• Gizmodo
  • bestmodo
  • lifehacker
  • kotaku
  • Profile logout login

#homeentertainment#blurayspecchangemaycause#popular

Gizmodo

Share Cancel
   
Upload an image | Add an image URL
×

logging in
  • FAQ. Include # before tag:
  • #tips,
  • #whitenoise,
  • #dealzmodo,
  • #broken,
  • etc.

New York, 12:53 PM
Sat Dec 19
58 posts in the last 24 hours

FR | IT | DE | SP | JP | AU | BR

Gizmodo Team

Tip your editors:

Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | | Twitter

Editor:
Jason Chen
| AIM | Twitter

Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
| Twitter

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

Kat Hannaford
| Twitter
Rosa Golijan
| Twitter
Chris Jacob

Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner

Interns:
Don Nguyen

Kyle VanHemert

Heroes and Friends

Comment Account Questions:

SUBSCRIBE TO Gizmodo RSS

New: Breaking news and daily top stories via email
9515 Subscribers
Gizmodo
  • Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.
    Dsmvwl  Admin  Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×
    Image of OCEntertainment OCEntertainment
    12/18/09

    In reply to 3D Glasses For HDTVs Will Cost at Least $70 a Pair
    Just remember. Until 3D glasses are either gone, or somehow manage to be cool, you will always look stupider than this guy while watching.
     Reply
    OCEntertainment was starred OCEntertainment was unstarred
    Image of KhaiJB KhaiJB
    12/18/09

    In reply to 3D Glasses For HDTVs Will Cost at Least $70 a Pair
    they come in prescription? if not, useless to me....
     Reply
    KhaiJB was starred KhaiJB was unstarred
    Image of dry-roasted-peanuts dry-roasted-peanuts
    12/18/09

    @KhaiJB: Ditto. And I'm not willing to wear something like that over my real glasses because I don't want them potentially scratched.
     Reply
    Edited by dry-roasted-peanuts at 12/18/09 2:15 PM dry-roasted-peanuts was starred dry-roasted-peanuts was unstarred
    Image of Lizard_King Lizard_King
    12/18/09

    In reply to 3D Glasses For HDTVs Will Cost at Least $70 a Pair
    meh.... Have't seen a 3D presentation that doesn't give me migranes.

    Fad.
     Reply
    Lizard_King was starred Lizard_King was unstarred
    Image of Kaiser-Machead Kaiser-Machead
    12/18/09

    In reply to 3D Glasses For HDTVs Will Cost at Least $70 a Pair
    Is it too much to ask to have a set that looks like Nite Owl's?
     Reply
    Kaiser-Machead was starred Kaiser-Machead was unstarred
    Image of Jesse Scroggins Jesse Scroggins
    12/18/09

    @Kaiser-Machead: From the looks of your avatar you already have 3D glasses.
     Reply
    Kaiser-Machead promoted this comment Jesse Scroggins was starred Jesse Scroggins was unstarred
    Image of Kaiser-Machead Kaiser-Machead
    12/18/09

    @Jesse Scroggins: Until the giz crew took them back.
     Reply
    Kaiser-Machead was starred Kaiser-Machead was unstarred
    Image of Yerzriknot Yerzriknot
    12/18/09

    In reply to 3D Glasses For HDTVs Will Cost at Least $70 a Pair
    I can't say I like the idea of having to put glasses on every time just to watch a movie.
     Reply
    Yerzriknot was starred Yerzriknot was unstarred
    Image of wutlulzky wutlulzky
    12/18/09

    In reply to 3D Glasses For HDTVs Will Cost at Least $70 a Pair
    People say i look like an idiot even when i dont wear glasses, ... putting those one, will definitely make no difference
     Reply
    Kaiser-Machead promoted this comment wutlulzky was starred wutlulzky was unstarred
    Image of yantelope yantelope
    12/17/09

    In reply to 3D Blu-ray Specs Officially Confirmed, We Can All Breathe Easy Now
    I personally think that this will be good eventually. Many people already have 120Hz TVs and more and more people are buying blu-ray players. Where it may stall is that I don't think people will buy new TVs and new Blu-ray players just for 3D. I would however buy a new TV for 3D games and I already have a PS3 so I'm covered for 3D blu-ray.
     Reply
    yantelope was starred yantelope was unstarred
    Image of Pazu Pazu
    12/17/09

    In reply to 3D Blu-ray Specs Officially Confirmed, We Can All Breathe Easy Now
    Am I the only one that's not one inch moved by this 3D shenanigans, and actually frows every time a decent flick is released in 3D?

