$150 Lite-On Blu-ray player coming?

Lite-On already makes a 6x internal Blu-ray recorder for PCs--how about putting one of those in a set-top box?

Back in our CES 2009 preview, we predicted that we might see a $150 Blu-ray player at the show, but the best we got were a pair for $200 units from Vizio and Memorex. Well, we weren't off by too much if you put any stock in a recent report from the Economic Daily News, which suggests that Lite-On will offer a Blu-ray player for $150 in 2009. One of the biggest barriers to widespread Blu-ray adoption has been expensive hardware, but $150 starts getting real close to "impulse purchase" level.

There aren't any additional details on the story, but it makes sense considering that Lite-On already makes Blu-ray drives for PCs. Lite-On also has some history in the home theater space, as the company made several models of budget DVD-recorder/VCR combos. Whether from Lite-On or somebody else, we'd almost be surprised if we didn't see a $150 Blu-ray player by the end of the year.

Do you think Blu-ray players will hit $150 by the end of 2009? If they do, will Blu-ray truly go mainstream? Let us know in the comments.

(Sources: DigiTimes via Engadget HD)

[perkler]

Sure. I think Blu-Ray will hit 150$ by the end of the year but i don't think they will necessarily make it go mainstream. 150 is still a little high for people on a tighter budget to spend when they can buy a perfectly good optical drive for 30 or 40 dollars pretty much anywhere. Besides that fact, Blu-ray isn't a necessity in computers because unless you have a a big external monitor, you'll never see the difference. It would be nice however, to be able to watch ALL of my movies on my computer.

[tylers95]

EVen if it hits 150 it will never gain traction with the introduction of downlowable movies from places like netflix or apple TV

[pithenumber]

@tyler, you need to hack the aTV to make it worth having

[fleurya]

If they want Blu-Ray to gain any traction, they better get it to $150 before the end of the year. But in this economy, I doubt we'll see it as mainstream in '09. I think too many people are just too low on cash and see "upconverting" as a viable alternative.

[ironballls]

Blu-Ray is dead end. Just like CD's. It's all going to be downloaded like iTunes. Who cares about all the other features Blu-Ray allows. All I care about is getting HD movies...which I'm downloading from the various sites that sell HD movies for download. I have a 2TB external drive to store my media. Soon, that will all be in the 'clouds' too.

Don't buy Blu-Ray. Let Sony suffer. Allow Apple, Amazon, etc take control of this trennd.. Good'ol USA.

[btravitz]

You can't be serious. It will be a long time before downloads are able to equal the quality of a Blu-ray. As more people by HD TVs more will want the quality picture and sound that Blu-ray offers. Downloads are a long way off. There is no analogy to music in this case. iTunes is fine for MP3 players but not for serious listening. Blu-ray will die eventually to downloads but it will be years.

[xZero2007x]

Lol Sony isn't the only main backer of blu-ray. They're one of many. And I mean *many.* They don't act like they own the group (much less act like they're going to receive all of the royalties... because they don't). If anything, Sony has a stronger presence in the group because of blu-ray's integration into the Playstation 3. But telling them to suffer is like asking the entire association of 200-something corporations and all of the Hollywood studios to take similar hits as Toshiba and friends did. HD-DVD wasn't exactly a failed product since it competed on par with blu-ray (lacking only on basic storage capacity and security), but more due to it not having a stronger business model to flaunt its strengths that *could* have made it live on today.
Question is: Is blu-ray a failed product? If it is, then yes, all this money that's been put into and continues to get put into it will go to waste. But there's a market for it. It may not be entirely strong right now, but the market's definitely there. But if it were to fail as your wish stated, then I'd see an even larger economic problem starting from the entertainment/electronics sector as retailers take even bigger losses and many companies/studios on top lose *another* portion of their long-term R&D money (not all since some may have some footprint in the digital medium--diversification pays off).

As for it being a "dead end," I disagree with you. This has already been discussed but no matter how you look at it, we don't have the infrastructure for going fully digital for HD movies (connection, user-end-wise, and physical storage). Aside from the geeks and enthusiasts, there's an even smaller portion of the mass consumer group (relative to the blu-ray consumers) making their HD collections digital due to ignorance, the fact that many still want to have a physical copy, and skepticism towards the format (as you are towards blu-ray).

[GothardJ]

What? It is not possible to get the same audio playback or video resolution on a computer, and what is going to happen, when later in the year all the big broadband ISPs start to impose download limits on customers? After about two movies, you will start paying extra money per month. It's going to be a long time before the internet is the source for movies, and even music. CD says aren't really hurting from internet downloads. Many people still want the guaranteed audio that a CD gives. Just like many people, myself included want the guaranteed resolution of a blu-ray.

