Quote:
The government takes back their airwaves in 2009.  HDTV sales would have grown to a massive number.  Most of those owners will be looking for HD movie content.  So, for a company to think that they can keep the adoption rate of physical HD content that low for so long is at best a delusion, IMO.

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Nobody gives a rat's *ss what matters in Japan.  How many times do you have to be told Japan doesn't dictate the US market?

Let me break this down.

If the HD formats have less than 1% of the WORLDWIDE DVD market and yet in Japan Blu-ray has won the HD format war, then the same thing can happen here. 

This should be clear enough to understand now.

Quote:
I was at Target and they have HD-DVD and BluRay and they have signs up literally saying that you MUST HAVE an HD-DVD player to play HD-DVD's. THEY WILL NOT WORK in a NORMAL DVD Player. Same for Blu-ray.

Quote:
If we know this then it is obvious that "they" know this. They = Sony & co and Toshiba & co. And all they can do to help out the consumers is drop two totally different formats offering HD video. How many of them buy one format or the other and do not really understand that not all of the available movies are in both formats?

Quote:
I would like to see someone else come out with a whole new format that blows the others away.

Quote:
I like blu-ray solely because of disc size. That's it.

Quote:
I see a lot of Beta and VHS and remember VHS won out because of 2 main reasons
1. other manufactures could make VHS
2. it was different and newer. So the majority of people assumed it was better.

Quote:
HD-DVD's will probably end up winning. I know A_S will respond with various stats proving otherwise, but the average consumer probably thinks HD-DVD means HiDef DVD and will buy that where as Blu-Ray doesn' have HD in the name. Sounds dumb, but so are consumers.

Quote:
A_S, if you want examples of how dumb consumers are I can give you thousands upon thousands, but is it needed?

Quote:
Quoting VibroCount:

Quote:
I work at a retail who sells to the mass of consumers.

Cool.  I used to do the salesperson thing at Tweeter/HiFi Buys.

Quote:
The numbers who look forward to HDTV are minimal.

Usually the only thing the people I've sold to didn't care for was the PRICE of a HDTV.

Quote:
They are disgusted that they will have to buy digital receivers to get local channels on their current (non-HD) TVs. Very, very few look forward to buying an HDTV.

Of course, it's usually the cost.  They probably just bought a CRT a short while ago and now they have discovered they will have to buy something else to make it work.  They may not be comfortable letting that amount of money go.  That would piss me off too.  It is understandable.

Quote:
None of them -- literally none of 'em -- understand what "HD-Ready" means. We had two people today who bought HD-Ready TVs at Costco over the weekend, who were convinced that it meant that their new sets were "ready to watch HDTV." They had no clue that it meant that their TVs had no receivers. That without HD cable or HD satellite or a separate digital receiver, they would watch nothing more than the cable or satellite that they currently had, not in widescreen, not in HD, but exactly the same as what they had been watching.

They still sell HD-Ready TVs...j/k!  I think they try to call them HD or HDTV monitors now.  Their sets ARE ready to watch HDTV.  They just have to pay for it.   Cable and satellite companies love HDTV (and HD monitors) sales.  A great deal of people that purchase HD or HDTV monitors end up as their customers.

Quote:
They hate letterboxed movies, thinking they are missing half the image. They have no clue.

That is soooo true.  I try to educate them that they are missing 1/3 of the picture whenever I happen to run into them.  Then, they usually say I didn't know that.  Then, they purchase the full screen version anyways.   But, now, they can't accurately say they didn't know that.

Quote:
We sell nothing but HDTVs, all with HD receivers built in. Hook up an antenna and, voila, local TV in HD. "But your sets cost more than those at Costco (WalMart, Target, etc.)." Yeah, wait 'til you see what turning your HD-Ready set into an HDTV costs... I mutter.

Yeah, I would usually suggest they go with a satellite solution if possible.  I would never tell them to go with HD cable.  I would let them know that if they can't get satellite to go with buying a ATSC tuner/receiver and antenna.

Quote:
HD has a long road. Most Americans cannot see the difference, any more than they can hear the difference between true high fidelity sound and the distorted fuzz eminating from their 1000-watt Home Theatres in a Box.

I don't know if HD has a long road to reach the masses.  If you mean for EVERYONE to have one, then I can totally agree with you (people like the Joe Dirts of the country).  If you are in sales at a chain retail store, I'm sure they show you market research figures for HDTV sales in the US.  There are tens of millions of HDTV sets out there already.  We are still 2 years from the deadline, which salespeople WILL use to push HDTV sales.  If sales continue at the current rate, I think 2009 and 2010 will be amazing years for the takeover of (not just digital but...) HD content in all forms.

