Blu-Ray vs DVD?

[John Baker]

I was at Best Buy a year or so ago, all they pretty much sold was Blu-Ray, so I let myself be talked into buying a Blu-Ray machine and a few videos to go with it.

With my regular DVD player, I can put it on pause and go do something else for as long as I want, then come back and the video starts up right where I paused it. I can also stop it, turn it off, and turn it on the next night and be right where I was.

I can't do any of that with Blu-Ray. If I'm away from the player for more than five minutes after hitting pause, I have to start at the very beginning of the disk, where it warns you you'll end up in prison if you copy it. The same way with turning the set off, you must search through the disk to find where you left off.

The quality of the picture, and the sound, if it is any better than a regular DVD, I sure can't tell. I have a 65" Mitsubishi home theater. I either read, or watch movies at night. I have collected over a thousand DVDs from discount stores and yard sales. When I first got into it, I was buying new movies for as high as thirty five dollars, what a Dumbo.

I only watched Blu-Ray a couple of times, in fact, I have a Blu-Ray movie that I went and bought in a DVD format so I could watch it without all the hassles

IMO, Blu-Ray is nothing but a scam to sell DVD type movies at a much higher price. It isn't worth it. DVDs are pretty much the same quality, and a whole lot cheaper.

Anyone else think along these lines?

-John
​

 

[Captain]

I bought a PS3. Solid game console and comes with Blu-Ray. I don't have the issues you spoke of. Blu-Ray is better than DVD in terms of picture quality...but all physical media is dying now anyway. It'll all be streaming HD very soon. I'd not recommend anyone buying any type of physical media player at this point...

 

[John Baker]

OOPS. I meant to put this in Hanger Talk. Can someone please move it to the appropriate forum?

Thanks,

-John

 

[DaleB]

Blu-Ray and streaming are really nothing more than the industry's way to move toward their ultimate goal... you pay them any time you hear, see, watch or read anything. My Blu-Ray player does a magnificent job with DVDs, so that's mostly what we have. The BDs are kind of a pain in the rump.

 

[hopmedic]

John, it all depends on the player. How cheap, how expensive, what features, and so forth. Odds are you wouldn't find the issues you describe in their list of features, though. That's where reviews will help.

Myself, I have a 42", and it's hooked up to a computer. That computer has Windows Media Center, and a Blu-Ray player. I had to buy PowerDVD to play the Blu-Rays, as Windows doesn't come with software for that, and I added the BD player to the computer on the cheap. The end result? I can pull the disk out, play another disk, and IIRC, if I put the same disk back in it will remember where it was. I have an IR detector, and a Windows Media Center compatible remote control, as well as having a wireless keyboard that will reach across the room to where the computer sits up on a shelf. The computer acts as a DVR, and I don't have to pay any cable company - hook the antenna to the back of the computer (TV tuner card), and get the free channels, and what isn't on there, I can generally find online. I stream with Hulu, with Internet TV (a feature of Windows Media Center), and before I fired Netflix, I streamed from them. All of this is integrated with WMC.

Saying all that, I watch very little TV, which is the reason I have a computer hooked up to it - so I don't have to pay the cable TV bill.

 

[olasek]

DVDs are pretty much the same quality, and a whole lot cheaper.

It doesn't agree with my experience.
I have a rather inexpensive Blue-ray player, I paid for it less than $120 at my local Best Buy.
The quality is outstanding when watching rented BR movies, it is in fact so good I have a hard time forcing myself to watch regular DVD, I do it only when the title is not available in BR. With Blue Ray I have no more excuse to go to a cinema - I get cinema experience at my home.

 

[Piloto]

I am not a much of a TV fan even though I have a 70" Sharp HDTV I have no cable or Satellite but just and old fashion attic TV antenna. I also have a Blue Ray player but I rarely use it unless I get a new disc. A month ago my son gave an Apple TV gadget for fathers day. It is very much like renting a movie but via the internet. Unlike the Blue-Ray/DVD player it has a lot of advantages over the traditional DVD renting/purchasing. Here are some.

1. You can glance at a large selection by different categories
2. You can watch a preview of the movies without renting them. No need to risk getting a movie you end up not liking
3. The HD quality is as good as Blue-Ray
4. The download is less than a minute to start seeing the movie
5. You can pause the movie at any time for when you need to go to the john
6. One of my best you do not need to store a bunch of disc that you are not going to see again.
7. Average rental is $3.99.

