Consumers still not sold on Blu-ray

who actually cares about blu-ray other than hard core home theatre enthusiasts & the corporations who want to make millions from the inflated prices of the equipment

you have to spend thousands to upgrade all your current equipment because of the DRM, when you can simply put an up-scaled DVD onto your 40" LCD & it looks great, not as good as Blu-Ray but why spend your hard earned cash on the minimal benefit that blu-ray brings?

queue the retort full of ferrari/ford analogy's, or you must still use videos!

Well speaking for myself, I have well over a hundred or so DVD's in my collection(certainly not as many as what others have but I'm rather picky about the movies and shows I buy)and just have no desire to pay what I'd have to pay in order to replace them all, just to have a better looking picture. Perhaps this is the case with oters, don't know though. A lot of people, I suspect just can't notice or don't care enough about the difference in picture quality to invest in Dlu-ray, while others simply can't afford to. Given enough time, I'm guessing Blu-ray will eventually gain favor with the public. It just will not happen as quickly as the studios and disca manufacturers would like.

I think it just boils down to the average customer just doesn't care, and if they DID take the plunge and buy an HD monitor, they'd be happy with an upscaling player. Just look at how many people bought converter boxes during the digital TV switchover instead of buying brand new HD TV sets?

not surpised.
especially when you buy a bluray disk and your player wont play it or takes ages to load.
then you need to wait for a firmware update to issued.
this far too much hassle for most people espically when you consider you get none of this crap with dvds
.once they sort these issues it be more popular.

As far as sales go, when the economy comes out of the shit storm it is in, I think people will be more inclined to buy the Hdtv's and the Blu-ray players. I have a PS3 and I use it for blu-ray, it is a beautiful picture but I have to agree not worth a $300.00 player atm. I will stick to Dvd for a bit and with no sales the equip. price will drop like a rock, then I will buy the standalone and start buying BD movies.

Movie prices are too high. And how much is the real price for the average consumer? Seems like too much inconsistency IMO. Retail for Quantam of Solace - $39.99 - marked down to $29.99 at Best Buy - marked down to $19.99 on Amazon and sold for used at about $15.00. I do all of my entertainment shopping online, but always look around when I'm in B&M stores. The prices in the isle are high enough to turn anyones head away. I shop around for the best deals, but people like my parents only do that for food and clothing.

My mom brought over a movie for my kids to watch. Threw it in the PS3 to play on my 46" plasma. It was unwatchable to me, but my Mom kept saying how she was amazed at the picture quality. Boggled my mind. I threw in a blu ray for her and she was impressed by the clarity, but in the end she thought that the upscaled DVD was good enough. So I totally understand the argument people make about upscaled being good enough for most. I can't even talk about resolution to her. She looks at me like I have 3 heads. And then gets concerned that I'm spending too much money and being too materialistic. Any talk of image quality and new technology is met with "is it a necessity?"

On another note, my parents bought a new TV 10 years ago. In their world, you don't buy new TV's after 10 years. I grew up watching a TV that they ended up retiring after 25 years. For the most part, their generation is pretty much the same from what I've seen.

DVD has been around for quite a while now everyone's familiar with it,it's no different to the PS2 being the most popular console,with such a large user base it would be an up hill battle regardless if it was hd-dvd or bluray attempting to get a foot hold,if bluray is going to be in every home it'll need at minimum another 5-6 years if it's lucky,actually make that 10 years,going to any video hire store the shelves bulge with std dvd's the blueray section is pretty much non existant that goes for the junk mail in the letterbox their are very few blueray titles for sale & how long has it been now,most imo would only replace their std dvd players when they break down & that takes time which i doubt blueray has before the next gen arrive

bluray is cool but it will never sell as much as the dvd, people are moving onto better things. streaming and htpc's. only reason i will have bluray eventually is because ill buy a ps3. if they offered a ps3 without blu ray, id get that one instead.

Engadget ~ Evidently it's still cool to hate on Blu-ray: Harris Poll spin and remember - this is only for the US....

While I think there is a large, educated userbase, I think the size of the "unwashed masses" is much, much larger.
These are the people who don't even know that a BluRay is different than a DVD.
They only know this: BR is more expensive and it won't play in their player.
For that reason, BR will only become as ubiquotus as DVD by reducing the number of movies available on DVD. When Joe Six-pack can only buy "Talladega Nights 4, Ricky Bobby hits the wall" on BR, THEN he'll start wondering if it's time to upgrade that "disk playing thing" that sits on top of his TV.

Originally posted by Oner:

---

Engadget ~ Evidently it's still cool to hate on Blu-ray: Harris Poll spin and remember - this is only for the US....

---

you do realise that Engadget are sony whores, and are told what to write don't you?

just as this report shows, most people do not care about blu-ray i'm afraid, i can't state the rest of the globe but this is how it is in the UK & as previously stated & i can confirm, most people coming into Solihull's branch Comet don't even want to change their television as ppl think their current widescreen is more than adequate, choosing the freeview box that costs as little as £10 over a complete hardware upgrade!

First of all technology will always grow rather we like it or not pushing the limits of better picture quality and sound starting with VHS beta, laser disc dvd and now blu ray this shouldnt come as a shock to us knowing something else will be knocking on home theatres door....lol

After DVD it's all about Netflix and downloading/streaming from the internet.

Harvesting large amount of discs to your shelves are so yesterday.

Originally posted by nervuli:

---

After DVD it's all about Netflix and downloading/streaming from the internet.

Harvesting large amount of discs to your shelves are so yesterday.

---

That I agree even while technology is getting better people are finding alot more options too.

Interesting.

CNN does a report on Sony's hits and misses - labels Blu Ray as a "HIT", yet this is the Blu Ray spin, err "news" we get at afterdawn.

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/tech....fortune/9.html

Engadget is right, it is cool to hate on Sony. Especially here, apparently...

I agree...media center is the way to go. Kids don't scratch up your disks and people don't "borrow" your movies (never to be seen ever again). I still want my VHS copy of Naked Lunch back, Andy Mullins!

Yada...yada...yada... Still mostly the same drivel as when DVD started. It took several years for prices to come down and people to move up back then too.

That was from VHS though, I don't think the general public will notice (or even care) about the "subtle" benefits of Blu Ray.

