Sony's Blu-ray player thrice delayed

That's assuming the players are of the same quality. From what I hear, the PS2's DVD player isn't very good compared to normal DVD players. The same could be true here.

I can beleive the alledged comment that points to PS3 stealing all the drive mechanisms for themselves seeing as how much money they have invested in PS3. It would make sense really to get the $600 dollar Blu-ray player out there as it would be a bargain for the early BR adopters.

The quality of the playback wont be as good, or at least when comparing high end DVD players to those found in games consoles the differences are huge, particularly when viewed on a big TV.

Am I the only one who gets the Clone High reference here?

Sony wants a Blu-Ray drive in every home, but not everyone wants a video game system. Many people looking to build a home theater won't think 'what my system needs is a playstation 3', because when you think of home theater components, you don't think of video game consoles that incidentally play the media you have. However, by making it prohibitively expensive, people who would've purchased the BDP-S1 will by a Playstation 3 instead - which is likely what Sony would perfer. By releasing both products, however, they effectively cover both markets.

$1000, I think people are better off with PS3, of course I dont think its fair to compare a dedicate player but it does basic stuff like play movie with dolby.

what the ps3 was delayed.....

Smart business is what I call it. Sony isn't here to pass out candy and rainbows. They're here to make money.

As is every corporation in the world.

There is absolutely no way in hell an early adopting videophile is going to be caught dead playing his new blu-rays on a cheaper blu-ray player (or game console for that matter)...ie PS3

Sony doesn't quite get it. If you are planning to get the first of a new technology that comes out, PRICE is something you generally aren't concerned about. So why the hell would they give a damn that a NON-blu-ray dedicated machine costs $400 less? Videophiles are going to look at that and say "Damn, that blu-ray player must SUCK!" And inevitably, much like the PS2 isn’t that great of a DVD player, the PS3 will not be that great of a blu-ray player.

I'm starting to think this is intentional. Especially since Phillips (I think) already has one out. I saw one at a local best buy, it was right below a 42-inch Samsung HDTV (drool). I swear if I had $4000 I would of bought the tv right then and there. The problem is the player wasn't hooked up and they wouldn't play anything on it.
The PS3 is the only way I'm getting into the Bluray game and if Sony needs to cannibalize parts to get the PS3 out on time then go ahead.

#8

No, a lot of people will look at it as a good entry player, until they can afford a dedicated player.
That way you can join the HD era much earlier than you would if you had to wait for affordable players to be produced.

Obviously, videophile are demanding and intelligent consumers. They will try it and they use it only if it meets their standards.

Eric,

For the people that relate quality with price, they will buy the $1000 Blu-Ray player versus the PS3 or the HD-DVD player since both are less expensive than the former and therefore (in their mind) better. In that regard, Sony DOES get it, because they would offer the more expensive item ($1000) for those people who want the apparent best.

For those who want to have a Blu-Ray player at a value will buy the PS3 with the Blu-Ray capabilities. So that covers the mid-range of the market for early adopters.

At the low end (or inexpensive) is the $500 HD-DVD player, which will be a bargain to those who perceive value as best bang for buck (low).

So, the way I see it, Sony has two portions of the potential market out of three.

Darth--

$600 doesn't quite hit the realm of what I consider to be affordable. Although "affordable" is clearly a relative term, I can be confident enough to say that anyone who isn't a videophile would still consider $600 to be "unaffordable." Point taken, but I stand by my statement.

Personally I think the whole "PS2 DVD player isn't as good as a stand alone one" argument is BS. I originally bought the PS2 at launch as a DVD player and used it for a good 4 years (half of it with component video & optical out.) I started getting DREs then I was able to swap it for a new one with progressive scan and it's worked find ever since. The only problem I ever had was that it was a tad slow navigating through menus.

