jocksteelukI can see Blu-ray initially winning this battle but then losing it by raising the royalties amounts and once again reopening the door for a competitor, I think one of the reasons Hd-Dvd is losing is because of the ever changing hardware specs Eg: dual layer, triple layer, quad layer each time rendering the previous addition obsolete. I very much doubt this battle is won yet after all how many members of this forum actually uses Netflix? but besides this i do expect a combined hd-dvd xbox 360 console which will soon no doubt be released to reinvigorate hd-dvd sales, at the end of the day the winner of the battle is the general consumer!

yogurt_21wow it's really funn to claim a "winner" in a competition involving less than 3% of all movie sales. so what exactly has blu-ray won?

nothing, if there's a "winner" in this case it's the DVD why?
cheaper media, more titles (like 90% more), cheaper players, upconvertable players which are basically prolonging the life of DVD's into the all HD era, and the fact that everyone already owns a DVD player and plenty of DVD movies.

the average consumer (where the money is) isn't too keen on having to upgrade all their movies for a few more pretties, especially when they can get an upconverting player that will increase the pretties (ok a halfway fix) on the current DVd they already own.

so contrary to popular belief, Sony's Blu-ray was never competing with the HD-DVD, BOTH formats are actually competing with the good ol' DVD which currently owns the market. I mean seriously VHS's are out selling Blu-Rays atm. So i seriously doubt the format war is over, at this point a whole new tech could come into the business and beat both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. But as for now, there can be no winner (whether or not HD-DVD survives) when niether platform has reached the average consumer.

RavenasLooking down the road, when regular DVD gets phased out just like VHS did. That's really what you're not even taking into consideration.

yogurt_21actually i did, hence the upconverting dvd player comment, point is there is nothing that the blu-ray can offer your average joe consumer. why? because your average joe consumer is on a crt based non-hd, non-digital tv. when betamax and the vhs went at it, nobody had to upgrade their tv's to view it, thus people were able to buy their favorite movies from the theatre for the first time without having to upgrade their television.

thus in 2009 when the telelvision waves go digital exclusively, these people STILL wont upgrade their tv's, they'll just get the converter box and a govenment voucher to cover it.

beyond the average joe, your middleclassman wis already on an upconverting dvd player and has no reason to switch, as was posted earlier, both blu-ray and hd-dvd have yet to finalize their products, thus until they decide on the amount of layers they want on it and stick to it. They're not goign to sway the middleclassman either. well damn between the poor, the average joe, and the middleclassman there's 90+% of the market.
getting it yet?

and as i said before VHS's are out selling blu-rays meaning there is a larger chunk of the market who has yet to convert to DVD's that there are peopel who've played into the new "format war". Either side has yet to show any real numbers, so until they do, I think I'll stick with my original argument that both could fade at this point and something else could come in and win.

RavenasI don't understand where you're getting the middle-class average joe argument from...My entire family has HDTVs, with the exception of maybe 2 people in my family...I mean heck, my grandparents on both my Mom's and my Dad's side of the family have HD-tvs...I have various friends with HDTVs and they are college students living in apartments...

I don't really see how you're coming up with the categories and these suggestions, but maybe this is just me...

Wile EHe's generalizing. But he's 100% correct. Most people don't own an HDTV. I'm the only one in my family with one.

@yogurt - One small error, most people DO have a digital TV. Any "Cable Ready" TV is digital. In 2009 they aren't necessarily eliminating SD content, they're just eliminating analog transmissions. That's not to say that some networks won't go HD exclusive, but it's not mandated.

TripriftNo im thinking the same hd panels and even true hd panels are going down in price all the time and are not the mind blowingly expensive things they once were.

RavenasLike I said, it could be just my family, but nearly all of us have HDTVs. I see no difference in price. At the time my parents bought their old 62", it was 4,000$+. No difference to me. :cool:

RavenasLike I said, it could be just my family, but nearly all of us have HDTVs. I see no difference in price. At the time my parents bought their old 62", it was 4,000$+. No difference to me. :cool:

Wile EMost people don't spend $4000 on a TV. That's not the average. Most people I know cringe to spend $400 on a TV, let alone thousands. Your family is not the status quo.

Polaris573That's more than most of my friends spent on their car and that much money would get me through half a semester of college. It would be tragic for me to spend that much on a TV.

effmaster$4000 would get me through Three semesters of College since I go to community college and it is only $95 a credit hour there lol:laugh::laugh::laugh:

imperialreignSame here.

Out of everyone I know , I can only think of one person (well, two actually) with a Plasma HDTV, it was dirt cheap and he went in on it with his roommate, so between the two of them they only coughed up (IIRC) $1200 each.

But, they both told me if it wasn't for that deal, they never woulda gone for it.

effmasterWe finally bought our Plasma for $900. Well my family did at least. Im still not happy that they chose Plasma over LCD but you cant fix what they already did after they make up their mind there is no stopping them.