DVD will fail? Sounds a lot like Blu-ray
It's hard to imagine now, but when DVD first launched, its success was far from guaranteed. Back in 1996, there were even anti-DVD fanboys, and recently we ran into a rant--sarcastically retitled as "Why DVD would fail"--that struck us as eerily familiar to the current arguments against Blu-ray. Considering that DVD was such a huge success, it's worth looking at exactly how similar the two formats are at this early stage, and what that means for the future of Blu-ray.
1. Consumers aren't willing to rebuy movies
They will be the same tired movies that everyone already owns and will be loathe to buy again. [...] Because the titles available will be ones that people already own, they will naturally sell less than a new release that is still hot from the theaters. This will result in even a bigger cost for companies because the less they sell, the more each feature costs to implement on each title.
Right. Just like nobody repurchased their albums on CD or VHS tapes on DVD. This one seems to get dragged out for every new format and is quickly ignored once it takes off. We're not saying that people will rush to replace their DVDs with Blu-ray discs, but it seems obvious consumers eventually give in and repurchase media if the new format is worthwhile. The only difference we'd note is that well-kept DVDs don't deteriorate after use like VHS tapes did, so perhaps consumers will be somewhat less likely to replace their DVDs that still look as good as the day they bought them.
Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray.
2. Not enough movies
All the companies involved with DVD are promising a catalog of 250 titles at the launch with maybe 50 to 100 actually available in the stores in the beginning. [...] And even if they do manage to finish 250 movies in time for the launch, what will those movies be? Top Gun? Rocky?
When any type of new format launches, early adopters are stuck with a pretty limited initial selection. It happened with DVD, and it happened with Blu-ray, which still only has about 650 titles available two years after its release. And we're seeing it all over again with criticism of the selection on online movie services, such as iTunes, Vudu, and the Netflix Player. This argument seems pretty shortsighted overall--if a new format offers a new compelling experience, the content will follow.
Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray.
3. Can't record
Consumers will look at DVD and see that it doesn't record. That will instantly arouse suspicions in their mind that if the movies they want to watch are not available on the DVD discs, then the machine will be useless to them and a waste of money.
DVD recorders are old technology now, but when DVD first came out one of the knocks against it was that it didn't record like VHS--which was a killer feature before DVRs became ubiquitous. Blu-ray recorders are available now in Japan, but we haven't seen any signs of them coming to the U.S. in the near future. But the real issue is that Blu-ray recording just doesn't matter as much with high-def DVRs and so many TV series being released on high-quality DVD and Blu-ray sets.
Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray, but less people care.
4. Nobody cares about special features
Another question is, how many consumers actually want and use all the special features that DVD might offer? CD players offer all kinds of special programming and playback options, yet most people never touch these features. A cheap VCR is seen as too intimidating to most Americans. They just want to watch the movie, not select different versions, languages, and such. The LD market has proven that these extra features are desired, but only by a small segment of the population.
This point has been made about Blu-ray right here on CNET, in Executive Editor David Carnoy's Fully Equipped column. While I tend to agree that special features aren't a big draw for DVD or Blu-ray, it tends to be the icing on the cake, rather than the main draw of the format. DVD didn't succeed because of special features--and neither will Blu-ray--but they're a nice extra.
Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray.
5. Picture quality isn't that much better
And now we get into the most controversial aspect of the entire DVD debate. Picture quality, or the lack there of. When DVD was first announced, it was claimed to offer D1 Master Tape quality. A short while later, the companies said it was much better than VHS but worse than LD. Now they have swung the other way again and are claiming D1 quality again. Quite simply, this will be impossible on commercially prepared, feature-length films.
It seems insane to argue that DVD isn't a huge leap over VHS in terms of image quality, but it's less crazy than you think. It takes content makers a while to fully understand how to use new technology, which is why many first-run CDs and DVDs are surprisingly mediocre. The same thing happened with Blu-ray--anyone who saw the first version of The Fifth Element on Blu-ray can attest to that. But now that we've seen a steady flow of exceptional looking Blu-ray discs, it's going to be harder to find people who aren't impressed by the image quality of Blu-ray on a big-screen HDTV.
Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray.
6. The industry is just greedy
DVD is just a bad idea. It is being forced upon a uncaring and unwanted public and is an inferior product that simply isn't needed or desired. DVD exists only for one reason. Greed. Motion picture studios are always looking for a way to sell the same stuff over and over again and they think DVD is the answer.
More cynical observers might characterize Blu-ray as just the industry's latest attempt to make money on the same movies yet again. But the industry didn't introduce DVD out of the kindness of its heart--it did it to make money--and few people look back on successful formats like DVD and CD as a devious scheme by motion picture studios.
Verdict: Same argument now used against Blu-ray.
So, since the same arguments that didn't matter with DVD are now being used against Blu-ray, does that mean Blu-ray is destined to be as successful as DVD? Not quite. The simple fact is that Blu-ray's main draw is that it offers significantly better image quality than DVD, and whether consumers think that's a worthwhile upgrade will make or break the format. All the other arguments essentially don't matter, just like they didn't with DVD.
