backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 173 comment(s) - last by phazers.. on Dec 23 at 3:39 PM

The console war is far from over according to the Washington Post

Although the PlayStation 3 has been outsold by its competitors these past few months, Matt Peckham argues via the Washington Post that the situation is not as grim as may seem. The Washington Post article refutes a story from CNN Money that completely writes off the PlayStation 3 as a failure.

Compared to November 2007, PS3 sales are down this year from 466,000 units sold to 378,000 units sold. In contrast, Microsoft and Nintendo products sold very well in November. Twice as many Xbox 360s were sold and five times as many Nintendo Wiis were sold.

Despite comparatively poor sales numbers, Peckham points out overall PS3 sales grew by 60% year-to-date. For much of 2008 the PS3 had been catching up to the Xbox 360 due to momentum gained from events such as the end of the high definition disc war.

Peckham also discusses how the combined sales of the PS3, the PS2, and the PSP exceeded one million units. This number tops the 836,000 Xbox 360s that were sold. He states if the profit margins on the PS2 and PSP are assumed to be much better than the PS3 it becomes less clear which company made more money off of hardware sales.

The CNN article states the differences between Blu-ray and DVD are hard to see on a TV less than 50" minimizing the benefit of having a Blu-Ray player included in the PS3. Peckham refutes this claim stating “Blu-ray at even 720p (1280 x 720) with all its other commensurate upticks in sample rates and color quality is shockingly better than the visuals output of the average DVD”.

Finally, the CNN articles mentions a lack of quality exclusive titles on the PS3 to which Peckham lists off a variety of PS3 exclusives such as Metal Gear Solid 4, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, Ratchet & Clank Future, Wipeout HD, Valkyria Chronicles, the original Resistance: Fall of Man, and MLB 08: The Show.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Is this guy blind?
By bighairycamel on 12/18/2008 9:36:01 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
The CNN article states the differences between Blu-ray and DVD are hard to see on a TV less than 50" minimizing the benefit of having a Blu-Ray player included in the PS3.

Is this guy totally blind? Maybe... MAYBE I could agree if using a decent upscaling DVD player on a TV less than 40", but anything over that is a huge difference in video quality. I'm not even a videophile and I can tell the difference.

While I have a 52", my sister has a 42" and the quality is distinguishable on hers to, so his comment about "less than 50" is rediculous and reaks of anti-sony bias.




RE: Is this guy blind?
By cochy on 12/18/2008 9:46:15 AM , Rating: 3
Ya that's pretty absurd. I bought Troy on Blu-ray when I got my PS3. I also have it on DVD. My TV is 37'' and only 720p. The difference between DVD and Blu-ray is night and day.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Lord 666 on 12/18/2008 12:31:55 PM , Rating: 5
Do you like Gladiator movies?


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Sahkuhnder on 12/18/2008 5:42:13 PM , Rating: 4
Joey, have you ever been in a Turkish prison?


RE: Is this guy blind?
By quiksilvr on 12/18/08, Rating: 0
RE: Is this guy blind?
By ShaolinSoccer on 12/18/2008 8:32:47 PM , Rating: 2
you can get $149 off the purchase price of a PS3 if you use a sonystyle credit card. offer is good until 1-31-09. sounds like a good deal. I don't know the specifics, though:

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet...


RE: Is this guy blind?
By whirabomber on 12/23/2008 12:04:12 PM , Rating: 1
You'll need that $150 to repair the PS3 when it dies on you less than a year after you get it repaired in warenty. I've just put in a repair order on my 60GB because it won't play blurays (cleaned, tried other disks, games, etc), just dvds. After taxes it came to $160. I just checked my repair (read swap-out) on it and it was 02/08. I purchased the ps3 on 02/07. To make me happy with the PS3, Sony should go for a 2-3 year warrenty.

A few months ago, I preferred the PS3 because the graphics just look better (clearer, more vibrant) than the 360. The games played the same on the PS3 so naturally I just peferred it. However, I don't see paying $150+ a year to play the thing as a positive.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By tjr508 on 12/22/2008 3:41:15 PM , Rating: 4
It is not that people can't see the difference, it's just that they're not looking for it. Most people can enjoy films for what they are and a few less speckles here and there don't really change their viewing experience.

On the other hand, the primary reason BD owners claim to see far more difference than non-owners is the human instinct to justify a purchase. It's no different than an Escalade driver talking smack on a Tahoe. It's just sad that people have to get all OCD about movie watching just to feel good about their hundreds of dollars spent to see a few silly dots here and there.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By phazers on 12/23/2008 3:39:24 PM , Rating: 2
Ya that's pretty absurd. I bought Troy on Blu-ray when I got my PS3. I also have it on DVD. My TV is 37'' and only 720p. The difference between DVD and Blu-ray is night and day.

The difference between VHS and DVD was far more dramatic than between Bluray and DVD, and yes I have a 46" Sony XBR4 LCD as well as a 52" Sony LCD, with upscaling DVD and Bluray players connected to them.