[tcr071]

Blu-ray isn't dead but I don't think it is ever going to be fully adopted the way DVD has been. There is really nothing about blu-ray that screams "next generation." It is pathetically overpriced, the medium is fragile and prone to breaking or scratching, the players are bulky, and the "advantages" require the consumer to shell out thousands of dollars on equipment to have them realized.

I have been fed the line that "HDTV's are getting cheaper" but it won't fly here. Sure you can go pick up a crap HDTV from Walmart for $500 but to realize the "potential" of blu-ray you need a better TV with a faster refresh rate, higher resolution, deeper blacks, etc. The TV only covers 1/2 of the "blu-ray experience" which is visual while the other half is almost always completely ignored, audio. You need nice audio equipment to recognize the difference between DVD and blu-ray and even then you need a trained ear to hear them!!

Blu-ray isn't going to be a next-generation format. It will be a holder format for a while but it won't ever be mass adopted especially with the major economic problems we are having. Something will come along in the upswing of the recession that will truly be next generation. No optical disks, bigger storage, easier to produce, and much much cheaper.

It's great if you have a PS3 and all the equipment to enjoy HD with blu-ray but for the average consumer (read: the bulk majority of consumers) it just isn't worth it and likely won't be.

[ajalogan]

I have to agree with iron. I really feel that the format war hurt Blu-Ray and that gave downloadable and streamable content from the previously mentioned companies and netflix a foot hold. Why pay for an expensive, extra device to play HD content on expensive Blu-Ray disks that can be scratched, stolen, and take up space. Now you can stream, download, or get on demand content from your computer, your internet, or your cable/satalite provider. It's just an uneccesary cost at this point.

[davidthe14]

I've gotton a sylvania blue ray player for 140 at dillons because we got a 25 percent discount and now love blue ray

[xZero2007x]

Mm cheaper blu-ray drives down to the impulsive level would be nice, but I would see the drop in the price being reflected more in the number of retail units having one pre-equipped going to the consumer. Technically, the number of drives upgraded is much smaller than the number of *default* drives, and the only ones who usually upgrade are the enthusiasts or geekier.

Would it make it mainstream? Again, the price being closer to an impulsive level for the computer hardware front would mean it's cheaper everywhere else too, thus lowering the price of standalone units or increasing margins for manufacturers.
With the current state of the economy (damn it I hate this cliche`), no it wouldn't go mainstream (well I think it's nearing mainstream, but I guess mainstream = dominance) until we're some ways into the recovery process. If peoples' home theaters are a priority during the recovery process, we might as well stay in the recession longer.

[fooldog01]

There are a few Blu-Ray players right there at that mark already. Ive seen deals from TigerDirect and Newegg in newsletter deals around $160. Heck, Blu-Ray burners are under $200 and Blu-Ray drives are well under $100.

[green2u]

Ditto. I just saw one at Office Depot for $150.

[rawj7]

I have to disagree with Iron as well. For many reason download wont supass blu-ray for probably another decade if for no other reason our infinstructur will take that long to build. We are a decade away from seeing broad band speed across the nation, the likes of Japan or Europe currently are enjoying. Blu-Ray will come down in price and come into its own just like DVD replaced VHS. But I dont believe it will be this year, maybe in 2010.

[jmchien]

I'm pretty sure blu-ray players (at least a few brands) will hit the $150 mark by the end of the year. Is it going to take off? who knows. My recommendation for those who think $150 is too expensive, just save $5 each week on extra expenses (cut back on junk food or clothes shopping or something) and by the end of the year you can by a blu-ray player =)

[hblauer]

It's nice to have an extra $5 a week. People living paycheck to paycheck don't. And it's not just the cost of the player, how about the movies at $30-$40! I just don' see the need when I can't even afford a HDTV to support it.

[jimzzzak]

I got a $150 Blu-Ray player new online at Woot in the last quarter of '08.

Works pretty well. Firmware upgrades have been available online.

[mghotbi]

Blu-Ray players will dominate if they incorporate streaming technology - like the Samsung 2550 which has the ability to stream Netflix and Pandora. I'm surprised that VUDU hasn't partnered with anyone yet. Simple single-function blu-ray players should sell for less than $100. No one needs the BD-Live features anyway.

[Maxed-Out]

In a about a year you'll see the start of bluray burners and players drop significantly in price because of other companies that will try to compete with one another as this is still a new "market" for home theater. I'd buy one right now if empty bluray discs didn't cost an arm an a leg.