Rapid innovation is the culprit. HD & BLU-RAY arrived on the market way ahead of the buying publics expectations. The same for plasma and lcd TV. There was no actual need for it. Like someone said its really for the enthusiast. If the TV manufactures didn't forCE peoples hands to buy, doing this by making traditional monitor style TV's unavailable thus obselete. If not for this the flat screen evolution would still be hurting (in the tank) financially. I own BLU-RAY disc and player but who else owns one? Well he or she still lives a few miles away. Penetration for this technology is still low. I think the only way to profit is to halt the sales of standard DVD's. And nose dive the prices of current Blu-Ray disc and players.....though this is not likely.;0

i think the main reason people have not switched to blu-ray is simply because you need to spend a good $500-2000 on an HDTV. atleast that is the reason i still havent switched to blu-ray.

for me, i am satisfied with standard definition television, unless its gaming, then i would go with HDTV. i have a pc instead of a console, so im good there.

Quote:

---

After DVD it's all about Netflix and downloading/streaming from the internet.

---

Only if movie studios ligthen up a bit and allow Netflix and others like them to build large libraries of movies and tv shows. Beyond that, we also need more high-speed internet users.

If I had a job with my college degree and had money I would have this stuff.

It all boils down to cost versus perceived benefits. It was a quantum leap forward in technology between DVD and VHS/Beta, (no rewinding, lots of cool features, much better picture and sound, closed captioning, etc.) unfortunately the gap between DVD and BlueRay/HD is not as great as SOme companiNY wants you to believe. VHS will play on the same TV as DVD, but to realize the difference between DVD and BluRay one needs an HDTV. So, buy a new player and a new TV to see marginally better picture quality.I'm sticking with DVD for now until the mega tetrabyte drive comes out and all my movies are in my media computer and not lined up on a bookshelf or crate.

Originally posted by blivetNC:

---

It all boils down to cost versus perceived benefits. It was a quantum leap forward in technology between DVD and VHS/Beta, (no rewinding, lots of cool features, much better picture and sound, closed captioning, etc.) unfortunately the gap between DVD and BlueRay/HD is not as great as SOme companiNY wants you to believe. VHS will play on the same TV as DVD, but to realize the difference between DVD and BluRay one needs an HDTV. So, buy a new player and a new TV to see marginally better picture quality.I'm sticking with DVD for now until the mega tetrabyte drive comes out and all my movies are in my media computer and not lined up on a bookshelf or crate.

---

Yes I was going to say that people have to purchase a bluray player, and then they have to get bluray movies. The players need to be less than $100, and the bluray movies need to cost the same as dvd films. It's just plain stupid to expect someone to pay $5 to $10 more for the high definition bluray version of a movie.

And I forgot but other have pointed out, that you also need an HDTV to actually see a difference with bluray vs dvd.

It's just all stupid really. It really is just a marginal upgrade, and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone except for people that love watching movies at home on a near-daily basis. But those people probably already have all the blu-ray stuff by now anyway.

Originally posted by blivetNC:

---

It all boils down to cost versus perceived benefits. It was a quantum leap forward in technology between DVD and VHS/Beta, (no rewinding, lots of cool features, much better picture and sound, closed captioning, etc.) unfortunately the gap between DVD and BlueRay/HD is not as great as SOme companiNY wants you to believe. VHS will play on the same TV as DVD, but to realize the difference between DVD and BluRay one needs an HDTV. So, buy a new player and a new TV to see marginally better picture quality.I'm sticking with DVD for now until the mega tetrabyte drive comes out and all my movies are in my media computer and not lined up on a bookshelf or crate.

---

1) SONY is not the only company in the BD association, funny how you call only a specific one out though for some reason...

2) "The gap between DVD and BlueRay/HD is not as great" ~ Exhibit A & B + some direct ones

DVD - BD

DVD - BD

DVD & BD

If those don't show a "gap" then there is no point of me saying anything further...

I just went to Walmarts website. they have 11 BluRay players ranging in price from $169 to $499. They had 15 DVD players under $50. duh

According to engadgetHD something's very fishy about the Harris poll:

Harris Poll concerning Blu-ray and HD DVD penetration is way off

Quote:

---

We had a feeling something was up with the results of the recent Harris Poll and it looks like we had good reason. No one is trying to say that the folks that conducted the poll had a Red agenda or anything, it is just like Adams research puts it when talking about consumer polls in general, "you can't trust the average survey respondent to correctly identify the high-tech devices in their homes." You can say that again. The funny thing is that the results of the poll even look screwy when compared to the HDDVD Promotion group's numbers which reported that even after a few months following the format war, only 1 million stand-alone HDDVD players were sold. This is nowhere near the 10 million that it would take to make up 9 percent of the 111 million US households the poll reports. And in case you care, analysts project -- you know, the ones actually based on retail sales instead of a consumer survey -- that 14.8 percent of US households will have some way to play a Blu-ray Disc by the end of 2009, which is almost double what it was at the end of 2008.

---

The key statement there is this:

you can't trust the average survey respondent to correctly identify the high-tech devices in their homes.

People surveyed thought their upconverting SDDVD players were HDDVD players.

This alone invalidates the whole survey.

In addition: Toshiba is dropping hints that they could finally make BluRay products:

Toshiba Chief Hints At Launching Blu-Ray Disc Ops

Quote:

---

President Atsutoshi Nishida did not rule out the possibility of selling DVD recorders using the Blu-ray Disc format when addressing shareholders at the firm's general meeting here Wednesday.

"It makes no sense to decide not to enter the Blu-Ray market simply because we lost the DVD-format war. We cannot change the fact that we lost, but we would like to keep our options open," he said.

---

Originally posted by HDNow:

---

According to engadgetHD something's very fishy about the Harris poll

---

The Harris poll numbers don't jive with actual shipping and sales data from Adams Media Research:

BDA, Adams Dispute Harris Survey on Blu-ray

Quote:

---

The Blu-ray Disc Association is challenging the accuracy of a June 18 Harris Poll, which says that as of April, more Americans owned an HD DVD player (11%) than a Blu-ray Disc player (7%).

The BDA on June 25 said the Harris survey doesn’t mesh with actual shipping and sales numbers for Blu-ray, pointing to Adams Media Research data that puts the numbers closer to nearly 8% for Blu-ray and less than 1% for HDDVD. Calling the Harris data “grossly inaccurate,” the news release states that by the end of 2009, Blu-ray players will be in nearly 15% of American TV homes.

Tom Adams, president of Adams Media Research, blamed the survey findings on consumers’ inability to identify what exactly is next to their TVs.