Not that I'm knocking Bluray - saw The Dark Knight a few days ago and my wife and I were commenting on the beautifully crisp, sharp picture, especially the gorgeous colors in the sunlight office scenes as well as the night scenes in Hong Kong. Clearly the digital conversion to Bluray was outstanding.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By SkeptiCoder on 12/18/2008 9:47:53 AM , Rating: 2
Hell, I have a 24" 1920x1200 monitor (Gateway FP2401), and I can see the difference between DVD and BDR easily . It's not even close. Even after resizing the resolution down to closer to 720p it is apparent, so unless people are really blind, I can't see how they can't spot the difference.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Lugaidster on 12/18/2008 9:53:58 AM , Rating: 4
I do have to disagree with you on that comparison. People are usually closer to a monitor than to a TV. That's why they have always had more pixel density than TVs. Now, that guy is still wrong, he either is blind or he thinks that people are more stupid than they really are (something that is happening a lot these days).


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Mitch101 on 12/18/08, Rating: -1
RE: Is this guy blind?
By Mitch101 on 12/18/2008 12:00:31 PM , Rating: 5
Come to think of it could be a technical issue also. I wonder how many people out there will use thier SVHS connection from a BLU-RAY player to thier TV instead of the HDMI or DVI cable.

That might explain why people don't see a difference. Heck a lot of HD players downsample on the Component outputs to supposedly prevent piracy so it may just be that they are comparing 480P to 480P/480i.

After all most people don't understand the whole switch to Digital and how many think DTV is HDTV?


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Lugaidster on 12/18/2008 2:06:09 PM , Rating: 3
Vision is not in question here. And the fact that you have better than normal vision reinforces that guy's point. Standing at 40 cm from a really high resolution screen is different than sitting 2-3 meters away from a high resolution screen. Do the math, there's just no comparison.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By notolerance on 12/18/2008 7:34:16 PM , Rating: 2
I've done the math and my calculations indicate that, yes indeed, his eyes are painted on!


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Regs on 12/23/2008 2:25:23 PM , Rating: 2
Something related but obviously nothing to do with blue-ray quality.....

Comcast hooked my TV up with component cables. Likely because they know the signal they shoot out to me won't look any better on DVI or HDMI cables. Though I would think that one female and male HDMI cable would be a lot easier than 6 or so component cables for visual and sound.

Do Verizon Fios customers get the component cables as well?


RE: Is this guy blind?
By achintya on 12/18/08, Rating: 0
RE: Is this guy blind?
By karielash on 12/18/08, Rating: -1
RE: Is this guy blind?
By FITCamaro on 12/18/2008 10:11:00 AM , Rating: 2
Honestly I think my DVDs played on my 42" 720p DLP look great. I play them through both my 360 and my PS3. Now the Blu-rays look great too. But honestly I don't really notice all the little details if they're there. The biggest place I notice a quality difference on is between standard def and high def cable.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By therealnickdanger on 12/18/2008 11:15:00 AM , Rating: 4
So you see a bigger difference between SD-cable and HD-cable than you see with DVD and Blu-Ray? Either your SD-cable is really crappy or something between your Blu-Ray player and display isn't set up properly. Have you calibrated it (either ISF or do-it-yourself DVE)? I'm not calling BS on you or anything, I just think there's something legitimately wrong with your setup.

I've got both HD-cable and Blu-Ray set up on a couple TVs in the house (720p 32" LCD and 1080p 60" plasma) and I can see a dramatic difference between even HD-cable and Blu-Ray on both sets. ComcastHD can't hold a candle to Blu-Ray on either set. Don't even get me started on audio. OMG.

One of the first high-def movies I bought was "The Fugitive" and I remember being really upset with it. It wasn't until later that I discovered that Warner Bros. basically just upscaled the DVD version of the film and called it "HD". This happened with a lot of early HD/BD releases (Troy and The Fifth Element were also disappointing for different reasons). To date, I have yet to see (or hear) better demo material than Pixar's "Cars". It's also just a great movie. I've got the DVD (which is one of the best DVD transfers ever) and Blu-Ray of that and the Blu-Ray version offers an awesome upgrade in color detail and sharpness, but the uncompressed PCM audio is the icing on the cake. All the neighborhood dogs wet themselves when I crank it.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By mcnabney on 12/18/2008 12:10:07 PM , Rating: 2
Didn't you read?