You can also watch youtube videos and others for free.

I think this would essentially eliminate the need to buy or rent DVDs

José

 

[Captain]

I am not a much of a TV fan even though I have a 70" Sharp HDTV I have no cable or Satellite but just and old fashion attic TV antenna. I also have a Blue Ray player but I rarely use it unless I get a new disc. A month ago my son gave an Apple TV gadget for fathers day. It is very much like renting a movie but via the internet. Unlike the Blue-Ray/DVD player it has a lot of advantages over the traditional DVD renting/purchasing. Here are some.

1. You can glance at a large selection by different categories
2. You can watch a preview of the movies without renting them. No need to risk getting a movie you end up not liking
3. The HD quality is as good as Blue-Ray
4. The download is less than a minute to start seeing the movie
5. You can pause the movie at any time for when you need to go to the john
6. One of my best you do not need to store a bunch of disc that you are not going to see again.
7. Average rental is $3.99.

You can also watch youtube videos and others for free.

I think this would essentially eliminate the need to buy or rent DVDs

José

That Apple TV also brings your entire iTunes library to your TV. Most people have expensive high quality sound systems hooked up to their TVs and crappy stupid speakers hooked up to their computer...and yet where's all the music? On the crappy speakered device...the computer.

Well, ATV moves the music to where it should be. The living room. Plus, all your pictures on your computer can be viewed on that 70" HDTV that you have. It'll make slide shows too. I can't tell you how often it comes on as a screen saver and we all just get sucked into watching the slide show. Remembering and telling stories while the music plays in the background.

Plus ATV has NetFlix. There's $8 / month well spent. ATV really changed our viewing habits as much as a DVR did and that's saying a lot.

Like I said earlier, streaming content is the future. Talking about Blu-Ray vs. DVD is like comparing 8 Track to Cassettes in 1982. People have an opinion but in a decade it won't matter.

 

[saracelica]

OOPS. I meant to put this in Hanger Talk. Can someone please move it to the appropriate forum?

Thanks,

-John

Eh it can stay here you bought an airplane Blu ray to watch, right?!

 

[L.Adamson]

BlueRay on my 55" LCD/LED HDTV = perfection. I always prefer BlueRay if possible.

 

[Apache123]

The blu-ray medium is higher density optical storage than DvDs. Blu ray can hold several times more data Than DVDs.
Just because it's there doesn't mean it is always used. If a video was simply ported over from DVD to blue ray then the quality will not be any different. DVD movies will typically run up to 480i29 at 3 to 4Mbps whereas blu ray supports up to 1080p24 as high as 24Mbps (the highest I've personally seen).
If you have a screen that can handle it in full, and both are running at max, a blu ray video will be about 32 times higher "quality."
At this point some people will notice and some people won't. Have a friend that swears they see the difference between two colors that look identical to you? Have a friend who doesn't See the difference between two colors you can? We are getting close to what the human eye sees naturally, so not everyone sees it as different as everyone else. Watch a ton of content via blu ray and then go back to DVD and you will notice though. If you know what to look for it is annoying as hell, but then again that's part of my job.

The issue with the blu ray being paused for a few moments and shutting down likely has to do with a relatively small read buffer on the disc reader. If you are watching something that is 30 frames per sEcond of video about 29 of those are small P-frames or B-frames which are really really tiny, all 29 could fit into the size of the 30th frame in some instances. That 30th frame is an I-frame, and it is required for the other 29 frames to draw right. If your player for to sleep and loses its I-frame then you will have to spin the disc back up to gt that specific one, and if it doesn't track well, it may not be possible. Ever watch a DVD or bu ray or YouTube video when suddenly everything seems to become blocky or move like it was inky and you can see the rig shapes but the wrong colors? That is most likely a dropped I-frame.

The reason you can usually only skip aroundby 5 or 10 seconds on some YouTube videos is because they only have one I-frame every five to ten seconds, but this is what allows them to load so fast.

Gotta go, on an iPad, pm me if you're interested more in how compressed digital video works.

 

[Henning]

The only thing I watch anymore is Netflix, it's the only reason I haven't given the iPad to mom yet.

 

[hopmedic]

It doesn't agree with my experience.
I have a rather inexpensive Blue-ray player, I paid for it less than $120 at my local Best Buy.
The quality is outstanding when watching rented BR movies, it is in fact so good I have a hard time forcing myself to watch regular DVD, I do it only when the title is not available in BR. With Blue Ray I have no more excuse to go to a cinema - I get cinema experience at my home.