"Some people believe a DVD player on an HDTV is high-def. There's just so much confusion out there," Adams said. "Everybody makes mistakes" he said of the Harris survey "but we have models that show those numbers just can't be true."

---

I'd rather look at actual sales numbers than surveys from people who can't identify the machine sitting next to their TV.

Perhaps I should elaborate further to clarify my points made.
1. There is a visual difference between Bluray and DVD.
2. There is a difference between DVD and VHS.
3. The technological leap from VHS to DVD was greater than the technological leap from DVD to Bluray. DVD disks do not demagnetize nor strip off as magnetic tapes do. Kids may scratch the surface of a DVD or sit on it and crack it, but the DVD doesn't get eaten by the player which hasn't been cleaned or has a poor tape fed into it, nor have the kids pulled a tape out and mangled the tape itself or broken the tape housing. You don't have to rewind a DVD. They require much less room to store in quantity.
4. To take full advantage of Bluray one must purchase or already own a high definition TV. Most of the consumers out there do not.
5. The majority of people are not willing to shell out the required money to enjoy a sharper picture at this point in time.
6. Sony is the company that around here is pushing Bluray harder than anyother in my opinion. Go into a Blockbuster and look at their displays.
7. Didn't plan on getting into a flame war, just wanted to voice my 2¢ worth on why I won't be purchasing a Bluray/HDTV soon.

Eventually as the price of HD TV comes down as more and more people replace their older models which stop working, then perhaps Bluray will take over DVD in terms of unit sales, but for the majority of consumers out there right now, why spend several hundred dollars for a better picture?

Quote:

---

I just went to Walmarts website. they have 11 BluRay players ranging in price from $169 to $499. They had 15 DVD players under $50. duh

---

I own 2 Sony units purchased on sale for $29.99 USD, one from Wallyworld, the other from HHGreg. Great picture and also play all varieties of burned DVD+/-R and DL disks.

At some point sony is going to have to drop these ridiculous copy protection schemes, and firmware upgrades to play new titles if they want this thing to take off. If you think joe sixpack doesn't have a clue about the difference between the two formats, what do you think he does when he puts in a new disc, and has to do a firmware upgrade for the movie to play when he's already nine beers sh*tty. There is an old saying, "Keep it simple stupid." The media companies are going to have to realize this if they want to sell to the masses.

Originally posted by oner:

---

1) SONY is not the only company in the BD association, funny how you call only a specific one out though for some reason...

2) "The gap between DVD and BlueRay/HD is not as great" ~ Exhibit A & B + some direct ones

DVD - BD

DVD - BD

DVD & BD

If those don't show a "gap" then there is no point of me saying anything further...

---

have i miss read something? no body is saying that blu-ray and DVD are the same in this forum, it's obvious people know that more pixels equals a better picture, what the report says & what customers are saying to me is they "don't care". imho the picture benefits are minimal on a small (<40) screen at the normal 13 foot viewing distance. until the studios inevitably force the exodus to blu-ray by releasing blu-ray only blockbusters ppl will be happy with what they have.

he 9is being a bit hard on sony but they are a very bad company that constantly dogs on it's customers & are pushing for very restrictive DRM to block off the analogue hole which in turn benefits them as they also sell TV's. so is he right to single out a company, probably yes, bad companies need to be named & shamed, & why should you care exactly?

tbh buddy i think you need to take a chill pill.

Originally posted by pphoenix:

---

Originally posted by oner:

---

1) SONY is not the only company in the BD association, funny how you call only a specific one out though for some reason...

2) "The gap between DVD and BlueRay/HD is not as great" ~ Exhibit A & B + some direct ones

DVD - BD

DVD - BD

DVD & BD

If those don't show a "gap" then there is no point of me saying anything further...

---

have i miss read something? no body is saying that blu-ray and DVD are the same in this forum, it's obvious people know that more pixels equals a better picture, what the report says & what customers are saying to me is they "don't care". imho the picture benefits are minimal on a small (<40) screen at the normal 13 foot viewing distance. until the studios inevitably force the exodus to blu-ray by releasing blu-ray only blockbusters ppl will be happy with what they have.

he 9is being a bit hard on sony but they are a very bad company that constantly dogs on it's customers & are pushing for very restrictive DRM to block off the analogue hole which in turn benefits them as they also sell TV's. so is he right to single out a company, probably yes, bad companies need to be named & shamed, & why should you care exactly?

tbh buddy i think you need to take a chill pill.

---

You ask if you miss read something but yet you didn't quote my whole comment of which explains/shows why I posted what I did. So TBH I could care less for what you "think" since you took my comment out of context to make an invalid point right from the start. So I would strongly suggest you going back and READING to know where you missed out to see where you're wrong.

Originally posted by blivetNC:

---

Perhaps I should elaborate further to clarify my points made.
1. There is a visual difference between Bluray and DVD.
2. There is a difference between DVD and VHS.
3. The technological leap from VHS to DVD was greater than the technological leap from DVD to Bluray. DVD disks do not demagnetize nor strip off as magnetic tapes do. Kids may scratch the surface of a DVD or sit on it and crack it, but the DVD doesn't get eaten by the player which hasn't been cleaned or has a poor tape fed into it, nor have the kids pulled a tape out and mangled the tape itself or broken the tape housing. You don't have to rewind a DVD. They require much less room to store in quantity.
4. To take full advantage of Bluray one must purchase or already own a high definition TV. Most of the consumers out there do not.
5. The majority of people are not willing to shell out the required money to enjoy a sharper picture at this point in time.
6. Sony is the company that around here is pushing Bluray harder than anyother in my opinion. Go into a Blockbuster and look at their displays.
7. Didn't plan on getting into a flame war, just wanted to voice my 2¢ worth on why I won't be purchasing a Bluray/HDTV soon.

Eventually as the price of HD TV comes down as more and more people replace their older models which stop working, then perhaps Bluray will take over DVD in terms of unit sales, but for the majority of consumers out there right now, why spend several hundred dollars for a better picture?

Quote:

---

I just went to Walmarts website. they have 11 BluRay players ranging in price from $169 to $499. They had 15 DVD players under $50. duh

---

I own 2 Sony units purchased on sale for $29.99 USD, one from Wallyworld, the other from HHGreg. Great picture and also play all varieties of burned DVD+/-R and DL disks.

---

I do apologize blivetNC if what I said came out a bit strong but it is definitely not meant as a "flamewar". It's just that I found it odd you only called out 1 specific company out of quite a few that have a vested interest in a product they ALL support and had a hand in developing in one way or another.