He has a 720p TV. Going from 480p DVDs to a 720p display is not much scaling. A BD will have to downscale even more to get from 1080p content to 720p. And the cable comparison might be analog cable to digital HD cable.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By therealnickdanger on 12/18/2008 2:18:25 PM , Rating: 2
The question is did you read? One of my sets is also a 720p display, on which I see a big difference between upscaled content and high-def content, which I why I expressed concern about his setup.

quote:
Going from 480p DVDs to a 720p display is not much scaling. A BD will have to downscale even more to get from 1080p content to 720p

What exactly are you suggesting? That scaling low-resolution video to a higher resolution looks better than scaling high-resolution video to a lower one? (hopefully rhetorical)

Your logic is strange. Going from 480p to 720p is a resolution increase of nearly three-fold. Going from 1080p to 720p is a reduction of nearly two-thirds, but the source is 6X better than DVD. No matter what scaler you use, upscaling a DVD is like polishing a turd: even at its best, it still won't match a native 720p signal in clarity or color depth, let alone a downsampled 1080p signal.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By adiposity on 12/22/2008 4:10:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No matter what scaler you use, upscaling a DVD is like polishing a turd: even at its best, it still won't match a native 720p signal in clarity or color depth, let alone a downsampled 1080p signal.


I agree with you, but your last phrase seems to imply a 1080p downsampled to 720p would be preferred to native 720p. From what I know of scaling, and resampling, it is highly unlikely to be the case. Since blu-ray is not rendered at 720p, we would expect a lower quality than professionally rendered 720p...not that you can actually find that on disc in the USA.

-Dan


RE: Is this guy blind?
By omnicronx on 12/18/2008 3:09:19 PM , Rating: 1
The BD player is doing the scaling, there is no quality degradation between 1080p and 720p if that is what you are implying. Its also a night and day difference between DVD and a BD at 720p. I even have one of the better upscaling DVD players on the market and there is still no comparison.

You say that theres little difference between 720p and 480p, i beg to differ.

720x480= 345600 pixels
1280x720 = 921600 pixels

Thats almost 3 times more pixels in a BD movie at 720P.

While many people may not see the benefit of upgrading their 720p set to a 1080p set just for BD's (i agree, wait for your TV to die to upgrade) I feel the most noticeable difference is from 480p to 720p.

The only time I would say that a 720p and 480p video are comparable is when you are sitting 20+ feet from your television , at that point your eyes cannot perceive the difference, that is until your focus on a single spot of the screen. (assuming your vision is 20/20, the worse you vision is, the less distance you have to stand back before your eyes cannot perceive the difference)


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Morphine06 on 12/18/2008 1:13:01 PM , Rating: 1
A PS3 was hooked up to high quality HDTV playing Cars at Fry's. I was sold on BD tech at that moment. Having two small boys, I've watched that movie many times on my 1080i 51" RP. The difference was shocking. My TV is not as high quality and interlaced instead of progressive, yet I can see a difference similar to how I saw VHS vs DVD.

But...my wife can't see much a difference at all other than color depth. I have 15/20 vision due to lasik surgery. She needs glasses to drive legally....

The experience is relative.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By VitalyTheUnknown on 12/18/2008 11:18:55 AM , Rating: 1
You can't spot the difference between dvd and blu-ray yet the difference between SD television and HD television is visible for you. You contradict yourself there.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By The0ne on 12/18/2008 12:59:40 PM , Rating: 2
I say he's full of it myself but meh :) There will be the few but the key is to find the right tv, right player, right video source (dvd, BD, etc) and then find the RIGHT DISTANCE that the picture will look the best for you :)

Maybe these people able to tell between BD and DVD on a 24" monitor has superman vision. Or maybe it's just that the colors are richer, picture is brighter or what have you :)

Trust about the difference between SD video and HD video on cable is like referring to SD as crap and HD as a tasy sesame chicken salad :P Of course this is minimized if you compare it on a smaller screen size monitor. On my 73" you don't even want to watch SD.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By rykerabel on 12/18/2008 1:27:33 PM , Rating: 2
answer:
HDCP is downscaling his BR movies to 480p because he's not using hdmi so its the same picture as the DVD.

:P


RE: Is this guy blind?
By therealnickdanger on 12/19/2008 8:56:26 AM , Rating: 2
In the course of a week, I helped my next door neighbor (62 years old) and my friend's dad (65 years old) set up their new 60" plasmas and Blu-Ray systems. They were both clever enough to buy them off Amazon to get the best prices, but I was shocked to see that companies still ship Blu-Ray players with standard composite (not even component) RCA cables! WTF? They are just begging customers to return their products!

I got them both hooked up with HDMI cables and now they are in high-def heaven. A lot of the confusion regarding high-def quality is partly the fault of the manufacturers themselves. Unless they pay for a kiosk or endcap that is properly set up, people are going to walk into Wal-Mart and see the Blu-Ray display connected with composite cables and wonder what all the fuss is about.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By The0ne on 12/19/2008 12:13:47 PM , Rating: 2
And as someone already stated, some BD movies just weren't encoded properly to give you the best/true quality. This is especially true of older movies and movies that didn't do so well in theaters I guess :) But movies like Star Wars, Iron Man look amazing :)


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Lord 666 on 12/18/2008 12:38:12 PM , Rating: 2
My wife's first words were "wow" when I showed her the difference between "I am Legend" on BR then DVD. Thats playing it on a 46" Samsung 630 1080p with the Samsung 1500 BR player (definitely not the best upscaler or BR player.) Same thing for the movie Cars.