The BD is definitely better quality than the DVD for video. DVD max resolution is 720x480, where BD is 1920x1080 - well over 4x the resolution. Of course, whether you see it or not may depend on your optometrist...

That Apple TV also brings your entire iTunes library to your TV. Most people have expensive high quality sound systems hooked up to their TVs and crappy stupid speakers hooked up to their computer...and yet where's all the music? On the crappy speakered device...the computer.

Well, ATV moves the music to where it should be. The living room. Plus, all your pictures on your computer can be viewed on that 70" HDTV that you have. It'll make slide shows too. I can't tell you how often it comes on as a screen saver and we all just get sucked into watching the slide show. Remembering and telling stories while the music plays in the background.

Plus ATV has NetFlix. There's $8 / month well spent. ATV really changed our viewing habits as much as a DVR did and that's saying a lot.

Like I said earlier, streaming content is the future. Talking about Blu-Ray vs. DVD is like comparing 8 Track to Cassettes in 1982. People have an opinion but in a decade it won't matter.

I'm not familiar with ATV, but I've been using a computer to drive my TV for about 7 years now. It's the only way to go. The 7.1 soundcard is hooked up to an Onkyo receiver, and the Bose speakers are well-placed. If I ever get around to it, I'll put another monitor and set of speakers upstairs in the living room/dining room. There are probably about 250 CDs ripped to the 4 drive, 2TB RAID array in my server, not to mention the radio (yes, they still have that) and every sound you can find on the internet, so there's no shortage of tunes.

But yes, you are right. Most people have lousy speakers hooked to their computers. Thankfully, I'm not one of them.

 

[olasek]

If a video was simply ported over from DVD to blue ray then the quality will not be any different.

This is a good point and applies to many older movies.

I often was frustrated in inability to read some credits at the end of a movie, for example when producers thank someone or where shooting locations are mentioned, they typically come at the very end - it was never possible with a DVD as far as I am concerned, no problem with Blue Ray - never have problem reading even the smallest print.

 

[denverpilot]

The issue with the blu ray being paused for a few moments and shutting down likely has to do with a relatively small read buffer on the disc reader. If you are watching something that is 30 frames per sEcond of video about 29 of those are small P-frames or B-frames which are really really tiny, all 29 could fit into the size of the 30th frame in some instances. That 30th frame is an I-frame, and it is required for the other 29 frames to draw right. If your player for to sleep and loses its I-frame then you will have to spin the disc back up to gt that specific one, and if it doesn't track well, it may not be possible. Ever watch a DVD or bu ray or YouTube video when suddenly everything seems to become blocky or move like it was inky and you can see the rig shapes but the wrong colors? That is most likely a dropped I-frame.

Way over-thinking it. He just has a nanny firmware player that shuts itself off after pausing for five minutes. It's a UI thing.

The player isn't even attempting to read I-frames or any streaming data when it's paused. It's just sitting there with the platter spinning, waiting for a command and displaying the buffer contents.

Some player manufacturers didn't want to write code to spin down the platter and then re-seek to the appropriate location on the platter when the "un-pause" command is received. And they didn't want to leave the motor spinning and the laser on. So they just shut it off after five minutes of inactivity.

Just poorly done firmware and UI.

Your I-frame discussion comes into play when he hits un-pause after less than five minutes. Some players can pick up where they left off, some jump backward slightly to an I-frame and start from there. All depends on how dirty/cheap their firmware coders are.

 

[Timmer]

Hello!

First time post here (ironically) but I'm a huge video guy and was a very early adopter on DVD and again on BD. I, for one, can't even watch DVDs any more. If they look the same to you then either you most likely need a better or calibrated TV or you're sitting too far away from the TV which most people do.

The resolution between a DVD at 480p and a BD at 1980p is, well a _lot_! But, really, it's more than resolution. For example, Netflix can stream at high-resolution too but it looks terrible. This is because of compression. Some BDs can be over compressed too and made to look not much better than a DVD or if the source footage is dirty, it'll look bad.

But as much as the picture is important, what wins me over for BD is the sound. Listening to a BD in lossless sound that has a higher bandwidth that the video of DVDs is night and day compared to the lossy compressed sound on DVDs. Since it's pretty easy to switch sound modes, I've done A/B comparisons with friends and family on movies and people can always tell the difference.