Its not good of sony to delay there standalone blu-ray players because Even if Sony does sell a lot of there PS3's to people who want a cheap blu-ray player that does not gaurantee they will purchase games. If the buyers are not purchasing a lot of games Sony will take a huge lose because they need to make up the loose of money from each system that is sold (they make there money and recieve there profits from selling games)

Why is there an article about a Blu-Ray player's dealy on a videogame blog? Think for a sec... The PS2 and XBOX could play DVD's, but there were no articles on DVD players there.

Just because the PS3 has the ability to play blu-ray media (which I'm happy for, regardless what the majority thinks here), we have to be bombarded with any and everything blu-ray or Sony related?

This all reeks of Sony (anti)fanboyism. Yes, I said it...

#11

Are you serious?

You spent $1,000+ on a quality HDTV and $600 for a HD player is not affordable?

I don't understand.

People who think $600 is not affordable will stick with DVD until HD players are $100-200 a piece. Hence, these people are not really in the martket.

Hilarious,

I had friend (an electronic geek) tell me about the low quality of Sony drives two years ago. The legacy continues...

Blu-Ray and HD-DVD have arrived because of technology advancement and not because the consumer wants them.It's just another way to rake billions of dollars by replacing all those movies that people already own on DVD.It's a scam because most films won't show the detail that High Definition can technicaly display.What you'll get most of the time is a shit-load more grain to admire and how the colours from old film print look decidedly flat on that new 50" plasma you bought.People who will buy a PS3 won't all have HD TV's so if they do buy a Blu-Ray movie,all that detail is lost and they're wallets will be so much lighter.I have a collection of movies,and many of them have very noticeable grain on standard definition DVD so why bother with HD.As for TrueDolby and uncompressed PCM,it's just a selling gimmick.No doubt some audiophiles can hear the difference in a sound proofed room but to the average Joe it's going to be like "Ummm...I can hear a bit more hiss...yeah cool!"What a waste of bandwidth I say because most people won't own the high performance amps and speakers to realise the sound in the first place.Maybe in ten years when the whole world decides to catch up but don't count on it.

Nambit--

DVD's didnt come out RIGHT when the xbox and ps2 launched did they?

#17

Who says you have to re-buy your DVDs?
You are misinformed.

You can keep your DVDs. If you want, your HD player will upscale them to HD for you or play them at their regular 480p resolution.

I am not going to re-buy any of my DVDs.
When I buy a new release, though, I will certainly buy the HD version. Why buy SD when you can afford HD?

@17:
"I have a collection of movies,and many of them have very noticeable grain on standard definition DVD so why bother with HD."

You aren't seeing film grain. What you're seeing is MPEG artifacts from the DVD mastering.
MPEG2 is a lossy compression scheme, and not a very high-quality one.

The fact is that movies are much higher resolution than NTSC or PAL are capable of displaying.
The 720*480 of DVD is simply far too low to pick up film grain on most movies.

The point behind HD-DVD and BluRay is that now that TV standards allow for transfers of reasonable resolution, there's no reason not to make a media format that allows it.



As for the argument about raking in billions with consumers replacing movies...
I still have a large pile of VHS cassettes. I never replaced them with DVD. But once I had DVD, I never bought another VHS tape.

It's even better with HDDVD and BluRay, because the players are backwards-compatible. You can have one box that plays your existing DVDs AND your new and improved media.
If consumers replace their existing DVD collection, it will be because they believe HD video to be worth rebuying their movies, not because they were forced to by evil corporations.

sony is gonna launch very few PS3s in November, so blu ray fans will have to buy a BDP-S1

"People who think $600 is not affordable will stick with DVD until HD players are $100-200 a piece. Hence, these people are not really in the market."

Perfectly stated, Darth. I will wait until HD players are sub-$200 before buying one. Until then, I will enjoy watching DVD's on my plasma. Therefore, I am not really in Sony's market for a PS3.

Here's the problem. From 1995-2005, I gamed exclusively on the Sony platform in my home. I enjoy gaming, and make the gaming-related purchasing decisions for myself and my family.