But Comcast HD cable looks like crap while watching NFL. The commercials on the same channel look better than the game. FiOS is in my town, but not my specific neighborhood yet. Can't wait to dump Comcast.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By The0ne on 12/19/2008 12:10:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But Comcast HD cable looks like crap while watching NFL. The commercials on the same channel look better than the game. FiOS is in my town, but not my specific neighborhood yet. Can't wait to dump Comcast.


This is bad, or would be if I can actually see it instead of imagining it. Complain?


RE: Is this guy blind?
By killerroach on 12/18/2008 10:18:17 AM , Rating: 2
Did an informal test to show a friend the other day... I have a 46" Vizio 1080p LCD, an Xbox 360, and a PS3 (both connected via HDMI). There's a couple of movies I own on both DVD and Blu-Ray, and chose to use one of them (Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End) for a comparison test. Started playback at pretty much identical times, then would switch between the 360 and the PS3 at will to show the difference. Needless to say, they were quite startled.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By theapparition on 12/18/08, Rating: 0
RE: Is this guy blind?
By plonk420 on 12/18/2008 5:45:14 PM , Rating: 2
seems that your opinion is in the minority. GJ pointing out that you're different! terseness may be a blessing in this case...


RE: Is this guy blind?
By bighairycamel on 12/18/2008 10:20:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sorry your claim of anti-sony bias is ridiculous and reeks of Sony fanboi'ism.

Really does it now? It craks me up when people think that can see through the internet and judge people for what they are.... guess what, I have an XBox 360. OMG, can you smell my Sony fanboyism??!?!?!

I am just saying this guy was apparently looking for rediculous things to explain why Sony's system is doing poorly, when clearly his comment is absurd.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Treripica on 12/18/2008 9:49:52 AM , Rating: 2
I hooked up my PS3 to our old 20" and could tell a significant difference between LOST Season 3 on BD and Season 2 on DVD.

Now we have a Samsung 46" A650 and there's a marked difference between DVD and BD quality, especially with LOST season 3. According to the beginning of disc 1, they used less compression than what's on the HD Broadcast and were able to get a better picture. LOST looks great on BluRay :)


RE: Is this guy blind?
By mcnabney on 12/18/2008 9:58:05 AM , Rating: 4
Please compare an Oppo DVD player with HDMI versus a BluRay. You should at least compare apples and apples.

By the way, I play everything on my HTPC and once FFDshow setting are tweaked I often have a hard time telling the difference between DVD and BD on a 61" screen. The jump to 1080p using BD is only a small step in resolution (but a big one in audio - those uncompressed formats blow DD and DTS away!).

I am waiting for 4K and 100GB media....


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Spivonious on 12/18/08, Rating: -1
RE: Is this guy blind?
By therealnickdanger on 12/18/08, Rating: 0
RE: Is this guy blind?
By DEVGRU on 12/18/2008 11:06:27 AM , Rating: 4
Yeah, sorry...

Cheapo BR player = cheapo image quality/functionality.

I too, have an Oppo DVD player and there is no way I'm going to waste my money on a BR player and discs for a marginal quality improvement (and thats on my new 50" Samsung 6-series plamsa).

The initial cost of a BR player is not the issue. Its the massive amounts of money I'd waste just attempting to replace all of my DVD's with their BR equivalents (even if I could, which I can't). Granted, I could just do that going forward, but as DT is awash with technologies that completely eclipse BR in quality, storage amount, etc. BlueRay is simply not worth the cost/benefit ratio, especially in an economy like this.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By afkrotch on 12/18/08, Rating: -1
RE: Is this guy blind?
By mcnabney on 12/18/2008 12:07:37 PM , Rating: 5
The jump from VHS to DVD was huge. The jump from DVD to BR for video is not so huge.

Anyway, maybe you are the sucker that Hollywood dreams of. Did you re-buy a lot of your VHS collection when moving to DVD and are you doing the same with BR?

Ultimately, 4K will be the settling stanrdard since that is essentially the resolution of the film used to shoot the movies for the past 50-80 years. Even though I have BD I purchase very few BD movies since the price is so high unless you catch a promotion. When 4K comes out I think that will be a long term standard. They could do it now on 100GB BD disks, but the industry wants to milk the suckers for all they are worth...


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Gzus666 on 12/18/08, Rating: 0
RE: Is this guy blind?
By Spivonious on 12/18/2008 12:46:46 PM , Rating: 4
VHS - film quality picture but degrades with every use, analog sound, no chapter skipping

DVD - 480p, picture doesn't degrade, digital sound, chapter skipping, multiple audio tracks for same video track

BR - 1080p

Please explain to me why you think BR is huge leap.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Gzus666 on 12/18/08, Rating: -1
RE: Is this guy blind?
By hduser on 12/18/2008 2:31:43 PM , Rating: 2
You forgot to add better compression, color depth and audio fidelity, for BR to your list. While not earth shattering, still worth mentioning.