But I absolutely understand what you mean about cost of investment vs return on experience etc. My point was mainly just that for you to say there is no gap was incorrect but you addressed that a bit more, so it is understood what you tried to say earlier. Though I do not exactly agree with these 2 items

Quote:

---

5. The majority of people are not willing to shell out the required money to enjoy a sharper picture at this point in time.
6. Sony is the company that around here is pushing Bluray harder than anyother in my opinion. Go into a Blockbuster and look at their displays.

---

Sales of HDTV's over the last few years 100% disprove #5 and using Blockbuster for #6 as a main reference to how Sony is "pushing" BD is a bit outlandish, BUT that is not to say Sony isn't "pushing" BD, because they absolutely are...but that just goes back to my earlier comment of companies having a vested interest in a product they offer and want to succeed.

People always complain about DRM this or that but to those who it REALLY affects it really doesn't mean a damned thing because if they want to bypass it they'll find out how to ;)

I bought a 42" HD TV because it was cheaper than the 36" CRT TV it replaced that broke down...not because it had a better picture. It was also a HELL of a lot lighter...

The difference in cost between players+movies just doesn't make this worth it. Esp when I look at the roughly $3000 dollar price tag to replace my DVD collection at current prices.

@Mr.JoeSixPackCommenter - I'm hardly Joe Sixpack, either...I have more geek shit in my house than you will ever have. I just have a family to feed and more important priorities in my life than repurchasing what I already own for a relatively minor bump in visual quality. Eventually I'll do it, but only when I see players in the sub-$50 range and movies are in the $10-$15 range.

Iguana I think realistically that is probably how alot of people feel in general, and the fact is no one is asking/telling/making anyone repurchase their entire DVD collection. When someone finally makes the transition into BD they can use their DVD @ an upscaled resolution and then purchase their new movies on BD...honestly it's no big deal that some try to make it out to be.

I finally bought an LG burner to make 'backups.' The freakin thing has been collecting dust for 2 months. There's no way I'm going to pay $40 to $50 for a pack of 15 disks.

When prices go from the ridiculous to normal, that's when people will latch on to Blu-ray.

I think in order to realy see the differance between blue-ray and DVD is when the LCD panels become real HD 1600p or greater with built in upscailing. Just look at the 30 inch top end PC LCD's, now thats real HD. In addition to this, remember that as you get larger LCD tv's those dam pixels also get bigger.

Yes oner there is a difference but is it enough? Apparently not says the people.

Not to mention that in your home watching movie you don't compare which of the two is better. You're happy what you have and concentrate enjoying the movie. Or else you are a super nerd if you watch the whole movie in pain knowing there is a better quality out there.

It's bull shit that Sony has the monopoly on HD format DVDs. I can't believe that they were able to get away with that, it's unamerican. I will be boycotting blue-rays till further notice. I have always been a fan of Sony products till this BS.

Originally posted by nervuli:

---

Yes oner there is a difference but is it enough? Apparently not says the people.

Not to mention that in your home watching movie you don't compare which of the two is better. You're happy what you have and concentrate enjoying the movie. Or else you are a super nerd if you watch the whole movie in pain knowing there is a better quality out there.

---

Thank you, at last, a view like mine, i watch a movie for it's content ie the story. If it looks nice too, great, but if not, so what (especially if it's bad CGI that looks even more out of place than it would on DVD). This week i watched a couple of foreign movies, one Hindi and one French, rivetting storylines, not the usual regurgigated Hollwood eye candy. I like eye candy as much as anyone but i'm certainly not interested in moving to Bluray or worse still, i'm not going to be replacing a single DVD with a Bluray version, not just because of cost, because to me there's just no point, as per the thread title i'm "still not sold on Blu-ray".

The last couple posts hit it right on the head, other than that, bluray does nothing for me, my family, friends and neighbors, I have a Sony XBR 40 in. set, I hate admitting it cause I vowed never to buy anything Sony after that rootkit fiasco, but my deal was almost a steal, I rented our first bluray movie using the kids ps3, we all watched as I also invited the neighbors.

After the movie I kept switching my DVD movie to the bluray movie I had both, nobody could tell the difference, my wife when we watched the bluray movie she asked when are we gonna watch the bluray movie, she knows nothing about anything techie, I said we already did, need I explain more.

What I did see, about a month ago I was at a friends house he had one of them huge sets, 50 plus something, there is when I saw a difference, but not a considerable one, not for the kind of prices these guys are trying to lure you in, I use my upconverted DVD player on my set and it's just fine, if bluray had a difference like from VHS to DVD now that would be a difference, DVD to Bluray, no thanks, plus now they want you to upgrade all your equipment & collections etc, this is a no-brainer where this is going people, and a last point, the other day I was buying some blank media at my favorite site, I just happen to look at blank bluray media, I almost crapped my pants.

I wholeheartedly agree with the "It's just not worth the cost to me" argument...
But, here's another consideration.
You can debate the quality differences all day long, but the reality is that most people, myself included, do not have the ability to make that comparison. I have one TV and one Disk player (which hasn't been turned on in ages). I couldn't tell you if Blueray was better or not because I don't have it. What I do know is that my current TV/DVD player is sufficient. I'm not looking for "something better". There's on compulsion. So, Blueray may be the cats meow, but it wouldn't matter to me because what I have already does the job.

As for the future? I think we'll eventually be forced away from DVD's and into Blueray, but not because of the quality, but because of the pirating.
Right now you can get virtually any movie you want and most don't take an hour to get. They play awesome on a normal TV.
But, if the standard gets raised to the point where a downloaded HD movie now takes 5gigs or even more, then this convienence will disappear. It'll take days to download.

Originally posted by creaky:

---

Thank you, at last, a view like mine, i watch a movie for it's content ie the story. If it looks nice too, great, but if not, so what (especially if it's bad CGI that looks even more out of place than it would on DVD). This week i watched a couple of foreign movies, one Hindi and one French, rivetting storylines, not the usual regurgigated Hollwood eye candy. I like eye candy as much as anyone but i'm certainly not interested in moving to Bluray or worse still, i'm not going to be replacing a single DVD with a Bluray version, not just because of cost, because to me there's just no point, as per the thread title i'm "still not sold on Blu-ray".