What do you think? Are Blu-ray critics lobbing the same weak arguments as DVD critics did back in 1996? Or are the same arguments against Blu-ray more convincing in the current marketplace. Sound off in the comments.
Also, your argument about the Picture quality is not entirely correct. VHS to DVD was a big leep in quality and easily visible to eyes. But DVD to Blue-ray difference is not as great!!!
BluRay has to get the price at $150-200 this holiday season if they want to be relevant. At that price many people would consider replacing their DVD player.
Perhaps the facts should be put into this. The average downloaded movie is between 1 and 2 GB. That includes the highly compressed 5.1 surround sound and 720p image that most offer. Even if they were to offer 1080, the size would still be less than 8 GB (which would fit on a DVD). Blu-ray often has movies where the movie itself takes up 30-40 GB. This includes the 7.1 HD surround sound, the 1080p video at a lower compression right, the high bandwidth rate, and the option for subtitles and languages.
Add in the fact that Blu-ray supports picture in picture, far more extras, online content, and more!
And yes, the prices got down to $128 during the holidays.
Blu ray may eventually supplant DVD as the video format of choice, but it has nothing to do with studios wanting better content for us or with making money selling back titles and everything to do with limiting our choices in playback devices.
As for streaming (or non-physical) media replacing physical media, people know what happens when data backups go wrong. Yes, my DVDs and BDs take up a lot of room, but I don't have to worry about my server going south and my backup being corrupt, either.
Then there's the pricing. DVDs have always been more than VHS, but you do get a lot more for the buck. With Blu-ray, what additions do you get, higher definition?
Which brings us to the largest argument. "What quality difference?"
While nobody can argue that Blu-ray isn't superior to DVD as far as sound formats and video quality, the vast majority of consumers can most likely say they don't see the difference, or not own the equipment to fully experience the difference. DVD wasn't a jump to high-def, it was the same format as VHS, not requiring new equipment beyond the player to fully enjoy.
1. All new HDTVs for sale are 1080p. Only idiots and poor people buy smaller than 50".
2. You really can tell the difference between an upconverted DVD and a 1080p blueray disk on a 50"+ 1080p HDTV. And the studios will improve the bluerays movies for optimum viewing on a 50"+ 1080p TV.
3. It really will come down to viewers demanding a native 1080p experience. That will also make the broadcaster move to 1080p from 720p/1080i today.
At this point in time, I don't think there is a large enough demand for high definition TVs that really need Blu-Ray to look good. Most will be happy with regular or upconverted DVDs.
The differences between DVD and Blu-Ray are negligible. Yes, increased video quality. Yes, there's more storage space on a Blu-Ray disc. But, those things are a much smaller jump in advantage over those that the DVD brought over VHS.
It's not like you're getting all that much more by buying a movie on Blu-Ray that you already had on DVD, unless you really care about those few extra things. The jump from VHS to DVD was tremendous.
So, all in all, I think the Blu-ray critics (me being one of them) have pretty sound arguments. Besides that, why do we even need a new disc format? Do people need that much behind the scenes footage that it won't all fit on a DVD anymore?
and msot users won't go out and buy a multi terrabyte backup solution.
Jimlex - yes there are those of us out there want more behind the scenes and the making of. I have been know, as have people i know, to purchase a DVD based solely on the "extras" content.
Blue-Ray is here to stay, deal with it. Upgrade as you see fit, you are not being forced to make the switch. I supose we will ahve the same discussion when media content is trasmitted directly into our brains.
Transmit the movie directly into our thoughts, bypass the optical system by tapping into the nervous system directly. Cool!
And at the same time, we won't need mullion dollar movie studios either, as we could use the same technology in reverse to record and make movies from very creative people as they dream, then sell them.
Sony should spend their billions working on that instead of BluRay.
:)
I agree totally with your response to Robd11
I think eventually it will be successful, however it will be slow. As consumers in the technology age (generation Y and, whatever the new one is called.. i I think?) that were born into a world with technology get real jobs and have the money to splurge on blu ray players and ps3's, they will buy blu rays, especially because once they become more commonplace, the price will drop, just like DVD's did. Along with that, by that point the number of moves on BD will increase, so consumers will have more to choose from. Once that happens, they will begin to takeoff.
So, in droves, people are switching to Blu-ray... not because they have to... not because they need to... and not because they are making a comparison to DVD and are choosing Blu-ray... they are buying into Blu-ray because they believe it is the future, plain and simple. They heard there was a "war" between HD DVD and Blu-ray and Blu-ray won. They don't perceive that there is a "war" between DVD and Blu-ray (or even downloads, to which the average consumer is still mostly afraid of)... they see DVD as being old, even if it is still acceptable. They want to make sure they don't keep buying into something that is likely on its way out from just being in the market for too long. They see more and more movies being released on Blu-ray and they anticipate that, eventually, movies will stop appearing on DVD. They don't want to end up replacing their library after-the-fact, when it is too late... so they are starting to build their Blu-ray libraries now, in preparation for the future.
