To all the Apple fanboys who think watching a 'so-called HD' DL on a computer screen is really experiencing a movie you don't know what you are missing.

DLs look like sh!t when you start blowing them up for todays standard HDTV sizes (40+"). And when you put the BD counterpart next to it its no contest. BD is the best consumer format available.

But what do I know, I only have a 1080p projector paired with a 92" screen along with an Onkyo/Def Tech 7.1 sound system.

Apple and the other computer giant want physical media dead because it will strengthen their revenue stream, but the cold hard fact is that the pipe is not big enough to deliver true HD so their HD offerings are HD in name only. I mean come on a 720p download that is roughly the same file size as dual layer DVD. I know compression has improved but not to the point that DVD bitrates can reliably deliver 'HD' quality.

Plus don't be so quick to give up physical media because as we have already with the current 'HD' downloads that there is no "pay once, unlimited view option." Don't give all the control to the content providers and pipe owners because if they have it all be prepared to fork over cash everytime you want to watch your favorite movie.

last comment was in response to jntaylor

Well said. Problem is BD is getting too big to ignore.

AppleTV's new scheme is nothing more than Circuit City's harebrained DIVX idea minus the disc. You know they want to replace the 'pay-once, unlimited use' model with a 'pay for every viewing window' model. Just like I did to CC with DIVX, I do to Apple and MSFT. Middle finger raising... fu.

It's no secret Apple wants to control media distribution. BD is getting too big to ignore. So now Jobs complains about the complexity of BD licensing. Really it is all just ploy hoping to convince his minions to use the 'far less than BD-quality' AppleTV HD rental scheme.

Currently you can't 'pay once for unlimited HD viewing' and the quality is not much better than DVD. 720p on Apple TV is no where near BD quality. And I highly suspect they never want the user to pay only once for HD content. That's why Jobs is downplaying and ignoring BDs growth among enthusiasts.

Even 5 years into iTunes you still can't download lossless tracks and now he expects us to believe AppleTV HD is really HD. Sorry Jobs, you are just this generation's PT Barnum. You might have your followers but the vast majority of consumers see through your bag of tricks.

It is new releases that drive the industry. BD is currently in an early stage of its life cycle where certain movie genres sell better than others. DVD went through the same thing.

Like the other poster said the studio really are not making much off the bargain bin titles. But they will be making a significant portion of the year's revenues on the Q4 titles like Iron Man, Dark Knight, Indy IV and the other high profile summer titles. I think typically the industry makes 60% of its yearly revenue in Q4.

Did any one see the week Transformers finally had its BD release? It boasted BD sales to a ratio of 12:88 compared to DVD. Now that is good news. BD is selling decently to consumers who abandoned DVD in favor of better quality. As HD install base grows, BD will grow with it.

I wonder if HD DVD won if would be seeing these 'sky is falling' type responses.

And if you don't believe the scenario above could happen has anyone noticed that none of the download services are offering a 'pay once, unlimited view' option for HD content, at least on high profile high demand titles.

All you download proponents just be careful what you wish for.

With downloads are the control is in the hands of the content providers. That pay once unlimited view option may quickly disappear. Does anyone like the thought of opening their wallet everytime they want to watch one of their favorite titles? Downloads are the new version of Circuit City's failed pay per use DIVX format, which met a furious uproar of angry consumers. Downloads are just DIVX without the disc. Just think you want to watch TESB one evening and you go to bring up on your download server to be met with the following message:

THIS TITLE HAS BEEN DISABLED BY THE CONTENT OWNERS. THE NEW VERSION OF THE CONTENT WILL BE AVAILABLE SOON BUT YOU WILL HAVE TO PURCHASE A 24-HOUR VIEWING WINDOW TO VIEW.

Again if you hate BD fine, but don't be so eager buying into a system that does not have fair use and the consumers best interest in mind.

nathan,

Epson is not the only maker that has a hard time with panel convergence. The fact is any 3-chip design is probably going to have some misconvergence. At normal viewing distances the misconvergence disappears unless it is severely off. I have gone through 3 1080UBs, both that were operational had some minor convergence issues. I think dust blobs are much more of an issue on 3-chip LCD non-sealed light path designs.

Overall the 1080UB was a winner. It's too bad they are upping the price on the replacement, but it should have a higher lumen output with a 200W bulb versus a 160W bulb.

Andy Anonymous,

You are just looking at the current market. The 360 may have a larger library, but how many of those titles are quality titles?

Again you have to look down the road. Developers are already complaining the 360 is being hindered by the DVD storage space.

On the PS3, that storage space is going to be less of an issue. Same thing with the 360's hard drive. Most units out there are 20GBs, which further limits installing games on the HD.

I am not a huge gamer, but I like quality games and I am not dissapointed with the PS3 library.

I think very shortly MSFT is going to have to respond to the reality that the PS3 is by far a more more advanced console.

The PS3, especially if your looking between the two today, is by far the better value.

$400 get you:
a next gen console,
40GB soon to 80GB HD
a fully functional BD player, not to mention the best
built-in wireless hardware
DLNA networking for streaming media
Free account to the PSN