---

Creak I still enjoy movies for what they are ~ a story. No matter SD, HD, Sub SD rips or whatever. I just prefer a visually clean version if I had my choice to watch one or the other. I guess I do forget that since I have a 60" HD set I am able to enjoy the benefits that BD offers over SD stuff.

Oops I hadn't finished off my previous post properly.
Yeah don't get me wrong, I use DVD Rebuilder to ensure my DVD's are as good quality as they can be, and i've seen how clear Bluray's are (in the big stores on the huge TV screens) but i just don't "get it". Maybe once DVD's are in danger of extinction, and/or movies are only available on Bluray, i might reconsider, but what with the financial meltdown we're all still in, and the job market being an absolute joke, it just isn't going to happen anytime soon :p

Originally posted by creaky:

---

Oops I hadn't finished off my previous post properly.
Yeah don't get me wrong, I use DVD Rebuilder to ensure my DVD's are as good quality as they can be, and i've seen how clear Bluray's are (in the big stores on the huge TV screens) but i just don't "get it". Maybe once DVD's are in danger of extinction, and/or movies are only available on Bluray, i might reconsider, but what with the financial meltdown we're all still in, and the job market being an absolute joke, it just isn't going to happen anytime soon :p

---

But you still drive an old model t type ford while everyone else is in a red Ferrari with go faster stripes, you must go out ant buy one or you'll be left behind in the prehistoric era!

on a serious note, i fully agree with you creaky, & so do most of the customers coming into the Solihull branch of comet. most walk out shaking their head, maybe it's just the sales banter they dislike.

Originally posted by pphoenix:

---

But you still drive an old model t type ford while everyone else is in a red Ferrari with go faster stripes, you must go out ant buy one or you'll be left behind in the prehistoric era!

on a serious note, i fully agree with you creaky, & so do most of the customers coming into the Solihull branch of comet. most walk out shaking their head, maybe it's just the sales banter they dislike.

---

I actually do drive a really old car, have always had old cars. One way to avoid feeling less well off than others is to avoid Solihull :)
I like technology as much as anyone, though times are hard so the nicer things become even less attractive than they were when money was good. By the time i "get it" with Bluray i'll probably be wearing bottle-top glasses which cancel out the improved clarity of the movies. But as i say, in my case i'm fine with that, i do have a (fairly) large HDTV that can do 1080i max and that's clear enough for me for many years to come.
But i can't comment on consumers in general, i don't follow studies or polls or anything, just thought i'd throw my five penneth in.

You don't have to necessarily GET a HDTV to watch Blu-Ray, it just looks better on it. However, I can see people justifying this simply bc there's no reason to buy a BR player if you want sub-par video. That's like trying to see out of a windows that's smeared and claiming its clear. - BLUEBOY

screw BR and screw SONY.
after they paid/bribed Warner Bros. 40 million dollars to switch exclusively to BR their library, it destroyed HD and TOSHIBA.

Originally posted by nb69:

---

after they paid/bribed Warner Bros. 40 million dollars

---

LOL!

40 million???

They're not that cheap.

Try $400 million:

Sony paid $400-million for Blu-ray deal with Warner

Quote:

---

Sales of HDTV's over the last few years 100% disprove #5 and using Blockbuster for #6 as a main reference to how Sony is "pushing" BD is a bit outlandish, BUT that is not to say Sony isn't "pushing" BD, because they absolutely are

---

I'm not disputing that fact either, but my point is I have three perfectly good analog TV sets in my house, from 19" up to 32" which perform flawlessly. The picture quality is not as good as a 1080 HDTV set, but I can't justify tossing a good set and replace it with a new one just yet. When these die over the next few years as they will, I will replace them with a newer model, most likely HDTV 1080 or better by then, but for now I shall hold on to my model "T" TV sets and my 1950's chrome monster DVD players.

Originally posted by nb69:

---

screw BR and screw SONY.
after they paid/bribed Warner Bros. 40[0] million dollars to switch exclusively to BR their library, it destroyed HD and TOSHIBA.

---

So let me get this straight...it's bad for "BR/Sony" (yet the BDA is more than 1 company once again but I digress) to pay for exclusivity but it's not a problem for "HDDVD" to do the same? Double Standard FTL!

Originally posted by blivetNC:

---

Quote:

---

Sales of HDTV's over the last few years 100% disprove #5 and using Blockbuster for #6 as a main reference to how Sony is "pushing" BD is a bit outlandish, BUT that is not to say Sony isn't "pushing" BD, because they absolutely are

---

I'm not disputing that fact either, but my point is I have three perfectly good analog TV sets in my house, from 19" up to 32" which perform flawlessly. The picture quality is not as good as a 1080 HDTV set, but I can't justify tossing a good set and replace it with a new one just yet. When these die over the next few years as they will, I will replace them with a newer model, most likely HDTV 1080 or better by then, but for now I shall hold on to my model "T" TV sets and my 1950's chrome monster DVD players.

---

That's the thing BlivetNC, no one is forcing you to upgrade at all. When you do, you do, if you can. No big deal.

Originally posted by FredBun:

---

The last couple posts hit it right on the head, other than that, bluray does nothing for me, my family, friends and neighbors, I have a Sony XBR 40 in. set, I hate admitting it cause I vowed never to buy anything Sony after that rootkit fiasco, but my deal was almost a steal, I rented our first bluray movie using the kids ps3, we all watched as I also invited the neighbors.

After the movie I kept switching my DVD movie to the bluray movie I had both, nobody could tell the difference, my wife when we watched the bluray movie she asked when are we gonna watch the bluray movie, she knows nothing about anything techie, I said we already did, need I explain more.

What I did see, about a month ago I was at a friends house he had one of them huge sets, 50 plus something, there is when I saw a difference, but not a considerable one, not for the kind of prices these guys are trying to lure you in, I use my upconverted DVD player on my set and it's just fine, if bluray had a difference like from VHS to DVD now that would be a difference, DVD to Bluray, no thanks, plus now they want you to upgrade all your equipment & collections etc, this is a no-brainer where this is going people, and a last point, the other day I was buying some blank media at my favorite site, I just happen to look at blank bluray media, I almost crapped my pants.

---

I find that very hard to believe Fred. I think the Bravia TV's are one of the sets that Blu-ray differences really shine through. What movie was it? It must have been a poor BD transfer. I have seen the rare BD that has been no better than DVD also, while most are so much better it's like chalk and cheese.

