Thinking of buying a Blu-ray player?

  TopCat® 16:04 15 Feb 2008

Apparently, it's not advisable just yet, if this article is to be believed, and he gives fives reasons why not. TC. click here

  Dizzy Bob 16:25 15 Feb 2008

worth noting the comments at the bottom of the article

"the conclusion comes with a big caveat of its own: the Sony PlayStation 3. It's the only player that's futureproof, it doubles as a top-notch game machine and network digital media streamer, and it's readily available for $400. Oh--it also happens to be a great Blu-ray player, and it does a fine job of upconverting your standard DVDs to high-definition resolutions. As such, it remains the exception to the rule, and the only Blu-ray player that we can enthusiastically recommend for the time being."

Except the price in the UK!, the cheapest i have found is £279


  citadel 20:14 15 Feb 2008

I read that sony had a new blueray version that will be a lot cheaper to make.

  al7478 03:58 16 Feb 2008

An absolutely crucial point here, surely, is that HDDVDs can already do the things many blu ray players cant...?!

I think the article is quite in saying that moat people dont care about the extras, but you do'nt necassarily have to be a hardcore cinephile to want them - you may just want them more with some films than others.

Either way, i doubt the "man on the street" is familiar with these tehnicalities - especially when they are generally refered to with jargon, and not English.

Blu ray looks better on a big screen...? Well, the same applies to HDDVD.

Its my opinion (based on my own experience, but still), that if you looked around the net for a bit, you'd find far more firmware and compatibility problems wth blu ray than hddvd.

As the article indicates, those who are desperate enough will get a ps3, but how many really want an ugly (relatively speaking) games console hanging around unless they want to use it for more than blu ray viewing, especially at that price (tho i think its a reasonable price if you intend to do more with it).

  pavvi 14:20 16 Feb 2008

Quality isn't unfortunately the big thing if you remember the old VHS v Betamax battle. VHS won, but Betamax was better quality: you only have to notice that a great deal of the tv companies use Betamax tapes to record programmes.

  gazzaho 14:45 16 Feb 2008

I have to say I own a Playstation 3 and it does play Blue Ray movies but to date the only one I own is Casino Royale, and the only reason I own it is that it was sent from Sony free for purchasing the Playstation. I have no intention of changing to either Blue Ray or HD DVD until one becomes the standard, the only thing that would sway me to one or the other is not the HD Video abilities, standard DVD works fine for me, but the increase in storage capacity over standard DVD, and neither have affordable hardware or media in order to tempt me just yet.

  TopCat® 14:32 19 Feb 2008

Toshiba have stopped production of their players and left the format arena free for Sony and its partners. Blu-ray has won the day, it would seem, which has to be good news for the world's consumers. Unlike 'the old VHS v Betamax battle' which pavvi mentions above, the public has learned quite early on as to which format will hold sway. Whether it will now be reasonably priced is, of course, another question and we'll just have to wait to find out the answer. TC.

  Benje 16:10 19 Feb 2008

Don’t forget that if you want the hd surround sound you will need a amp with HDMI input if you only use the PS3. most of the stand alone players have a decoder in the player and you can connect it to the amp using 5.1 cables.

  TopCat® 17:20 19 Feb 2008

Here's a BBC reporter's view on the PS3 and Blu-ray issue. TC. click here

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Honor 9 Lite review

How Sam Falconer transforms science and geology into digestible, elegant illustrations

HomePod review

Les meilleures séries Netflix (2018)