How can Sony decide I am no longer in their target market?

PS3 will have enormous appeal to people who spend most of their lives on AVS Forum. But vast swaths of middle America, who are not interested in paying $600 for an HD player, are not in Sony's market anymore.

That works fine if you've decided to work a niche market (Kutargi's 'fine steak restaurant'), and you no longer care what your market share is relative to Microsoft and Nintendo. But I don't think Sony's software publishers signed up to play that game.

The question is Darth

Are YOU seroius?
You wrongly assume that someone who pays over a 1000 for an HDTV set will automatically see merit in putting down another 1000 for a higher def DVD format, furthermore a HD DVD format whose future is in no way certain.

I hate arguing with "in my experience" arguments but two people I know that have spent well over 2,000 for their HD sets (My brother and a therapist I interned with) scoff at me for even bringing up blu-rays DVD's. One said, and I quote "DVD is good enough", the other said "I'm not going to spend that much on DVD's you geek."
People are stupid with their money, they will swallow $50 dollars a week for their SUV's but they will yell $1000 is too much for a high def dvd player.
My points-

It is wrong of you to assume $1000 or $600 is cheap because they have already spent over a 1000 on HD
It is also wrong of you to assume they will spend that much on unproven technology that could go the way of the UMD in a few years.

Just to comment on the original PS2 DVD player capability, it wasn't that great at launch. I bought a PS2 the day of release, and used it as my primary DVD player for my room, while we had a more expensive player in the family room (also a Sony) which we purchase around the same time.

The original firmware for PS2 DVD player, lack of a decent DVD remote (which was odd, considering it was a Sony) and the limited options available using the PS2 dual shock made DVD playback "servicable." It wasn't great, but it worked. Now when they finally did release a decent remote (the one we all know from today), along with the updated DVD player firmware, then the PS2 became a much better DVD player. Still, if I had the choice between a dedicated player vs PS2 for watching movies, I'd go with the dedicated player.

I'm just excited to hear the spin after the holidays when BD and HD_DVD start comparing their installed user base.

Also the point of HD fuzz/grainy is well put. Until movies are shot with true HD cameras there will be no real HD movie content.

Darth Pixel,

You were missing the point of my post alltogether. I wasn't trying to state that $600 was too expensive for people (although this could be true for some). I was merely stating that there are three price ranges for players in the market for early adopters, and depending on whether you want to spend more, or spend less, there are different options for you. Sony has products for 2 of those price options (out of 3).

As someone else said earlier, it is wrong for anyone to assume that because they own an HD set that they are not cost conscious. The truth is, some people are and some people aren't, which is why there are multiple price points (going back to my earlier statement). The same goes with televisions. Some go for the 60" 1080P plasma and some go for the DLP or LCD 42" 720P set. Those people also make different decisions on what accessories to buy. Hence, multiple price points.

It's not cut and dry.

movies are shot in hd cameras.
you think thats SD your watching at the cinema?

Doesn't sony know that if they sell the PS3 at a loss, expecially to those who just want the Blueray, they aren't going to make ANY money??

If you have read the news lately on the Samsung BD player, just launched on Guru3d you'll notice they arn't very impressed with BD. Problems with not been able to read the second layer, plus lower picture quality and content on disk compared too the HD-DVD disks available doesn't bode too well.

This is due to the complex laser read apperature and thin structure of BD disks, ican't see how they are going to get a 4 layer version to work if they can't even get a dual layer vers to work right.

When the FIRST DVD Players hit the market many moons ago they were priced at roughly 1000.00. However, there was no CHEAPER models available at said time. When the price came down and the PS2 sold in Japan that lead to the high adoption rate. However, I have seen what HD-DVD and Blu Ray has to offer 599(HDDVD), 600(PS3) and 1000 (SONY BLU), and none of this is worth the upgrade. The difference from a regualr DVD is not that great. I was all ready to buy these players and I just could because I cannot see the difference. Albiet, I have only seen the HDDVD player at BB, Blu-Ray is not looking better. So, how do you convice the masses to buy? Look at UMD on the PSP.