Also, the greatest feature of DVD over VHS was never having to rewind tape at the end of the movie.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Gzus666 on 12/18/08, Rating: 0
RE: Is this guy blind?
By Spivonious on 12/18/2008 2:47:34 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, and MPEG-4 isn't compression? Give me a break.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By afkrotch on 12/18/2008 2:53:12 PM , Rating: 2
Wrong. blu-ray uses mpeg-2, mpeg-4, or vc-1 compression.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Sivar on 12/21/2008 1:39:25 PM , Rating: 2
Blu-Ray video is still compressed.

Uncompressed sound (PCM) is an option, but Dolby and DTS offer better choices (compressed but lossless).

The other Blu-Ray sound options (which include those for DVD) are compressed and lossy.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By BansheeX on 12/18/2008 6:23:30 PM , Rating: 1
Screw explanations, why don't you see for yourself...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=10...

DVD is a joke compared to 1080p MPEG4.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By wempa on 12/18/2008 12:59:59 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, DVD was huge jump over VHS. It's not just about resolution .... the ability to jump to different scenes, not having to rewind and the difference in picture quality is pretty big . Resolution and quality are 2 different things. Magnetic tape just doesn't compare to an optical disc. While I agree that HD looks very nice, I am quite satisfied with DVD quality. Now, the super compressed SD cable broadcasts are a different story altogether. They look like CRAP !


RE: Is this guy blind?
By afkrotch on 12/18/2008 2:11:50 PM , Rating: 2
I have bought some of my favorite movies that have been released on blu-ray. Mainly cause I never owned it on dvd and I barely owned any vhs tapes, minus porn.

Majority of my dvd collection is anime and there's almost no anime on blu-ray. Lest I buy them directly from Japan. If you think $25 is a lot, you'd hate their $70 price.

Blu-ray was expensive when it first came out. $35 bucks a pop, then it started dropping. Now, I'm paying at most, $25. Pretty much the same price as dvds when they first came out.

If companies started putting tv series on blu-ray, but at the same quality of a dvd, I'd buy them. That'd be a full season of whatever on a single disc. I take extremely good care of my dvds/blu-ray/games/etc, so I'm not all that worried about scratching or breaking them.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Dreifort on 12/19/2008 2:09:03 PM , Rating: 2
how soon until movies are released in 3D for BluRay or another new platform DV3D?


RE: Is this guy blind?
By mydogfarted on 12/18/2008 12:30:25 PM , Rating: 4
"Its the massive amounts of money I'd waste just attempting to replace all of my DVD's with their BR equivalents (even if I could, which I can't). "

God that argument makes me want to scream.
#1 - you don't have to replace your existing collection with BR. Most older movies aren't worth replacing because the initial quality is not there.
#2 - the cheap player/cheap picture argument is BS. The biggest problem with cheap players is they tend to be loud.

If you want to wait for the next gen is and then decide, fine... just don't make BS excuses.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By DEVGRU on 12/18/08, Rating: 0
RE: Is this guy blind?
By Gzus666 on 12/18/2008 2:18:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I dunno, how about the quality of the upconversion chip, oh wait, nothing to do with cost there.


You are buying a Bluray player to upconvert?

quote:
I won't even mention possible failure rates of various components or the number and diversity of connections, etc. from a $150 player to something a tad more.


Pretty good chance the parts came from the same bin.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By mydogfarted on 12/18/2008 2:59:42 PM , Rating: 2
Nothing proves your point better than name calling. Awesome. Internet tough guys FTW.

More expensive = better is also a fabulous argument. That's always so true with electronics. For example: Dell WFP LCDs vs Apple's Cinema displays - same parts, same quality, significantly different prices.

I bet you believe you need to spend $100/ft on speaker wire for optimum sound too.

quote:
Pretty good chance the parts came from the same bin.

Exactly. Perhaps the soldering on the boards isn't as clean on a $200 player vs. a $1000+ player, but chances are you're spending most of the money on a fancier case, a big name and some bells and whistles that you'll never actually use.

From PCWorld (http://www.pcworld.com/article/147209-4/the_best_b...
quote:
Sharp BD-HP20U Blu-ray Disc Player

Sharp's first Blu-ray Disc player, the BD-HP20U, is a winner on all counts.

Turn on the BD-HP20U ($400 as of June 2008) and the unit is powered up and ready to receive a disc in under 6 seconds. That's less than a third of the time that any other player PC World tested took for that chore.

True, once on, it's slower than many others at starting to play, but the combined startup time of 41 seconds was still faster than that of any other player, and almost twice as fast as the Pioneer Elite BDP-95FD.

But it's what you see (and hear) when you have it going that counts. The Sharp simply surpassed every other player on almost all criteria. Our jury rated it number one in our tests of detail, color quality, brightness and contrast, and audio.