In regards to other comments here, I can certainly agree that quality improvements mean nothing if the story line suffers. However, what we're going for here is a transfer that is transparent to the master. A media standard that can offer the end consumer the ability to basically bring the film reel home and watch and hear the movie as it was intended to be like at the cinema, ie: with no video or audio quality loss when compared to the master.

I knew somebody was gonna come back with a comment like that, e.g. there must of been something wrong with that disc, absolutely not, I already had a store bought DVD of Rescue Dawn, nothing wrong with it, I own a Sony Bravia XBR 40 in. 120hz, and I bought it because it was a 120, the 60's for my eyes were terrible, I actually got a headache from one, the motionflow was to my eyes were unwatchable.

Watching my movies are crystal clear, I went out and rented the same movie in bluray and there was nothing wrong with that disc either, it was a brand new rental from blockbuster, no difference what so ever, I have tons of movies and I am very particular weither it's a copy or store bought, if there is a minor flaw I return or disgard, and as I say again, I'm not the only person that seen it that way.

Last month a friend invited me to watch Spiderman 3 on his superset 50 plus something, his was a bluray, I brought my reg. DVD copy of spidey 3, and yes there was a differnce in quality, but let me expalin if this makes any sense, watching that bluray movie was as clear as watching spidey on my 40 in. set without bluray, cause watching reg. DVD's on his superset was not good, it seems to me the bigger the set the lousier picture on them giant sets, so where's the advantage unless you invest in nothing but bluray and I am not one of those that will spend money foolishly even if I has big bucks, and if you have a quality LCD tv 40 in. or under bluray is totally useless, I would love to say otherwise and admit wow this is great what a difference, but I call them as I see them, bottom line, totall waste of money.

Quote:

---

I would love to say otherwise and admit wow this is great what a difference, but I call them as I see them, bottom line, totall waste of money.

---

Amen brother Fredbun, Amen.

Originally posted by FredBun:

---

I would love to say otherwise and admit wow this is great what a difference, but I call them as I see them, bottom line, totall waste of money.

---

Not for me.

I just upgraded to an Epson 6500UB 1080p projector and a 96 inch screen. It's BluRay or nothing for me.

Upconverted DVD is barely watchable unless I pass the signal thru a $3500 DVDO iScan VP50 outboard video processor.

BluRay is worth every damn penny I spend on it.

My media room has a 124" screen. There is a big difference between Blu ray and DVD. DVDs are kind of washed out at that size while BD is crisp.

Bottom line. DVD will join the ranks of VHS. It's just a matter of time.

Originally posted by ChiefBrdy:

---

My media room has a 124" screen. There is a big difference between Blu ray and DVD. DVDs are kind of washed out at that size while BD is crisp.

Bottom line. DVD will join the ranks of VHS. It's just a matter of time.

---

It's not just the video. The lossless audio shines when you have the right system. I just got a new Denon receiver and Definitive speakers so tthe BluRay experience is better for me.

According to bluraystats.com 79% of all BluRay movies have lossless audio. It's just another advantage that gets overlooked sometimes.

Originally posted by HDNow:

---

Originally posted by ChiefBrdy:

---

My media room has a 124" screen. There is a big difference between Blu ray and DVD. DVDs are kind of washed out at that size while BD is crisp.

Bottom line. DVD will join the ranks of VHS. It's just a matter of time.

---

It's not just the video. The lossless audio shines when you have the right system. I just got a new Denon receiver and Definitive speakers so tthe BluRay experience is better for me.

According to bluraystats.com 79% of all BluRay movies have lossless audio. It's just another advantage that gets overlooked sometimes.

---

Agreed. I have a Denon too with B&W speakers. There is a noticeable difference.

Ok, I guess I am starting to see a trend here. Some AV equipment will show little or no improvement with Blu-ray. I too have invested a fair amount into a good home cinema experience which is why I can appreciate the difference (see the link in my signature. I plan to upgrade JBL ES100 pack to the B & W CM9 pack in the near future also). I guess to appreciate Blu-ray, the right equipment is needed.

The problem with Blu Ray is that far more people have 40" or even 50"+ televisions. If you need a 100"+ screen to "really" see the differance, then most people will not even bother.

I think the Blu Ray lovers are the acception, and "most" consumers are the rule. That's why "most" people don't want to spend the $$$. They see little return or benifit from spending their hard earned $.

I could care less what other people want to spend their money, but for me, right now, not going to happen any time soon for myself.

Originally posted by Oner:

---

Originally posted by blivetNC:

---

It all boils down to cost versus perceived benefits. It was a quantum leap forward in technology between DVD and VHS/Beta, (no rewinding, lots of cool features, much better picture and sound, closed captioning, etc.) unfortunately the gap between DVD and BlueRay/HD is not as great as SOme companiNY wants you to believe. VHS will play on the same TV as DVD, but to realize the difference between DVD and BluRay one needs an HDTV. So, buy a new player and a new TV to see marginally better picture quality.I'm sticking with DVD for now until the mega tetrabyte drive comes out and all my movies are in my media computer and not lined up on a bookshelf or crate.

---

1) SONY is not the only company in the BD association, funny how you call only a specific one out though for some reason...

2) "The gap between DVD and BlueRay/HD is not as great" ~ Exhibit A & B + some direct ones

DVD - BD

DVD - BD

DVD & BD

If those don't show a "gap" then there is no point of me saying anything further...

---

well it looks like you used a standard dvd player and not an up scaling DVD player, my up scaling samsung does a wonderful job and actually looks closer to the BD versions of yours. I can almost count the hairs on Kong's arms with my standard DVD playing. like most people are saying, it is just not worth it to upgrade to Blu-Ray for the minimal improvement.

Ryu77, edit your sig to conform to forum specs ASAP. yours is 90x115 pixels & 5 lines of text which includes the blank line.
4. If you want to use both text and image in your signature the image should not be more than 500 pixels wide and 100 pixels tall, and you can use up to three lines of text.

Originally posted by ddp:

---

Ryu77, edit your sig to conform to forum specs ASAP. yours is 90x115 pixels & 5 lines of text which includes the blank line.
4. If you want to use both text and image in your signature the image should not be more than 500 pixels wide and 100 pixels tall, and you can use up to three lines of text.

