At the same time, media pundits have noted that Blu-Ray movie sales have doubled from a year ago. Also, the industry claims it will ship 12 million new Blu-Ray players in 2009. Somebody even noticed that Blu-Ray acceptance is well ahead of where DVD was at the same point in both of their life-cycles, despite the massive bite of the Great Recession. Some estimates claim that sales rates will triple current numbers 2010. Ergo 2010 should be the cross-over point where DVD becomes legacy material, like VHS, and Blu-Ray becomes the standard.
I am pleased. This is part of a larger trend. More and more experts and consumers are questioning what they have been told by so-called experts in regard to Blu-Ray. They are having a hard time squaring their experiance with the twisted tales of a mis-begotten technological misfit, favorited by a small cult of fans, doomed to an early death. Many are making noises that sound something like this: "Jesus! What the fuck were you bastards smoking when you reached that preposterous conclusion?"
For about 4 years now, predicting the failure of Blu-Ray has been an ultra-fashionable thing among would-be experts. It has been functionally good, as it has placed great pressure on Sony and Samsung to cut the cost of ownership. One might even argue that predicting the failure of Blu-Ray has been an underhanded way to insist upon price cuts.
Still, there have been persistent blithering idiots who have popped up on the net saying foolish things like "I can't tell the difference between a DVD and Blu-Ray" or worse "There is not much difference between a DVD and Blu-Ray". In the first case, you could be vision impaired, so your statement might be accurate. In the second case, you are absolutely and completely wrong, and it is easy to mathematically prove. If you think there isn't much difference, you have neither seen a Blu-Ray, nor studied it. Ah-hem... Let me try this another way. If you weren't suffering from sour grapes, you would be honest and say "It's great, but I just can't afford it."
For the first time, it would appear that mainstream media is beginning to test Blu-Ray seriously. Gone are the foolish claims that DVD can compete with Blu-Ray. Those claims have finally been thrown out of court. Now the NYT has investigated the claims of Video On Demand (VOD) firms also. Guess whay they found?
- VOD firms don't offer much HD
- When they do, it is 720p
- The encoding of said 720p pretty well sucks. Maybe its better than SD, but...
- We don't have enough bandwidth to get constant 720p without jerks.
- Or maybe they don't have enough bandwidth to serve-up constant 720p without jerks
- I don't like running an Ethernet cable to my TV.
- I don't like having a computer in my entertainment system.
- Blu-Ray seems to crush VOD in terms of quality.
In a nutshell, this what they are starting to say now. It's about time they figured this out.
I learned most of these things 2 years ago. Nothing has been able to change my mind since. I tried the most recent incarnation of the Apple TV recently. While better than all VOD solutions before it, it still sucks. Blu-Ray absolutely destroys Apple TV. I am talking about a total-annihilation demolition. It is the defeat the dimensions of which Apple has never experienced: A route from which no honor can be salvaged. I returned the unit to Fry's electronics. It wasn't worth owning.
Allow me to make a positive case for Blu-Ray. My family members, friends and I have come to the conclusion that a Blu-Ray image, when displayed on a high quality large screen, is so compelling we find it difficult to summon the motivation to go to the theater anymore. The images we see on the big silver screen seem dark, drab, lifeless, colorless, undetailed and soft (meaning unfocused) in comparison to the razor sharp, detailed, colorful pictures we see at home. The movie always looks better at home. The movie never looks better at the theater. There is a wide gulf too. This is not a small or marginal victory. We are talking about a 38-10 route.
When watching incredible Blu-Rays like Wall-e, or No Country for Old Men, or Sin City, I have frequently asked myself the following questions:
- How thrilled were the authors of this movie when they first saw it on Blu-Ray? They must have been ecstatic. To see your creation preserved and presented in such an astounding format must be extremely gratifying.
- How long is going to be before the movie theaters realize they are being completely outclassed by home theaters?
- How long is going to take before studios realizes that they should not optimize for the movie theater, but rather for the home theater? Movies should not be shot in 24fps or on film anymore. They should be shot at 60p on digital. You are only in the movie theater for 3-6 weeks. You will be on Blu-Ray [or something better] forever. Optimize for your true distribution channel. Forget the glamor vector.
There are plethora of other benefits to watching the movie on Blu-Ray. You can talk about the movie if you want to. You can eat your favorite popcorn, and you can have it your way, cheap. You can drink any damn thing you want, and it is cheaper than the theater. You can hit pause and go to the bathroom. You don't have to miss parts of the film. You can start whenever you want to start. You can watch with the subtitles on if you are hearing impaired. None of these things have anything to do with fundamental image and sound, but they are very nice bonuses.