    I'm not wearing another pair of glasses over my prescription glasses, and I'm not watching another 3D movie or buying a 3D TV until they figure out how to do this without glasses.

    P.S.: don't tell me to wear contacts. I would hate those 3D glasses even if I had perfect eyesight.
     Reply
    Edited by Pazu at 12/17/09 8:31 AM Pazu was starred Pazu was unstarred
    Image of Fractal the Meek Fractal the Meek
    12/17/09

    @Pazu: Yeah, but it's neat if it's optional like this. I'd normally do without, but sometimes it'd be fun to put on the glasses and watch hobbits run around the living room.

    And I could swear there were some very expensive no-glasses sets shown here on Giz. But the viewing angle was like 2°.

    Found: [gizmodo.com] . There's a video somewhere showing a live demo, too. The perspective came through a little on the camera. But $25k!
     Reply
    Edited by Fractal the Meek at 12/17/09 12:27 PM Fractal the Meek was starred Fractal the Meek was unstarred
    Image of KhaiJB KhaiJB
    12/17/09

    In reply to 3D Blu-ray Specs Officially Confirmed, We Can All Breathe Easy Now
    yay. more movies I can't watch in 3D cos I already wear glasses....
     Reply
    KhaiJB was starred KhaiJB was unstarred
    Image of fuchikoma fuchikoma
    12/15/09

    In reply to What Is "Success" for Blu-ray?
    VHS was blurry. On most average (poorly maintained if at all) players, the bottom of the screen would pull to one side. The tapes wore out as you played them. Sometimes the machine would just eat one and tangle it up inside.

    In comparison, DVDs had solid, stable video. Low noise. After a few years, they usually weren't too badly artifacted. The (commercial) discs would last forever if treated well.

    Blu-ray has all this too, at the same form factor, but if you have an HDTV it's sharper. I love Blu-ray, but that's about its only trick. It's nice accessing menus while the movie plays, but that's no system seller. BD-Live... I've never seen it actually used yet. Of course it's not going to pick up in the same way as DVD - it's an enthusiast-specific format from its very inception. VHS was bad. DVDs aren't bad, they're just not as good.
     Reply
    Edited by fuchikoma at 12/15/09 7:16 PM fuchikoma was starred fuchikoma was unstarred
    Image of Stephen Bruner Stephen Bruner
    12/14/09

    In reply to What Is "Success" for Blu-ray?
    Let's also not forget that when DVD came out everyone already had a means of watching a DVD if they bought a player, that being a normal TV. In order to get your money's worth with Blu Ray you really need an HDTV. Most people I know who have an HDTV also have a way to watch Blu Ray's on it. It's just that there aren't as many HDTV's floating around as there were SDTV's when DVD was launched. While HD still looks nice on a SD set, not many people go that route simply because they can watch the same movie for cheaper on DVD.
     Reply
    Purple Dave promoted this comment Stephen Bruner was starred Stephen Bruner was unstarred
    Image of Purple Dave Purple Dave
    12/15/09

    @Stephen Bruner:
    A lot of people did get suckered into buying HDTVs because they were told lies about how only HDTVs would be able to receive digital signals when the switch from NTSC to ATSC happened. More importantly, retailers have started eliminating SDTVs from their electronics sections altogether. Whether by choice or not, whether knowingly or not, the public will eventually end up converting to something that doesn't fall into the SDTV category eventually. But that doesn't mean they'll also switch to Blu-Ray, as even DVDs have higher bit-rates than most streamed HD programming. If you're okay with watching HD channels on cable or satellite, you probably won't cringe at DVD playback unless someone tells you what you're watching.
     Reply
    Purple Dave was starred Purple Dave was unstarred
    Image of Panzer23 Panzer23
    12/14/09

    In reply to Silver PAC Evolution 5500 Remote Would Have Been Great 3 Years Ago
    Isn't it still a feature on windows 7, although hidden? I believe that it can still be found if you have an enabled device.
     Reply
    Panzer23 was starred Panzer23 was unstarred
    Image of Yerzriknot Yerzriknot
    12/14/09

    In reply to What Is "Success" for Blu-ray?
    Cut blu-ray some slack, the HD Wars started in the beginning of the recession, of course sales aren't what they should be.
     Reply
    Yerzriknot was starred Yerzriknot was unstarred
    Image of Shawn Barney Shawn Barney
    12/14/09

    In reply to What Is "Success" for Blu-ray?
    Oi... I'm beginning to think ya'll at the Giz are sour that you poured money into HD-DVD or something...