The Elite sells for $1200. Yup, pricer is better.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Reclaimer77 on 12/18/2008 5:24:37 PM , Rating: 2
^^
Win


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Moishe on 12/19/2008 12:19:44 AM , Rating: 2
I have both and I can tell you that any average BR player has a high quality image. This isn't first-gen. Hi-def beats regular DVD all day long. Listen to the folks who live with HD daily. I have both HD-DVD and BR and DVD.

HD IS better, by a long shot.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By wallijonn on 12/18/2008 12:23:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Blu-Ray really isn't expensive.


The going rate is a $10 premium over standard def DVDs. If BDs 'on sale' is compared to DVDs 'on sale,' the BDs usually go for ~$15 while the DVDs usually go for $5. It's still the same $10. Then there are the Disney films which command a $15 differential... 'Wall.E' day-of-release price was $15 for DVD and $30 for BD. Both prices have since gone up $5. Do you really believe that there is a market for $35 BDs?

To me, down-loadable content is a non issue - the quality is not there. The same goes for Dish and Cable - the quality is inferior to BD.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By therealnickdanger on 12/19/2008 9:46:23 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
'Wall.E' day-of-release price was $15 for DVD and $30 for BD.

Shop fail.

I bought Wall-E (3-disc Blu-Ray with Digital Copy) the day it came out from Amazon for $23.99. Best Buy was selling it for $29.99. I got the same exact deal on The Dark Knight (3-disc Blu-Ray with Digital Copy), except Best Buy was selling it for $23.99. The Blu-Ray versions without the Digital Copy were even less. The DVD versions were over $15. The DVD versions with Digital Copy were $22. I also just bought Total Recall on Blu-Ray for $8.99. That third boob has never looked so awesome. Several years ago I bought Band of Brothers on DVD for something like $120. I just bought the Blu-Ray version... $43. The improvements over DVD are astounding. I also recently bought the Harry Potter collection (years 1-5 Blu-Ray) for $65.

When comparing only new titles, I think it's fair to pay 50% (the difference is usually less) more to get 6X the video resolution and uncompressed (or lossless) audio. I have a relatively strict policy about buying movies in general, but for Blu-Ray:

- it needs to be a movie I like to watch a lot
- it should be a "spectacle" type movie (visual/aural feast)
- it needs to be a quality transfer (as rated by AVS or HDD)
- never over $25 (triologies or packs need to be under $20/film)

For everything else, I have Netflix. I have also converted most of my DVD collection to video files for streaming over my home network.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Gzus666 on 12/18/2008 10:57:47 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
HDTV is only slightly better than a good digital SD broadcast, so I can't imagine BD is that much better than DVD. Especially not for a $300 player and $30 discs.


Either you have poor vision, or your TV is crap.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Spivonious on 12/18/2008 12:52:48 PM , Rating: 2
And you've obviously never seen a good digital SD broadcast. Obviously it's not as sharp as HD, but the colors and sound are there and it's much clearer than an analog SD broadcast. The extra sharpness is really only a benefit while watching sports, and even there if I had to choose between 16:9 SD and 4:3 HD, I'd choose 16:9 every time.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Gzus666 on 12/18/2008 12:57:13 PM , Rating: 2
I will take that as "I have a crappy TV". Fair enough.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Spivonious on 12/18/2008 2:40:25 PM , Rating: 3
And I'll take that as "I have no life and therefore must argue with everyone on DT." Because that's all I've ever seen you do.

Forgive me Gzus!! I have sinned and not spent $3000 on a TV!!


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Gzus666 on 12/18/2008 2:43:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And I'll take that as "I have no life and therefore must argue with everyone on DT." Because that's all I've ever seen you do.


I love how you have to resort to the personal attack, classic.

Anyway, I don't care what TV you have, but don't say "I can't see the difference" when your TV sucks. Expect to be hammered on it.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Spivonious on 12/18/2008 2:56:15 PM , Rating: 3
You ignored my last reply and instead assumed that my TV was not up to par. Believe me, the HD looks great. All I'm trying to say is that a good SD digital broadcast looks very good, and for most programs, going to HD doesn't make a huge difference.

If you can't agree with that, then I have to say that your TV signal sucks.

I have yet to see a "must-have" feature that will cause me to get a Blu-Ray player. Having you constantly argue with me and everyone else on here who thinks Blu-Ray is overrated and overpriced is not going to change my mind.

I would much rather spend my money on something worth spending it on, like a guitar, some books, going to Europe, going out on a nice date with my wife, etc.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Gzus666 on 12/18/2008 3:03:25 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
HDTV is only slightly better than a good digital SD broadcast, so I can't imagine BD is that much better than DVD. Especially not for a $300 player and $30 discs.


You can't imagine, how technical of you. I would venture your imagination sucks, that is what I was arguing with in the first place. If you can't imagine it looking better, chances are your TV blows, add in the fact that you haven't even seen BD on your TV and your whole post was just to try to downplay something you don't have.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Maharajamd on 12/18/2008 4:23:12 PM , Rating: 2
Dude you need to calm down. All you have done here in try to vindicate yourself or your beliefs by knocking other people down. Grow up and come back later. No one wants you or your "internet flaming hard boy attitude" around here.

