Go Back   Forums @ The Digital Fix > Entertainment Discussion Forums > DVD and Blu-ray Discussion

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 20-09-2006, 23:30   #41
Guest 36346
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Solihull, near Birmingham
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
My suggestion is to bloody wait

Theres no way a player is deservant of a 1200 quid price tag, no matter how much 'better' it is than a bog standard 20 quid dvd player with its new fangled dual capabilities - personally I wont be buying either, not for a very long time, admittedly the prices will drop, and probably pretty fast, buying one now tho, and especially a dual one which will just extend the format war and cost you maybe 200 quid extra, which you would be able to get a player for in a year or two if you wait, instead of a premium now, i doubt these dual players will sell many, just like blue ray and hddvd for a long time until people can actually afford them

Last edited by Swafe; 20-09-2006 at 23:31.
Guest 36346 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2006, 11:35   #42
Spectre07
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: None Bothered
Posts: 5,806
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
You've also got to take into account an almost decade of deflation that we've had since DVD was launched. So, when inflation was higher your pound didn't buy as much as your pound can today. So it goes; spending £400 on a player today is probably equivalent to spending £475 in 1997, which at the time bought you a very basic DVD player. Paying £1200 for a player today is more like spending £1600 in 1997. These aren't based on actual % for inflation but I'm just using them to illustrate the point.
Spectre07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2006, 11:50   #43
Guest 36346
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Solihull, near Birmingham
Posts: 1,288
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
If you reverse the inflation, would you have paid 900 in 1996 quid for a dual + and - layer format as well as standard dvds, ensuring you could play every type of dvd, or just plumped for the 400 jobby that just played standard dvds?

Last edited by Swafe; 21-09-2006 at 11:50.
Guest 36346 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2006, 12:18   #44
Andrew70
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,244
Thanks: 6
Thanked 71 Times in 27 Posts
Handy little page here, although admittedly it only goes up to 2003.
__________________
Lynda La Hughes: "There's no such thing as gay - it's just laziness!"
Andrew70 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2006, 12:22   #45
Spectre07
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: None Bothered
Posts: 5,806
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swafe
If you reverse the inflation, would you have paid 900 in 1996 quid for a dual + and - layer format as well as standard dvds, ensuring you could play every type of dvd, or just plumped for the 400 jobby that just played standard dvds?
I'm a hi-fi anorak so prefer seperate components. I don't like integrated hardware because you get a 'jack of all trades and master of none'. So I'd go for a stand alone player every time.
Spectre07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2006, 12:28   #46
Spectre07
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: None Bothered
Posts: 5,806
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew70
Handy little page here, although admittedly it only goes up to 2003.
That's interesting, so it started in 2001, so £1200 today is the same as £1200 in 2001. But in 1997 it the opposite to what I thought, £400 spent today is equivalent to spending £480 in 1997.
Spectre07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2006, 22:45   #47
JamesK
James-K
 
JamesK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Reigate
Posts: 6,984
Thanks: 15
Thanked 36 Times in 27 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectre07
That's interesting, so it started in 2001, so £1200 today is the same as £1200 in 2001. But in 1997 it the opposite to what I thought, £400 spent today is equivalent to spending £480 in 1997.
No.

£600 spent today is equivalent of £500 spent then.
JamesK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-09-2006, 22:56   #48
Spectre07
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: None Bothered
Posts: 5,806
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesking420
No.

£600 spent today is equivalent of £500 spent then.
Of course it is. So I was right all along.
Spectre07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2006, 00:59   #49
pompeyfan
Built for comfort
 
pompeyfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Isle of Wight
Posts: 8,294
Thanks: 118
Thanked 41 Times in 20 Posts
I'm probably more representative of 'joe public' than I am the average poster on here as I just like films for the entertainment value and DVD's for the picture/sound quality and better value TV sets (even though I don't have surround sound) over vhs eg. no crackling sound, lines on the picture, tv boxsets cheaper etc and am not particularly interested in the technology, bit rates, the art of film making etc - if it looks and sounds good and is entertaining I'm happy and things like pitch correction, pull down and PQ differences between PAL and NTSC just aren't noticable to me and I can't tell the difference as they both look and sound good.

So tbh HD holds very little incentive for me atm to get really interested in it enough to be prepared to spend money on it (even though I have a HD ready LCD set - mainly as it saved space over a CRT version - I couldn't fit anything bigger than a 28" CRT in the space I have, but can a 32" LCD)) - the only thing I'm looking forward to with HD is the chance to get the LOTR trilogy with each film complete and not split over 2 sides (but I'd be quite happy for that to happen with a lower PQ on SD discs as they look good to me anyway), but even that wouldn't persuade me to buy into HD untill all the films/TV shows I'd want to see are released on an affordable HD DVD player - be that HD-DVD, Blu-ray or a combi one I don't care as long as it's (and the discs I'd want) readily available and sub-£100 maybe stretch to sub-£200 but I certainly wouldn't pay more than that for one, and just as certainly I wouldn't buy something if there's a chance I could then be told a film/tv series I want to see isn't being released on that format as exclusive to the other - and I'm sure a lot of average punters will feel the same.
__________________
"Give a poor man a gun and he can rob a bank.
Give a poor man a bank and he can rob everyone."