But, honestly, I love the convenience of streaming and for 70% of movies I'm fine with streaming quality for the price savings and ease of use. Unlike DVDs which I bought like they were going out of style, I am quite selective on my BD purchases.

Sadly, sound is something that really lacks on streaming.

 

[denverpilot]

Forgot to mention...

If you can't see much difference between the DVD and the Blu-Ray, I highly suspect you utilized analog inputs for video into that Mitsubishi. Or it's a really old 720p only model.

Here's hoping that's not the case and you've used HDMI...

 

[hopmedic]

Forgot to mention...

If you can't see much difference between the DVD and the Blu-Ray, I highly suspect you utilized analog inputs for video into that Mitsubishi. Or it's a really old 720p only model.

Here's hoping that's not the case and you've used HDMI...

Yeah - I didn't even think of that, but absolutely true.

 

[Piloto]

Forgot to mention...

If you can't see much difference between the DVD and the Blu-Ray, I highly suspect you utilized analog inputs for video into that Mitsubishi. Or it's a really old 720p only model.

Here's hoping that's not the case and you've used HDMI...

I had the same problem and found out that I needed new glasses.

José

 

[Jay Honeck]

Forgot to mention...

If you can't see much difference between the DVD and the Blu-Ray, I highly suspect you utilized analog inputs for video into that Mitsubishi. Or it's a really old 720p only model.

Here's hoping that's not the case and you've used HDMI...

That was my first guess, too. We had a huge, 60" Panasonic that could not reproduce the clarity of Blu-Ray. Our 42" Toshiba is perfect.

John, check the specs on your TV. Just because it says "HD Ready" doesn't mean it is.

 

[PPC1052]

My first guess is the connection cable type between the player and the T.V. Is it HDMI, DVI, component, or composit? If it isn't HDMI, you are likely not getting the best quality image to the screen. Second, if it's a 65" mits, it's probably a rear projection 1080i. Just a guess. If so, you won't see the ablsolute max resolution. But it should still be better than DVD. Next, check the output settings on the BD player in the menu. What I found with most (actually, all) new blue ray players that if you use component connections, it will NOT display 1080i or i. It will only do 480p. The component cables cause the BD players issues, for some reason. I had an old BD player that had a hard time playing discs, even after I updated the firm ware. I eventually gave up, and bought a new one. But I was frustrated that I couldn't get the correct resolution. After a while, I figured out that it was dropping the resolution down due to the component out. After taking it back, and checking for other models, I simply couldn't find one that would do 1080p through component. My old Mits doesn't have an HDMI connection; it's too old. I eventually went back to my upscaling DVD player.

 

[DaleB]

I simply couldn't find one that would do 1080p through component.

I believe that's a copy prevention restriction. You can watch in high res via HDMI, but with component you could theoretically capture it with a recorder. They don't want you to be able to make a high quality copy.

 

[hopmedic]

My first guess is the connection cable type between the player and the T.V. Is it HDMI, DVI, component, or composit? If it isn't HDMI, you are likely not getting the best quality image to the screen. Second, if it's a 65" mits, it's probably a rear projection 1080i. Just a guess. If so, you won't see the ablsolute max resolution. But it should still be better than DVD. Next, check the output settings on the BD player in the menu. What I found with most (actually, all) new blue ray players that if you use component connections, it will NOT display 1080i or i. It will only do 480p. The component cables cause the BD players issues, for some reason. I had an old BD player that had a hard time playing discs, even after I updated the firm ware. I eventually gave up, and bought a new one. But I was frustrated that I couldn't get the correct resolution. After a while, I figured out that it was dropping the resolution down due to the component out. After taking it back, and checking for other models, I simply couldn't find one that would do 1080p through component. My old Mits doesn't have an HDMI connection; it's too old. I eventually went back to my upscaling DVD player.

I believe that's a copy prevention restriction. You can watch in high res via HDMI, but with component you could theoretically capture it with a recorder. They don't want you to be able to make a high quality copy.

The component cables are analog, and simply don't have the capability of carrying that much data. You CAN get the full resolution out of DVI cables (so if your TV has that, you'd get better quality), which is what I do with my TV, but DVI doesn't carry audio; HDMI does. I don't care about that in my case because my computer is next to my receiver, while the TV is on the adjacent wall, so I pipe them separately.