I have found that most Americans CAN see the difference.  During my time at Tweeter/HiFi Buys, I only came across 2 people that said they couldn't see a difference between SD and HD content.  Most people just didn't want to justify the extra cost of an HDTV, but that's a different issue.  My father is LEGALLY BLIND and he can see the difference between the two on a TV 32" or larger!  People might not be able to tell the difference between high quality sound and poor sound if it's not done back to back.  Again, most customers in the HiFi Buys sound room can not only tell the difference between high and low quality sound, but also the difference from speaker brand to speaker brand.  Most of the customers I've dealt with are under 60, though.  I do these tests for people that come to my home as well.  They can all tell the difference between a DD soundtrack at 640kbps, DTS lossy core at 1.5Mbps, and an uncompressed PCM track.  Most of those people do not have anything more than a 32" CRT TV in their homes (without anything more than the TV speaker for sound).

Quote:
They like their DVDs, they like TIVO. Paying hundreds of dollars for a player which might not be supported five years from now or ten, then paying $10 to $20 more for each film on disc for a difference in quality that they cannot see is not going to fly. They will await... and wait.

I like my DVDs and TiVo as well.  I don't know about your area...but in the places I've lived (Atlanta, Savannah, South Florida, Tucson, San Antonio, and NYC) the average person just doesn't seem to want to spend more than $100 on a player...period.  As far as cost per disc, both HD formats have titles for $19.99.  If you are not trying to purchase titles from the highest priced HD retailer versus the lowest cost DVD retailer for a new title, there is no $20 difference in price.  But, that is neither here nor there. 

These people you are describing sound like followers...not leaders.  They follow the leader.  They usually buy a new format when there is not much choice of content left on their old format.  They are just ahead of the people that still only have a VHS player, in my book.  Those people don't decide anything when it comes to new format adoption.  People may or may not agree with this but it's the truth.  This is pretty much the first time it's been this inexpensive to get into a new format this soon.  There are people that are joining the early adoption market that really have no business doing so.  Those are the people the are ones complaining about the price of admission, title costs, software issues, etc.  These prices are considerably lower than Betamax and VHS players when they first started out.  These HD players are much lower than 8-track, cassette, and CD players and that's not even considering inflation.  These prices are great for new formats comparing them to start-up formats in the past.

In this particular format war, more people will have more say in how this war goes than usual.  That is without question.  Actually, this time around I believe this will be mainly decided by the 35 and under crowd.

Quote:
A sub-$200 player & sub-$20 discs... maybe. Until then, HD disc format will not reach 5% of the market.

You may be right about that if you only count standalone players.  It's kind of a moot point anyway.  What you are talking about is right around the corner.  We already have sub $20 discs.  I've even bought some for Blu-ray titles for $12 some time ago (I can't find those deals anymore).  I have bought quite a few at $19.99 at retail chain stores, too.  HD DVD said they will have a player for $199 by the holiday season.  Blu-ray said they will have a player 1080p/24 for only $100 more during the same time period.  I think the PS3 at $500 or $600 will probably move a ton more units with about 20% buying BD titles.

Quote:
By then, HDMI links from their highspeed internet connected computers to their HD-Ready sets will be available. Perhaps by then, memory cards or flash drives containing HD content will plug direcly into their HD-Ready TVs.

I would be willing to take that bet for whatever amount you feel comfortable with.

Quote:
You think like the creators of the original Star Trek thought. That 200 years in the future starships will have toggle switches, not anticipating flatscreen switching technology.

You are already thinking in the past.

Thank you for putting me in the same category as Gene Roddenberry!  Wow!

Future depictions of an almost perfect structured society, an improved way of space travel, advanced devices that allow communications between different species, showing people what might be out in the Universe, among many other things, but the creator was thinking in the past?  BTW, the reason they had toggle switches and CRT screens on the show is because of the lack of technology and budget money...not thinking in the past.  His vision was really beyond what man was capable of producing.  As a reference point, during the same time period, NASA space capsules (using future technology at the time) had toggle switches, too! 

Another thing about the creator of Star Trek...he created Earth: Final Conflict around the same time period.  The show did not get produced until the late 90's.  Technology had not progressed far enough to even properly depict his vision of the future 'til then.  He died in 1991.

If I thought in the past, I don't think some of the people here would disagree with me much.  Then again, if some of them are disagreeing with me about all the present day facts I've been presenting (basically saying based on all this information...that should be the outcome), I doubt thinking and talking in the past would change their disposition.

Quote:
Does anyone think Toshiba will start making Blu-ray players?