Last edited by pompeyfan; 22-09-2006 at 01:07.
pompeyfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-09-2006, 12:19   #50
kiran_mk2
Trusted User
 
kiran_mk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 3,058
Thanks: 6
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
I wouldn't worry, by the time the peices get down to these levels the war will have been decided - be it a clean win or dual players.

I have to say though that once you see HD played back on an HD screen it's very hard to look at anything else - our Tescos has a load of HD screens hooked up to the internal advert feed and one hooked up to a PC showing HD footage. The difference in quality is stunning and even people who don't usually notice PQ like my mother have commented how good it looks.
kiran_mk2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2006, 21:07   #51
Spooksta
Mr Honest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 2,650
Thanks: 26
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
From a Joe Public point of view..
Loads of people have been buying HD Tvs this year.
Loads of people will be buying HD-DVD to go with them next year.

Ive not seen any Blu-Ray Tvs in the shops yet?

__________________
Feedback

Last edited by Spooksta; 26-09-2006 at 21:08.
Spooksta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2006, 23:35   #52
Spectre07
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: None Bothered
Posts: 5,806
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spooksta
Loads of people will be buying HD-DVD to go with them next year.
Not if loads of them bought DVD players last year they won't be.
Spectre07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-09-2006, 12:00   #53
SimonI
Rude Mechanical
 
SimonI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 6,358
Thanks: 272
Thanked 280 Times in 187 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiran_mk2
The difference in quality is stunning and even people who don't usually notice PQ like my mother have commented how good it looks.
That's what I've seen and I think that will be the key.

I'm actually quite surprised by how luke warm the reception to HD disks has been on these forums; personally I can't wait! My dream: A Canterbury Tale and My Neighbour Totoro in HD
__________________
It's turtles all the way down!
All things prog | Yes World | DVD Basen | Home | MX-5 | Nausicaa | ET | My Criterion
SimonI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-09-2006, 13:53   #54
Spectre07
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: None Bothered
Posts: 5,806
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonI
That's what I've seen and I think that will be the key.

I'm actually quite surprised by how luke warm the reception to HD disks has been on these forums;
Noticing the improvemnet in PQ and being wowed by it are two completely different things. From what I've seen, I don't think the improvement is enough to justify rushing out to get a HD TV and player. I was in Curry's and they have a demonstration now showing the difference between SD and HD on a split screen. If what they are showing as SD is supposed to be DVD quality then they're perpetrating a fraud because my DVD's don't look as bad as the SD images they're using in their demonstration. Things like that just reinforce my view that HD isn't that big a deal.
Spectre07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-09-2006, 14:06   #55
Guest 17385
Keyboard Warrior
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,120
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
It's all to do with the setup, isn't it. In my local argos they have a big display of lcd tv's which were apparently all HD and showing an HD feed. They looked like they were showing a VHS quality film. It was terrible. Now if you were to go into a proper shop, not your high street currys.digital, and see a proper display with a proper source then you can't fail to be blown away by HD.
The problem is that far too many people expect to get a brilliant picture on a £200 LCD TV. It ain't going to happen. You always get what you pay for. Always, with very, very little exception when it comes to AV kit.
Guest 17385 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-09-2006, 14:56   #56
Spectre07
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: None Bothered
Posts: 5,806
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by xraystan
Now if you were to go into a proper shop, not your high street currys.digital, and see a proper display with a proper source then you can't fail to be blown away by HD.
I've been into a specialist AV store as well. They had two 42" Pioneer LCD's playing House of Flying Daggers one on DVD the other on HD DVD and yes HD image was better but I walked away thinking that my DVD collection was staying put for a few years yet.

Last edited by Spectre07; 27-09-2006 at 14:57.
Spectre07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-09-2006, 16:09   #57
nwgarratt
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 10,574
Thanks: 79
Thanked 85 Times in 58 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spectre07
I've been into a specialist AV store as well. They had two 42" Pioneer LCD's playing House of Flying Daggers one on DVD the other on HD DVD and yes HD image was better but I walked away thinking that my DVD collection was staying put for a few years yet.
Same here. The difference wasn't worth it. Anyone who changes their entire collection to HD would be nuts. I will be using my current DVD's for a long time yet and when I can afford to upgrade my proejctor to a HD one, I will only be buying new films in HD (except for LOTR trilogy).
nwgarratt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-09-2006, 16:29   #58
Guest 17385
Keyboard Warrior
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,120
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I don't think anyone is saying upgrade their entire DVD collection to HD-DVD's. That would be nuts.
Guest 17385 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-09-2006, 16:49   #59
nwgarratt
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 10,574
Thanks: 79
Thanked 85 Times in 58 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by xraystan
I don't think anyone is saying upgrade their entire DVD collection to HD-DVD's. That would be nuts.
I have heard several people are doing exactly that. I have also heard people have stopped buying DVD's because of HD but won't be upgrading for years. They don't plan on watching any new DVD's until they get HD. That is also nuts.
nwgarratt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-09-2006, 16:49   #60
Spectre07
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: None Bothered
Posts: 5,806
Thanks: 6
Thanked 18 Times in 7 Posts
Having seen how good DVD can look on a large HD display, bearing in mind my DVD player is better than the one used in the demo, I'm not going to bother with HD DVD or BR whatsoever.
Spectre07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
Blu-ray Disc, HD-DVD Disc

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:17.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018 Poisonous Monkey Ltd. Part of The Digital Fix Network