I believe there was a MUCH bigger "quality" or should I say "satisfaction in quality" jump from VHS to DVD. Sure I understand the math, yes I have a VERY nice 1080P tv, but the difference between DVD and BR on my VISUALLY isn't as impactful as the vhs to dvd was.

Audio however is a completely different story.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Reclaimer77 on 12/18/2008 5:30:30 PM , Rating: 2
Ok I'm staying out of the "techincal" aspect of this argument.

But I just have to ask, Gzus666, do you think you are a better person then somebody because you have Blu Ray or something man ??

If you used that insolent tone with me.. well I would just tell you to go Blu yourself and be done with you. Now go buy another Monster Cable and masterbate at how awesome you are. I know you want to.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By robinthakur on 12/19/2008 5:47:33 AM , Rating: 2
Gzus, you lost all my respect when you claimed erroneously that video on Bluray is not compressed, so please don't attempt to lecture people on technology you do not fully appreciate. So Spivonious can't afford a $3000 TV and is happy with his SD picture and sound, that's fine. He's not claiming its better than BD, and you yourself watch a 1080p *MPEG-4 compressed* picture, presumably on equipment where you can tell the difference between that and DVD. Everybody's happy. I dare say that if he were to see a bluray presentation on decent equipment, he might change his mind, but your unhelpful tone will not cause him to like Bluray.

I watch my Blu-Ray on a large 1080p tv and 1080p projector, with onkyo amp and KEF reference speakers. I spent that money because I could appreciate the difference from a purist perspective, which justified the outlay. Most non-technical people might notice slightly sharper images with more pop and louder sound. The functionality is pretty much identical to DVD (bar all the "live" dross) and they simply don't really care that much that the colour depth is greatly improved or that the resolution is roughly double that of DVD or even that the sound is occasionally uncompressed. I understand that and would be perfectly happy watching a dvd upscaled or blu-ray because its the content which matters most, not these superficial matters.

The whole HD subject is rife with complexity for the average buyer and the deliberately DRM hobbled connections certainly do not help. The fact that anyone might unintentionally hook up their BR player using S-Video makes me shudder...but it does happen.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By tdawg on 12/18/2008 9:51:09 AM , Rating: 2
I can tell a difference on my 24" screen!


RE: Is this guy blind?
By AnnihilatorX on 12/18/2008 9:53:08 AM , Rating: 2
If yours is a PC screen then sure


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Moishe on 12/18/2008 9:53:23 AM , Rating: 2
I have a 120" 720p display and Hi-Def is clearly better without a doubt. I'm always surprised when someone says that HD is not worth it.

At my size, 1080p will be an even greater difference when I finally upgrade.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Chaser on 12/18/2008 10:22:33 AM , Rating: 2
Is it outdoors? I'll drive my car up and watch a movie :)


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Hiawa23 on 12/18/2008 12:04:26 PM , Rating: 2
Peckham also discusses how the combined sales of the PS3, the PS2, and the PSP exceeded one million units. This number tops the 836,000 Xbox 360s that were sold.

Ridiculous. Why is he comparing sales of the Playstation line compared to the 360? I own both consoles, & honestly I hate I spent $1000 on the PS3 back in 06 plus the cables, games, & honestly I reallty hate I bought it, as I only buy the exclusives for it & donot buy consoles to watch movies. The 360 has been an amazing console for me, RROd aside, but Sony really has some serious issues, but I guess you can look at the glass as being 1/2 full instead of 1/2 empty, no matter what excuses you want to use those Ps3 numbers aren't good.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Gzus666 on 12/18/2008 12:22:15 PM , Rating: 1
Because PS2 is still selling and the PSP is selling as well, that is money for their games division. The fact that you spent $1000 to get the PS3 when it came out leads me to believe you are a moron. I had a launch unit a few days after Christmas and I got it for $599 with free shipping off Ebay.

If the exclusive games didn't appeal to you, why did you buy it? A large portion of them were announced to begin with. I would easily say 360 and PS3 have a comparable number of good exclusives. Sounds like idiot's remorse cause you overpaid for something and expected the world because of it.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Hiawa23 on 12/18/2008 1:18:45 PM , Rating: 1
Because PS2 is still selling and the PSP is selling as well, that is money for their games division. The fact that you spent $1000 to get the PS3 when it came out leads me to believe you are a moron. I had a launch unit a few days after Christmas and I got it for $599 with free shipping off Ebay.