I remember when Laserdisc was around offering better picture and sound than VHS tape but it died a slow death.I think it's a similar situation now for these HD format's in that they may only belong to a niche market.If a winner emerges,it will be because of it's price/performance ratio.I'm betting on HD-DVD but even then I don't see it being a huge success.A bit like those high definition CD's you can buy,I'm just happy enough with good old CD thank you very much.

You're right!

It IS the tinfoil hat talking. You and Oliver Stone need to spend a weekend in Cape Cod coming up with more creative weak-premised conspiracy theories. Maybe you can come up with a new theory about bigfoot!

' ' Smart business is what I call it. Sony isn't here to pass out candy and rainbows. They're here to make money.

As is every corporation in the world. ' '

i 2nd that. Sony is going to destroy the competition.

If you think that old movies are not going to look awesome in HD, then you are way off. alot of film looked better then HD because of the film. Just because Red Dawn looks bad on DVD, dosnt mean that when the re-release it on HD-DVD, that it wont blow you away. http://ask.metafilter.com/mefi/32336

lol @ "After all the videophiles pick up the PS3"

No Chance, who's gonna want to sit there navigating through a Gaming UI with a joystick so they can watch sub-par Blur-Ray on a games console.

I can't think of even one "videophile" who would even consider this, how many "videophiles" currently use or have ever used a PS2 for DVD playeback in a high-end set-up. None, If you can afford the rest of the gear needed for serious home cinema why settle on a stunted jack-of-all trades that your kids are going to be wanting to use all the time to play games.

People will be buying the PS3 (or not) for playing games with movies as a very distant second reason (exactly like the PSP and UMD).

It's been put back (The Sony Blu-ray player) because the Samsung Blu-Ray player got slated as being worse than the Toshiba HD DVD player at twice the price, Sony have to go and fix that.

Wondering how many people realise that currently Blu-Ray is using 25Gb disks as apposed to HD-DVD's 30Gb AND that Blu-Ray is currently using MPEG 2 compression (same as current DVD's) compared to the far superior VC1 compression used in HD DVD titles.

All i can say is that Sony is smart so they know what there doing.

Ben: guessing we'll have remote controls, just like the 360 does now. Don't think that's really an issue.

' ' Just because the PS3 has the ability to play blu-ray media (which I'm happy for, regardless what the majority thinks here), we have to be bombarded with any and everything blu-ray or Sony related?

This all reeks of Sony (anti)fanboyism. Yes, I said it... ' '


mm i do agree here the bloggers the likes of ross miller and the other one james something ,are nintendo fanboys and anti-sony.

but this is a blogger site and normal people post here the news so im not bother by their comments.

The thing that is different here with the PS3's Blu-Ray capabilities is that it's going to be in 1080P, through an HDMI connection. I can't imagine that being noticeably any different than any 1080P video through HDMI. How can you have multiple standards for that type of connection, just because it's coming from a PS3 and not a standalone player?

One must also consider that the PS3 is cheaper than the standalones not because its necessarily of lesser quality, but because they knew they had to sell it at a somewhat reasonable price, and that it's going to be a somewhat surefire bet. Aren't many sources claiming that the PS3 is going to be worth about 8 or 900 dollars in parts?

omg is that you C. Grant with your useless anti-sony posts @ pspupdates ,just want to let you know man i hate you with passion and if i ever get to see you on the streets even though i dont know you ,i will destroy your face.

C.Grant

Sure, but I can't remember Sony throwing in a remote control with the PS2, why would they do it this time - especially with the budget pack.