 

[rainsux]

> I can't do any of that with Blu-Ray. If I'm away from the player for more than five minutes after hitting pause, I have to start at the very beginning of the disk, where it warns you you'll end up in prison if you copy it. The same way with turning the set off, you must search through the disk to find where you left off.

That's the fault of your player ... and the BB [cough] sales consultant. My Sony
will happily resume after very long pauses. Hint: NEVER trust the information of a
BB [cough] sales consultant. Or; Geek Squad. They're gonna recommend whatever
puts the most $$$ in their pocket.

> The quality of the picture, and the sound, if it is any better than a regular DVD

Blue-Ray (native HD) w/HDMI can look a LOT better than DVD. If it doesn't ... it's
either the authoring of the disk; or the connection between your player and Mitsu.

 

[Captain]

> I can't do any of that with Blu-Ray. If I'm away from the player for more than five minutes after hitting pause, I have to start at the very beginning of the disk, where it warns you you'll end up in prison if you copy it. The same way with turning the set off, you must search through the disk to find where you left off.

That's the fault of your player ... and the BB [cough] sales consultant. My Sony
will happily resume after very long pauses. Hint: NEVER trust the information of a
BB [cough] sales consultant. Or; Geek Squad. They're gonna recommend whatever
puts the most $$$ in their pocket.

> The quality of the picture, and the sound, if it is any better than a regular DVD

Blue-Ray (native HD) w/HDMI can look a LOT better than DVD. If it doesn't ... it's
either the authoring of the disk; or the connection between your player and Mitsu.

Agree with the 'BB [cough] sales consultant' position. Consumers have voted with their wallets that lower price is more important that knowledgeable staff. Nobody should walk into a BestBuy not knowing exactly what they want. The only exception would be if you narrowed it down to two or three and want to see a side by side comparison. Research should be done first on the internet.

With that in mind, BestBuy does offer a pretty good internet help team. They may be biased a bit to steer business to their store front, but I've had good advice in the past that actually steered me to the internet...so I don't know.

The BestBuy online tech advise can be accessed by anyone with a Twitter account. Simply tweet your question with '@twelpforce' at the beginning of the tweet. You'll get a response within a few minutes usually by someone who actually knows something about what their talking about. Nice service.

 

[denverpilot]

John went silent. We've Geeked him to death.

 

[PPC1052]

You CAN get the full resolution out of DVI cables

Correct. However, if the TV is old enough to have DVI, it will likely not have 1080p capability-- just 1080i only. Granted, that's not that big of a difference.

For what it's worth, my Mits has the DVI shift issue (there were a slew of them that shifted the image way to one side if you used DVI as the input), and I never got that fixed. It may be time to retire the Mits for an upgrade anyway, so I have never felt compelled to get it fixed when it really became an issue. But that is why I didn't go the HDMI to DVI cable route.

 

[hopmedic]

Correct. However, if the TV is old enough to have DVI, it will likely not have 1080p capability-- just 1080i only. Granted, that's not that big of a difference.

For what it's worth, my Mits has the DVI shift issue (there were a slew of them that shifted the image way to one side if you used DVI as the input), and I never got that fixed. It may be time to retire the Mits for an upgrade anyway, so I have never felt compelled to get it fixed when it really became an issue. But that is why I didn't go the HDMI to DVI cable route.

I haven't shopped TVs, so I don't know what connections are typical anymore. My 42" is 4 years old, has DVI, VGA, two sets of RGB, and 3 HDMI inputs. Why so many, I will never know...

 

[Henning]

I haven't shopped TVs, so I don't know what connections are typical anymore. My 42" is 4 years old, has DVI, VGA, two sets of RGB, and 3 HDMI inputs. Why so many, I will never know...

The TV in my cabin on Jeremy had all those ports, filled, including a KVM switch that allowed it to serve as monitor for every system computer on the boat as well as working every other video system.

 

[olasek]

John went silent. We've Geeked him to death.

Yeah, I hope he will look at the configuration of his system and find the culprit. Perhaps he could visit a neighbor that has all the Blue Ray stuff and could show him what it looks like in its full glory (say with some IMAX movie to boot).

 

[Datadriver]

IMO, Blu-Ray is nothing but a scam to sell DVD type movies at a much higher price. It isn't worth it. DVDs are pretty much the same quality, and a whole lot cheaper.

Anyone else think along these lines?