[tigrzeye]

Having bought into the Blu-Ray format about a year ago when I purchase the BD-P1400 by Samsung for $199 (I also have an Toshiba HD-DVD player that I got for $99) it is time to look at the cost for Blu-ray movies as well. I pick and choose which new titles I buy in Blu-ray format. $14.99-16.99 for a newly released DVD is much better than $22.99-29.99 for the same title in Blu-ray. Certain movies I don't care whether they are Blu-ray or not. And I am surely not going to run out and get Blu-ray replacements for my current DVD's I have. Some sure, but most not. For me to buy all my new movies in Blu-ray the price for them has to drop to within $5 of the standard DVD format prices.

It's a combined decision. The price of player just to get you started, AND the price of the Blu-ray DVD's to make it continue to be cost viable. If you don't want to or can't pay more for the Blu-ray DVD's then you sure won't consider a player no matter what the cost.

[BluFan1]

I've been working with Warner Home Video on some blu-ray projects and there is no doubt in my mind that we'll see $150 (and very likely below) players this year. Player prices dropped signifigantly in 2008 and there is absolutely nothing to suggest that this won't continue in perpetuity. Blu-ray is continuing to make large strides in marketshare and as that happens, prices of both players and titles will invariably fall.

[Waam]

I know some people are beginning to really consider downloading content and streaming it too, but never underestimate the power of the physical media. People want to have something in their hands they can easily take around with them. Sometimes, thats just not possible with downloaded media and especially streaming media.

Also, does anybody here download HD? They are HUGE. I have a Lacie 1TB external, and I surely don't want to use it just for movies.

[Inconnux]

Couldn't be bothered with Blu-ray. Still far to expensive. Maybe when the prices are at par with DVD's will I look at it, until then I'm just not interested.

[Shaun822]

I've said it before and I will say it again, ISPs are going to make Blu Ray go mainstream as soon as the price drop in the $125 to $150 range and the price of discs drops to within $5 of DVD (its already pretty much there on new releases purchased during the first week at stores like Best Buy). As people buy more HDTV's, and at this point any new TV purchased is pretty much HD, they are going to want to watch HD quality movies on it. As ISPs begin to restrict the traffic to people, A) the quality of movie downloads is going to decrease to allow people to get more which is going to lead to, B) people are going to start purchasing hard media that doesn't affect their limits and offers better quality and a longer more secure shelf life.

[prberg]

Yes. Blu-ray players will hit 100-150 by the end of the year. I bought a Sony Blu-ray for black friday for $175 so all signs look good. We love our blu-ray. GREAT picture quality. Once I get a new receiver I will be able to really appreacite the great audio tracks too.

I'm not a big fan of downloads. It's ok for music or for short youtube clips but not for my HD movie watching.

I visited out local Circuit City (Closing) looking for a decent DVD player possibly HD, but there were two salesmen that insisted that Blu Ray was the way to go. And when I told them that I thought that the competition between HD DVD and Blu Ray was similiar to VHS vs Beta, they said that Blu Ray had already won and was NOW the standard for HD players. I continued to debate the question with them, but I could not sway them nor could they sway me. When I can get a 'decent' DVD player that plays in 1080i for $50 or less, and have DVD prices from $2.50 to $30, I think that DVD is firmly entrenched in our culture (like the VHS). It seems to me that only the 'true connoisseur' or 'audiophile' will glean satisfaction from the Blu Ray quality and frills, and they would be willing to pay the price. However, those of us just wanting to see a movie . . . will the choice is . . . cheaper is better. I'm not one to sit watching a movie and analyze the number of pixels in the video or the resonance of the audio, I get engrossed in the watching of the movie, which, given today's technology is plenty good for me.

[wmclover]

Blu ray players solve the connection problem to the HDTV and AV receiver to provide the best possible video and sound. Streaming movies to a computer is a an enjoyable experience, only if you can clone the video and sound to your TV and AVR. Streamed movies from satellite and cable provide great video, but not the advanced sound quality available on a modern blu ray disc. A computer with an HDMI output merely requires HDMI cables to connect through an AVR to a HDTV, but you need to solve the desktop connection to your TV or have a powerful laptop. When you consider how long it has taken the industry to bring products to the market that were readily foreseeable decades earlier and how slow the general population accepts change, the simplicity of an affordable Blu Ray player and the ease of its connection should be widely adopted in a relatively short period of time. If only the movie industry would get off its butt and start providing updated movies with advanced video and sound. Has the industry ever considered the possibility of producing DVD music discs in high quality sound to take advantage of the Blu ray player and newer AVR players capabilities???