I've got a 360 remote control all wrapped up in the original packaging still, I just don't see non-gaming adult videophiles playing movies on a games machine. I also don't see how the PS3 will be anywhere as good as even the Samsung player is now.

If people are considering High Definition video's for home-cinema then the choice as I see it is;

Toshiba HD-DVD - Can be had for $400 currently
Sony PS3 - Stunted - $599
Samsung/Sony Blu-Ray - $999

Seriously, by the time the PS3 comes out you could buy an xbox360 AND a standalone Toshiba HD-DVD player for the same price. Who would choose the one machine over the two dedicated machines at the same price?

This is an 'eye of the beholder' issue. Videophile perceive things other do not. Whether those things are real or not these people represent a market to be served at a profit. Really serious videophiles will view the PS3 as a high-end video game machine but a low end BD player.

Considering that some boutique brands were able to sell DVD players for far more than $1,000 after good decks were available for $200. The really crazed and affluent video philes will proudly pay thousands for HD playback decks just because of styling and snob appeal.

The people who look upon the PS3 as a BD deck are those with lesser finances (you know, most of us) who need a solid collection of positives to justify diving into the expense of both the PS3 and a display that fully supports it. We know this stuff will eventually fall to a fraction in price, so we need some seriously compelling stuff to make us early adopters.

On that basis, a PS3 that lacked Blu-ray but was $100 lower in price might be a harder sell than what Sony is doing.

#30 The1, that is simply wrong. The DVD launch featured nearly a dozen models from several companies. The most popular was the $1,000 Sony model (S7000?) and long regarded the reference platform for compliance to the DVD spec.

The low end was represented by RCA at $500. This unit was junk and couldn't deal with complex action scene without severe glitches. In Twister, one of the first heavy duty action movies available on DVD, there were scenes that would be nothing but a macro block mess for several seconds.

By comparison, the $1K Sony unit performed perfectly, even on features that couldn't be tested by conusmers until many months later, like RSDL as first seen in Terminator 2. Lesser players would freeze for most of a second during the layer change, just as Linda Hamilton pokes the picnic table with her knife.

"1. That's assuming the players are of the same quality. From what I hear, the PS2's DVD player isn't very good compared to normal DVD players. The same could be true here.

Posted at 6:02PM on Jun 22nd 2006 by Grant"

The PS2's DVD player was horrible. Saying that the PS2 could play DVDs is like saying that chocolate can help cure scurvy.

@Nambit
' ' Just because the PS3 has the ability to play blu-ray media (which I'm happy for, regardless what the majority thinks here), we have to be bombarded with any and everything blu-ray or Sony related?

This all reeks of Sony (anti)fanboyism. Yes, I said it... ' '

Did you notice where this news was acquired?
It's relevant to the PS3 because it could help its sales. Very relevant.

"8. Smart business is what I call it. Sony isn't here to pass out candy and rainbows. They're here to make money."

I'd seriously have to argue that one. Here is my proof.

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0007ZD79Y.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

http://www.kbtoys.com/g/vgames/big/126531.jpg


Anyways. Everyone seems to be forgeting BetaMax. Sony has tried before to get into format wars and have failed even though they were offering the superior quality. DVD Didn't win because of PS2. DVD won out because of 2 things really. First, it was less expensive and higher quality than what was the standard format (VHS). Second, the sales approach taken. With VHS you had to wait months after the movie was released for rental or pay about 100 dollars. With DVD, for about 20 bucks(the same price you would pay for the VHS copy several months to a year after it was released for sale) you could buy the movie right when it hit stores with added bonus content.

What is BluRay or HD really offering non-techie consumers (the mass market) that will make it the standard format???

You all are forgetting that Microsoft will price the xbox360 and HD-DVD drive lower than the cheapest PS3.

Scott,

There's been many reports stating that Microsoft can't sell that thing for under $200. The people saying they will are rumor bloggers, not industry analysts.

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/its-official-hdmi-13-finalized-182675.php