-John
​

Yep. Blu-ray improvements over dvd do not warrant the increased cost.
Yes, the future is streaming but so also is bandwidth caps, pay-per gig, etc.

 

[denverpilot]

This is from 2007, but gives a nice explanation of Over The Air HD raw bit rates and how even the OTA folks were starting to slice and dice that bandwidth even back then.

http://www.current.org/dtv/dtv0702bitstream-liroff.shtml

AFAIK no OTA terrestrial broadcaster left is transmitting the "full HD" signal. Nor did they ever, really.

Dish, DirecTV, and others definitely never did. HDNet and one other venture came close over satellite, by limiting the number of available channels.

So... even us OTA direct off the antenna "purists" arent getting "full HD" quality anywhere. Satellite subscribers never did.

And not many people really notice. On the main channel anyway. The sub-channels from OTA broadcasters usually look pretty poor, but work fine for old TV and movies (networks like MeTV and the like) and can make an antenna receiver into the equivalent of the old day's "basic cable" with 20-30 "channels" in large Metro areas with six or eight real transmitters.

Here's another decent one... that's more video related. It also explains that DVDs are compressed with MPEG-2 which minimally reduces their quality but makes a significant impact on file size.

http://www.infotelesys.com/dvd_bandwidth.htm

This doc doesn't cover DVD HD, only DVD SD.

It also explains the raw megabits/second needed is 943.72 megabits/second if you had to digitize and send every single pixel of a 1280 x 1024 screen with a 24-bit color depth. Nothing today can come close to delivering that to your house from elsewhere, so compression is required.

Luckily, some very smart mathematicians know that there's lots and lots of ways to trick the human eyeball.

That all leads up to the chart that's fairly accurate on the "Bit Rate" page at Wikipedia... See the "Multimedia/Video" section...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit_rate#Multimedia

So... SD DVD is quite a bit lower quality than HD DVD, but Blu-Ray is significantly more capable of higher quality than an HD DVD, when everything is done right and all the gear can handle the best possible Blu-Ray has to offer.

And even HD DVD and Blu-Ray are compressed. DVD is always MPEG, the standards folks defined multiple encodings for Blu-Ray and it is left to the manufacturer.

Think about this one for a second...

Most movies are shot in higher quality formats above the best Blu-Ray can offer and then the final "render" is done into DVD and Blu-Ray formats. The render farms of computers are massive, and all the file movement is on fiber optics within the farm. Each compute node takes a small chunk of the video and does its encoding and then at the end the final format is produced by concatenation all these little chunks together into that seemingly simple file stored on the disc.

And think of the storage space needed to store a two or more hour feature length film at the higher quality levels.

Amazing stuff, really. Lots o' bits flying.

Or as a buddy used to joke, when we were talking about how to do massive off-site backups...

"Never underestimate the bandwidth hauling capability of a 747 loaded to max gross with DVDs."

(Blu-Ray didn't exist yet when he made that joke. And the problem is always the burn and verify time of the DVDs in data applications. Today the joke might replace DVDs with regular old hard drives... Just write to 'em, yank 'em, and ship them offsite via FedEx.)

 

[olasek]

Yep. Blu-ray improvements over dvd do not warrant the increased cost.

Matter of opinion, my Netflix subscription rate went up $2.00 a month to have access to Blue-ray titles. Do I think it was a fair adjustment - I think it is outright cheap.

 

[cavmedic]

90% of my service calls relating to poor picture quality are mostly due to input issues.

One will purchase a component and then attach every output available.

HDMI ,COMPOSITE even an S video from time to time. A giveaway is if you have constant screen cropping.

HDMI is great as it makes for a cleaner install, but there are still many units that will not play ball with each other due to the encryption handshake. Ive seen this happen between BR players, receivers with video switching and TV's.


Even if the TV is a 720p , the picture quality is noticeably different.

If I was a betting man , my guess would be that the tv is not on the proper input.

 

[Gerhardt]

I'm with John on this. Even in the stores I can't tell the difference between the two. But my eyesight isn't what it was twenty years ago...so for me there's no advantage of blueray over dvd. And yeah, I can see where you guys could oversees someone. Shoot, i just want to pop a movie in wo thinking about the technical details.

 

[Datadriver]

Matter of opinion, my Netflix subscription rate went up $2.00 a month to have access to Blue-ray titles. Do I think it was a fair adjustment - I think it is outright cheap.

True. Consumers seem to be buying less of both