    Lets recap; yes Blu-ray sales are lower in their fourth year then the fourth year of DVD sales. But lets compare 2000 to 2009. Actually lets not; we all know were in a recession. The masses will not all go and buy the newest gadgets (*shock!*); many will stick with what they have as they ride through difficult times.

    A 30 percent Blu-ray sale is tremendous.
     Reply
    Shawn Barney was starred Shawn Barney was unstarred
    Image of Monty Monty
    12/14/09

    In reply to What Is "Success" for Blu-ray?
    Okay, I hate to be optimistic in a sea of anti-Blu-ray geeks, but here is something to chew on: According to the article below (pure Sony propaganda, I am sure), Blu-ray hardware is at around 12 million sold after three years. If this is true, Blu-ray players are selling faster (yes, I said it) than DVD players.

    While media sales of any format may never compare to the ridiculous sales of DVD's because people have tired of "collecting" disc media (thank you, Netflix!), the bottom line is that Blu-ray appears to be doing just fine, thank you very much.

    [www.storagenewsletter.com]

    I know we all wanted HD-DVD to win, but like it or not - Blu-ray is a very healthy format right now, no matter how much we want it to not be true.
     Reply
    Monty was starred Monty was unstarred
    Image of nukee nukee
    12/14/09

    @Monty: I'm pretty sure that's been known/true for awhile. People just like to forget the slow start that DVD had.
     Reply
    Monty promoted this comment nukee was starred nukee was unstarred
    Image of Shawn Barney Shawn Barney
    12/14/09

    @Monty: Thank you! I feel like I'm the only defender of the Bluu
     Reply
    Shawn Barney was starred Shawn Barney was unstarred
    Image of Monty Monty
    12/14/09

    @nukee: I think it is some sort of brain disorder caused by wheat products. We are all under some mass delusion that every human being has owned five DVD players since the early sixties, so clearly Blu-ray is not selling well. It really stinks when we actually look at the numbers comparing the two formats because suddenly the DVD does not look so impressive after all.
     Reply
    Edited by Monty at 12/14/09 7:20 PM Monty was starred Monty was unstarred
    Image of nukee nukee
    12/14/09

    @Monty: Haha, damn wheat lobbyists. I honestly think it has to do with exposure on the internet though. We've been following Blu-Ray for a few years now and used to get in verbal wars over the weekly Nielsen reports as they came in when HD-DVD was still kicking. That didn't happen for DVD really, the first exposure that people got was when they bit the bullet or visited a friend that had bought in. Times are tougher for technology to prove itself I'd say than 10 years ago.
     Reply
    Edited by nukee at 12/14/09 7:49 PM nukee was starred nukee was unstarred
    Image of Monty Monty
    12/14/09

    @nukee: That is actually a very good point, and one I had not fully considered. When we spend all of this time talking about products for years before they are released we then have a false sense of how long it has truly been available. Truthiness makes it feel like Blu-ray has been out for a decade when it really is just over three years old. You combine this with a lack of knowledge of how many years DVD spent in it's awkward toddler years dressing up in a DIVX costume at Circuit City and you really do not have a true sense of how well a product is historically doing.

    We need technology history lessons around here. Thanks for that insight, nukee!
     Reply
    Monty was starred Monty was unstarred
    Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

Login

Enter your username and password.

Please enter a username.
Please enter your password.
logging in
Login via Facebook | Sign Up | Forgot Password?

Reset Password

Please enter your email address to have your password reset.

Please enter your email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
requesting password reset

Register

Registering will give you a user profile and the ability to add other users as friends. To become a commenter, however, you need to audition.

Want to know more? Consult the Comment FAQ and legal terms.

Please enter a username.
Please enter a password.
Please confirm your password.
Passwords are not identical.
Please enter a valid email address.
registration sent, waiting for reply

Submit Your Comment

You don't need to login to comment. Just enter your email address below.

See how your address will be displayed in the Comment FAQ.

Please enter a valid email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
logging in

Login with your Facebook or Gizmodo account.

Sign up here.



  • Archives
  • About
  • Advertising
  • Legal
  • Help
  • Report a Bug
  • FAQ
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.