---

?? It's been like that for almost a year and now you tell me? It's nice to see that members like myself that have contributed a lot to this website still get spoken down to by mods. ddp, take whatever action you see fit as it really doesn't bother me.

lol, I love this, to all that disagreed about my views on bluray, and don't get me wrong, it's great to disagree cause we can learn from many different point of views, but you guys have made my point for me, especially the one's that own these big sets, you guys are right, you diffently need bluray because of that cause watching reg. DVD's on those sets trully suck so I don't find that an advantage thats a hindurance unless of course you got big bucks and if thats the case more power to you. I'm a different animal, even if I had big bucks I couldn't do it I'm to old school.

I have also been cursed cause you people that own those really huge sets, watching them in a living room my eyes just can't take, and those really big projection screens YUK, even with bluray they suck, the person that owned it thought it was the most fantastic picture and I was glad for him but my eyes coudn't take it, I wish it was different, I had to walk down his hallway before my eyes could adjust to it, sitting to close to those things made me dizzy, him he loved it I was jealous. Unless of course if you can afford one of those huge rooms that create a theater setting that might work and of course your on a pro basketballs players salary.

It's the kings new clothes syndrome Fred.. They paid out huge bucks and can't stand to see anybody who a) doesn't live in a palace big enough to fit the damn things in.. and b) wouldn't squander that kind of money on what after all is only a tv even if they had it.

market share October last year .. b-r 13% .. current 12% .. that's total films on disks sales.. and slowly falling as people see they have been conned. Where are you supposed to fit a 60" or above tv in a room 9' by 8' with a window, 2 doorways and a fireplace in it anyways?

scientific studies in 1934-36 showed that the optimum screen size for comfortable viewing at a sensible distance was 12" at 5-7 feet distance.. anything larger was found to be possibly damaging over extended periods.. they suggest getting up from your computer for 2 minutes in every 30. I can't watch these huge things... they either look damn awful or give me a headache or both.

varnull, ditto

Originally posted by varnull:

---

It's the kings new clothes syndrome Fred.. They paid out huge bucks and can't stand to see anybody who a) doesn't live in a palace big enough to fit the damn things in.. and b) wouldn't squander that kind of money on what after all is only a tv even if they had it.

---

That's where the whole concept of "home theater" gets lost.

You have to realize that a home theater display is no longer just a TV.

There is a segment of consumers out there that understands that the whole idea behind a "home theater" is to re-create the experience you have when you watch a movie in an actual theater.

Quote:

---

market share October last year .. b-r 13% .. current 12% .. that's total films on disks sales.. and slowly falling as people see they have been conned.

---

Everyone in the business world knows that you don't compare sales data from October of the previous year to that from June of this year. You compare year-on-year numbers:

Quote:

---

scientific studies in 1934-36 showed that the optimum screen size for comfortable viewing at a sensible distance was 12" at 5-7 feet distance.. anything larger was found to be possibly damaging over extended periods.. they suggest getting up from your computer for 2 minutes in every 30. I can't watch these huge things... they either look damn awful or give me a headache or both.

---

Citing studies from before World War II doesn't prove anything. If I watched a 12 inch screen from 5 to 7 feet away I wouldn't be able to make out the scores at the upper left hand corner of a football broadcast.

Based on more recent studies, sitting 12 feet away from a 96 inch screen gives you the full benefit of 1080p - and a great home theater experience to boot.

http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html

lol, you know surveys and studies make me laugh even though the one varnull used pretty much nailed it cause it was just common sense, I have yet to see a really large screen that can give you the same effect as going to the movies, we just are not there yet bluray or not if you try to tell me any different I just shrug my shoulders and say yeah right with a giggle, many that spend that kind of money have to defend the cost they put out and thats cool if it makes you happy, just don't try to say it's a real movie experiance, it's not, yes you can make the sound a complete movie experiance but visual not yet.

I know in years to come the visual will be duplicated, again, if you can afford that theatrical room, but remember as varnull said, I don't care how clear that huge screen can be, to watch a tv that big that close cause most people can not afford a theater just isn't gonna happen, and I have read somewhere there already experimenting with large screen tv's that can compare to a real movie screen, than again I could never watch a movie in front rows I would puke, so unless you have those big bucks and don't forget what do you think those new big screens will cost, for 90% of us it's will always be out of our reach, most of us I think will be satisfied with a nice 40 or even a 46 incher.

Ryu77, if you had read the rules when you made youro sig then this would not be happening. try to police over 600,000 members with multi-million posts & you can see why you got missed till now. i'm even hitting addicts over their sigs so nobody is immune. just fix it, ok?

Another good example of the "average consumer doesn't really care about quality" argument is lately I'm surprised at the MAJORITY of bars, restaurants, events and even stores I've been to that have wide-screen sets set up completely wrong, nor do they really care (during the Stanley Cup one set was 16x9 with a squished image with letterboxing on top of that, and another set was a stretched 4x3 picture) most of the people I asked didn't see a problem with the picture including the employees who basically shrugged their shoulders and said "looks fine to me" (I had to leave it was giving me such a headache). Anyways my point being is if the average person can't set up their sets correctly, let alone even see there is an obvious problem with the picture, they sure ain't gonna notice the quality of Blu-ray.

Originally posted by Varnull:

---

scientific studies in 1934-36 showed that the optimum screen size for comfortable viewing at a sensible distance was 12" at 5-7 feet distance.. anything larger was found to be possibly damaging over extended periods.. they suggest getting up from your computer for 2 minutes in every 30. I can't watch these huge things... they either look damn awful or give me a headache or both.

---

Good to see that we are referring to studies (75 years ago) that completely relate to our generation. Imagine playing Jay-Z to someone in that generation... "It's the Devil music!... Burn them at the stake!"

The years you refer to is when TV was just being launched to the public. The first TV was made in 1928 and wasn't commercially available until the late 1930's. I couldn't even imagine who could afford one then. Of course they are going to tell that a 12" set is optimum because that is all they could manage to produce at that time! Also, on what basis were these studies performed? Who was the control group? etc. etc.?

Come on Varnull, 12 inches!? and 5 - 7 feet?? Who sits that close to the TV in their Living Room? And where the hell can you get a 12" TV from today? Oh ok... You can get a screen that size with a portable DVD Player! :-P

Originally posted by progrockt:

---

Another good example of the "average consumer doesn't really care about quality" argument is lately I'm surprised at the MAJORITY of bars, restaurants, events and even stores I've been to that have wide-screen sets set up completely wrong, nor do they really care (during the Stanley Cup one set was 16x9 with a squished image with letterboxing on top of that, and another set was a stretched 4x3 picture) most of the people I asked didn't see a problem with the picture including the employees who basically shrugged their shoulders and said "looks fine to me" (I had to leave it was giving me such a headache). Anyways my point being is if the average person can't set up their sets correctly, let alone even see there is an obvious problem with the picture, they sure ain't gonna notice the quality of Blu-ray.