I said it costed about $1000 when you add $599 plus the games & cables, extended warranty, & there is no point to call names. We are adults here.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Hiawa23 on 12/18/2008 1:29:41 PM , Rating: 2
If the exclusive games didn't appeal to you, why did you buy it? A large portion of them were announced to begin with. I would easily say 360 and PS3 have a comparable number of good exclusives. Sounds like idiot's remorse cause you overpaid for something and expected the world because of it.

again, looks like you misunderstood yet again. I said I bought the PS3 exclusives which is why I bought the console. All multiplatform games I buy on the 360, this buyers remorse nonsense you came up is crazy. I have enjoyed to console, but am totally fine with the 360. I was only saying that to me when is comes to gaming & online play the PS3 hasn't differentiated itself from the 360, as most of the multiplatform games are better on the supposed inferior console, & Live is still unmatched by PSN as far as my tastes go.

Comparing 360 sales to the PS2 PSP PS3 combined to me is a cop out, cause the PS3 directly competes with the 360, & part of the reason the PS3 had a bad month was it costs alot more & in this economy most are looking to save as much as possible & now even the Sony branded standalone Blu ray drives ar $200. Seems like alot of PS3 owners bought the console for movie playback & not games, & now that the drives are cheaper sales are suffering.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Gzus666 on 12/18/2008 2:06:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I hate I spent $1000 on the PS3 back in 06 plus the cables, games, & honestly I reallty hate I bought it


That is what you said. You stated that the PS3 was $1000, PLUS the cables, games and you stated you really hate you bought it. I go by what you say, I can't read your mind if you meant something else.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By foolsgambit11 on 12/18/2008 8:05:01 PM , Rating: 1
Depends on how you parse his statement. 'back in 06' is an independent clause, and can be popped out, leaving that he 'spent $1000 on the PS3 plus the cables, games...' I agree, he could have put the independent clause elsewhere to make his intended point clearer, as he could have meant either that the cables and games were included in the $1000 or that they weren't. And that his placement of 'back in 06' favors the latter. But to say that he stated that the PS3 he bought was $1000 is inaccurate. To say that he was unclear and possibly misleading would be more accurate.

For what it's worth, I immediately assumed he meant that the $1000 included accessories.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By BansheeX on 12/18/2008 7:34:00 PM , Rating: 5
The reason he is pointing that out is not in contention of 360 vs PS3 november sales, but the CNN article's bogus assertion that Sony is a sinking ship from that statistic. The PS3 outsold the 360 in 2008 at a 2x higher shelf price. And it has the PSP and PS2 sales to backstop it. That makes it pretty clear that the CNN "analyst" is an idiot, and the entire community is dumber for having listened to him. If it weren't for the fact that these articles influence uneducated consumers, people who bought one wouldn't be pissed. It's time for analysts to stop ignoring the massive value disparity between medium and high end configurations where the PS3 is clearly king.

Take a look at this. Let's say someone wants blu-ray, a hard drive, wireless, and four years of netplay.

360 Arcade ($200)
Four years of netplay ($200)
Stand-alone blu-ray player ($200)
60gb hard drive ($100)
Wireless adapter ($100)
-----------------
$800 total

PS3 ($400)
----------
$400 total

It's time for analysts to stop ignoring the massive value disparity between medium and high end configurations where the PS3 is clearly king. I concede that people who don't want any of these see a better value at $200 for an arcade 360. But there are people who do, and if analysts stopped ignoring them, they wouldn't have such a hard time figuring out why their doomsday predictions before the system was even launched turned out dead wrong.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Aloonatic on 12/18/2008 5:32:05 PM , Rating: 2
I tend to think you are are right. The difference is there, if you want to look for it and care.

From my own personal experience, most people who have seen a a BD film on a 40" 1080p LCD don't really see what all the fuss is about.

How many times have you been to a friend or relatives house and they have not set their set top box to 16:9 even though they have a wide screen TV now so it's a stretched 4:3 display? Or the have the colour, brightness and contrast settings set at the default which is often set-up to look good in a shop display room but looks awful at home, with flesh tones that look orangey red?

It's not that the extra detail isn't there or anything, it simply seems to be that most people just don't notice a HUGE difference in quality, so just don't care.


RE: Is this guy blind?
By mikeblas on 12/18/2008 7:28:21 PM , Rating: 2
Does it reek of anti-Sony bias, or is it just that you happen to disagree with it? In other words, is there a way for you to make your point without overstating it, and relying on rhetoric?


RE: Is this guy blind?
By Flunk on 12/19/2008 4:20:09 AM , Rating: 2
I think it would be more accurate to say that most people don't care about the difference in quality on televisions less than 50". I certainly don't care enough to buy a new player and rebuy movies just for bluray. And yes I do own an HDTV but it's a 32".


RE: Is this guy blind?
By aBott on 12/19/2008 8:03:38 AM , Rating: 2
Really, it's resolution that matters. I can tell a huge difference between DVD quality and HD on my computer monitor. It's only a 24", which is small compared to those tv's, but it runs at 1920x1200. I think most people are content with their DVD quality video and don't realize how much better HD content is.
On the other hand...
If you're happy where you are, is it really worth upgrading? Personally, I think so, but that doesn't mean that it's worth while to everyone.