So, the intellectuals can debate all day long as to whether Blu-ray will succeed or not... in the end, it will... because the majority of the purchasers are not intellectuals. They are just the average consumer. They just want to buy the next thing... the iPod... the Blu-ray player... etc...
Video downloads are here to stay... but they aren't going to completely replace physical media for another 5-10 years. This means that Blu-ray is going to plant itself firmly into the ground... and then, within 5 years, you will see Blu-ray players capable of streaming/downloading movies. The transition between Blu-ray physical format and streaming/downloading will come in the form of Blu-ray players about 5 years from now.
Then, about 5 years after that, people will be less concerned over whether or not their set-top-box will support physical media anymore... it will all be about files and streaming. The reason this is going to take longer in the United States is due to the poor broadband infrastructure in the U.S., the high costs for bandwidth, and the new attempts by ISPs to charge more for extra bandwidth usage (from movie downloads and streaming.)
I am not an average consumer, but even i tend to think i need to be future proof and go for the latest.
I don't think any of us will have any complains about the present technology until a new one comes around, which we are made to believe will make our lives better.
Its the fear of being left behind, being 'OUTDATED' which pushes us to be 'UPDATED'.
Anyway we are all the victims of it, and i think we will be for a long time to come.
So again, history will repeat and Blu-Ray will succeed...
I dunno...if you've seen a movie once, does it really benefit your life to see it again...and again?
I have seen people connect their DVD player to their TV with RCA cables, like they did to hook up their VCR to their TV, and are doing the same to hook up their HDTV, simply because nobody has told them the importance of true digital connections like HDMI.
I watch Blu-ray discs in my Playstation 3, projected by a 1080p Bravia HD projector, onto a 90" wide 16:9 projection screen, and the results are awesome.
True cinema quality High Definition.
I find it hard to watch Standard Definition after that.
To me, Blu-ray is far superior to DVD.
Len Vine
Toronto
Correct me if I am wrong, which i have been in the past :-), most HD TV's are too small to even notice the advantage of 1080p.
Of course audio quality is superior on bluray, but again, most people are not going to notice the difference. I have decent equipment and I can tell, but most people won't.
--Peter A
-
by Toosimple
August 22, 2008 9:49 AM PDT
- The writer of this article (Matthew Moskovciak) missed a few crucial points that some of the commentators have already ponted out.
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
-
by AnthonyNYC
August 26, 2008 8:17 PM PDT
- Well I agree with you and that last part about getting it into households world wide, sales in japan are good I hear and Europe but then again our dollar has lost 30% its value to the euro, so BluRay isn't as expensive to them, is it?
-
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (65 Comments)1) When it was VHS vs. DVD, there were ONLY those 2 options. And, like many here have pointed out already, DVD was a MAJOR LEAP for the industry and the consumer alike. The ability to get to any chapter of the movie by navigating with the remote, the storage space difference, not having to worry about the tape getting caught in the player etc... (although there is a "scratch" issue now)
2) Because, as mentioned, there are other media types available, such as hard drives and many different types of flash memory (which, by the way, get cheaper every week), it is more likely that people will turn there. For those who argue about hard-drive crashing, let's not forget that 1) DVD's can get scratched so badly that they can become unplayable - especially when you have children at home. 2) When you legally purchase a movie online, you should have unlimited access to it, because it is already on your account's profile that you purchased it. (So you can re-download it) 3) You can always have 2 hard drives (they are dirt cheap anyway), and back everything up twice. 4) Hard drives, in my experience, don't crash that often. And, when they do crash, they can many times be recovered easily, especially considering that they would be connected to a TV and not a computer.
With modern compression types such as .MKV using H.264, you can rip a high def 1080p movie into 8 GB or a 720p into 4 GB and then people REALLY won't notice the difference between that and BLU-RAY (talk about people not noticing between DVD and BLU-RAY!)
That means that with a 2TB hard drive, (which will probably be in the $100 - $150 range within the next year or two) you can store around 250 1080p movies or 500 720p movies. and with newer, larger hard drives becoming available, you can probably expect to see in the near future 10 or maybe even 20 TB.
Also, with a hard drive attached to your TV, you can navigate through your 500 movies by simply using the remote!
3) With internet piracy growing rapidly, the industries need to compete by finding a way to make movies available to people fast and easy, as well as very cheap. (Netflix has started that with their new ROKU).
$400 for a BLU-RAY player is far too much, and so is $30 for a DVD. If the player costs $100 and the DVD $5 people might reconsider.
Ultimately, however (also, as some commentators have already pointed out) if the companies market BLU-RAY properly, and make people feel as if "they need it", that will get it into housholds worldwide.
And to us, it is 30% more so 60% swing there, US economy not ready for BluRay pricing from Japan at all.