---

Yes, you are right there.

I can't begin to tell you how many times I have seen a wide screen TV set up incorrectly.

As I sell this stuff for a living, sometimes it is very difficult to explain modern AV tech to people, while other times people catch on very quickly. It is a new World now that's for sure but one thing for certain is that we are not going to take any steps backward in technology.

That is where the HDMI idea was born. This was ideally introduced as a way for consumers to be able to connect their AV equipment with less set up know how. Digital video and audio in a single connection. As everything is connected digitally, the CEC mechanism can use logic to communicate between devices. This should automate optimum settings for the user. Maybe we haven't quite got there with HDMI yet, but is is an evolving technology which seems to be very close to being 100% user friendly.

So those that wish to stay with DVD, that's fine. I just find it odd that there is something better that is readily available but you choose not to have any interest. Some even go as far as to say, there is no quality improvement? Is this some kind of denial? The only thing that I can understand stopping people is the cost. Now please don't speak on behalf of everyone and tell me that it is too expensive because A) The term "too expensive" is a highly subjective matter and will differ greatly depending on who you ask, and B) The cost of Blu-ray Players and media will come down, it is inevitable. What one should be saying is I can't justify the cost at this point in time.

Ryu77, good post, first I really don't think varnull was trying to use that article as a main fact, I think you might have missed the point if you read between the lines so to speak.

Your last point, first you sound like a guy that really knows his stuff technically anyway about these sets and I don't argue the fact, but as you say you think people like myself don't want to get with the program cause of costs only, nothing can be further from the truth in my case anyway, I really couldn't afford the set I got but did it anyway, as I did with VCR's, monitor TV's, surround sound systems and even my first video camera with the portable VCR hanging on my side, before people I hung with didn't even know what the hell it was, I worked harder and longer to acquire these things with arguments from the misses to no end even though in the end she enjoyed these things as much as I did.

I got these things because there was a difference, it was a total new technology, it was exciting even though the prices were dear. So in no way would I hold back and I'm sure many others if something as exciting comes again, hell DVD from VHS was great, now there was something to be excited about, I didn't jump on the band wagon because it was new, it was great, a whole new viewing experience even though many thought I spent my money foolishly later on they all jumped on the band wagon anyway and all came asking me for advise, I was a year ahead of all of them.

Now I'm not techie like you are, but I do have common sense and eyes which are still good thank the bearded guy upstairs, if this bluray thing was worth it I would definitely jump on it, unfortunately it's not meaning it has not much to do with the cost, well some I'm not gonna lie, but the fact of the matter is with the bluray there is nothing to be excited about, in other words it's a rip as far as the prices are now anyway.

Even if the prices come down as low as all the DVD sitch is now, why change anyway, I still cannot see any difference on my 40 inch set, and what about people like me that have a whole collection of DVD movies, I redid my VHS collection to DVD's cause it was worth it, and now were suppose to do it again to bluray because they say the viewing experience is something to behold, are these people sh%#@#g me, it's again the dumming down of America because it has always worked before, this time I don't think people are as stupid or are at least waiting for something well worth more than bluray.

But than again if your the type that has to have the new toys because the industry says it's the way to go than more power to you, and or if you have the big bucks for a theater than that's great to cause that's the only way bluray shines just a little bit.

And last, I still loved your post, it was well written.

Just a note with my own personal experience.

I've got a 50" Panasonic 1080p Plasma. Yeah there IS a difference in image quality but ONLY if the Blu-ray has been digitally mastered well. Some movies hardly look better than decently upscaled DVDs at all... some do.

With good upscaling DVDs do look excellent. The main difference between that and Blu-ray I see in mid to longshots (like landscapes ect). Otherwise ... meh! It's perfectly understandable someone not wanting to bother with a blu-ray player.

The real advantage is with the HD TV broadcasts... they look much better than the standard SD TV.

I've not bothered to go out and buy any Blu-rays (I just rent them) and I certainly would not bother to replace any of my existing DVDs.

I'm not rich. I'm not interested in a fancy car or somesuch, but I like my AV. I pump my games and a PC (which has the blu-ray OD) through this set too- they look great. So I'm glad I made the purchase of the TV set.

SPAM removed

SPAM removed

SPAM removed

Originally posted by HDNow:

---

Originally posted by ChiefBrdy:

---

My media room has a 124" screen. There is a big difference between Blu ray and DVD. DVDs are kind of washed out at that size while BD is crisp.

Bottom line. DVD will join the ranks of VHS. It's just a matter of time.

---

It's not just the video. The lossless audio shines when you have the right system. I just got a new Denon receiver and Definitive speakers so tthe BluRay experience is better for me.
According to bluraystats.com 79% of all BluRay movies have lossless audio. It's just another advantage that gets overlooked sometimes.

---

As for me, I prefer a prepro and good separate power amps (the def tech speakers are just fine) for killer sound from the BD discs. A good powered sub would be a fine addition too. Receivers (even high end ) just don't do it 4 me

I agree with some of the people posting. I personally don't think bluray is worth the cost. The small differences on some movies pop, but all in all, the price just has to come down.
@Ryu77,
Why is it all your posts make you sound like a salesman or share holder in sony, or the bluray group? I've been in other conversations with you and it always sounds like a sales pitch.
I'm not trying to be confrontational, and maybe I'm just reading you wrong, but it does sound that way.

Originally posted by llongtheD:

---

Why is it all your posts make you sound like a salesman or share holder in sony, or the bluray group? I've been in other conversations with you and it always sounds like a sales pitch.
I'm not trying to be confrontational, and maybe I'm just reading you wrong, but it does sound that way.

---

Because he sells AV tech for a living. I'm sure he's not only fluent in Sony. Just so happens that is the subject matter.

Originally posted by emugamer:

---

Originally posted by llongtheD:

---

Why is it all your posts make you sound like a salesman or share holder in sony, or the bluray group? I've been in other conversations with you and it always sounds like a sales pitch.
I'm not trying to be confrontational, and maybe I'm just reading you wrong, but it does sound that way.

---

Because he sells AV tech for a living. I'm sure he's not only fluent in Sony. Just so happens that is the subject matter.

---

I come by the same problem all the time. I'm just not an AV sales tech LoL.