Blu-ray fails to overtake DVD as many predicted


Two years ago Disney predicted that Blu-ray sales would overtake DVD in two years. Like pretty much every prediction about Blu-ray this has failed to occur. In fact the studios have actually reduced the number of BDs they are producing: this year there are actually 10% less BD titles released than in the preceeding 12 months (source: DVD Release Reports). Additionally a similar reduction in the number of titles also afflicts DVDs too.

Current sales numbers indicate that DVD sales continue to slow, and BD sales slowly rise. However DVD still sell boat-loads more than BD, and for many reasons (not just because I refuse to buy any).

Think of these predictions when you read the same folks predicting how huge 3D BD will be.

In other news, Netflix streaming video is claimed to take 20% of internet bandwidth in the USA. Related? You be the judge.

 

Comments (6)

  1. Peter says:

    I assume the subtle undertone here is that HD-DVD would have done better.  There is really no way to know that and some of BD's issues are due to diminishing interest in all forms of physical media.

    I have always felt that the slow uptake in all HD formats is due to the lack of penetration of HD sets. Without an HDTV, buying any HD disc player was pretty much a waste of money. Until recently HDTVs were pretty expensive. Prices have dropped dramatically, but I guess the poor economy still has people waiting. The other issue is that with the proliferation of mobile devices, people seem happy to watch a movie on a 2 inch display.  At that size the overal image quality isn't going to be that different in SD or HD.

  2. andypennell says:

    I don't know that HD DVD would have done any better, although it would have been cheaper and simpler for everyone than BD. However I do now think that if there had been no format war at all, then things would be better for HD shiny discs if the DVD Forum had succeeded. However if BD had shipped without competition in its original form then it would have been even less successful than it is now.

    You are right: turns out the average Joe considers picture quality to be pretty unimportant most of the time, happy to watch things on tiny screens, or crappy quality on large screens. Except for the Superbowl or Iron Man 2 anyway.

  3. ac says:

    But has the picture quality gone up really?  Maybe most people, when watching TV quite far away compared to say a computer monitor, don't really count the pixels.

    However what is immediately obvious to most people, is that CRT (well, forgetting NTSC) TV's make things more lifelike by the way of better color reproduction (well atleast for all those old good movies and series that were made using CRTs in production). In comparison, LCD based TV's look either pale or artificial in their tone. It doesn't help that since digital color grading has come prevalent and every movie is using same artificial color grading "preset" that (eg. blue/teal+orange) the producers think is hot just makes every movie look crap. Who cares if there's a billion pixels if they're all showing boring/unpleasant colors? Thought so!

    In another news LCD panel makers have conspired to keep prices high (as anyone trying to buy decent IPS panel monitor or laptop with IPS 5 years ago can attest). So consumers got totally robbed by paying high price for inferior technology (TN panels).

    Now of course there's some Plasmas out there that maybe popular in some places but until recently they weren't even selling them here and considering how few they sell I've heard too much stories of them failing too soon. And TBH when talking about average plasma TV I have doubts if they match the average PAL CRT in color reproduction, atleast those I've seen don't look good at all. (I guess that's why they've never used plasmas in production/broadcast monitoring)

  4. Alan says:

    "Now of course there's some Plasmas out there that maybe popular in some places but until recently they weren't even selling them here and considering how few they sell I've heard too much stories of them failing too soon. And TBH when talking about average plasma TV I have doubts if they match the average PAL CRT in color reproduction, atleast those I've seen don't look good at all. (I guess that's why they've never used plasmas in production/broadcast monitoring)"

    My Pioneer Kuro wipes the floor with any other TV I've ever owned. True that Pioneer have abandoned developement, but the tech has been sold to Panasnonic. Watching films has never been so enjoyable.

  5. Matthew says:

    "Current sales numbers indicate that DVD sales continue to slow, and BD sales slowly rise."

    Looks like one way traffic to me. And it will hasten as HDTV adoption picks up…which is steadily getting faster due to the fact they don't even manufacture large CRT's any more (in the UK we can only buy a 14" portable CRT…while we have every screen size there is in HDTV flat panels). So yes, they might have got their predictions of *when* BD would overtake DVD (thanks in no small part to a global recession), but the fact that BD *will* overtake DVD at some point is a fact of life…like the birds and the bees.

  6. James Woodcock says:

    I was and actually remain a big fan of HD DVD, owning a large number of titles, a stand alone player and the Xbox 360 add on drive – however as impressive a technology as streaming movies at 1080p on the Xbox 360 is, I still love physical media and Blu-ray is the best option out there.

    The adoption of the format may be fairly slow (not helped with the constant changing of the format), but at least I can enjoy high quality disc based media with stunning picture quality and beautifully clear audio as I am certainly not ready to stream all my movie content and I can't see my attitude changing for a number of years yet.