Reminds me that you can cook any number to benefit you.
I wonder, out loud of course, how those sales relate to the percentage of households with TVs, with HDTVs, with cable/satellite programming, between this past year and when DVD first came out years ago.
Sure it's good to see sales increases, but you have to remember that 'just buying someone a couple of DVDs for xmas' didn't exist as an acceptably-lame xmas present until after DVD established itself. Blu has the advantage of piggybacking on that cop-out present. ;)
Kumar, there are valid questions about the state of home entertainment between now and when DVD came out, but the probable answers to those questions actually make the BD performance even more impressive. The only thing necessary for anyone to make the jump to DVD was a television, and I think it's pretty safe to assume that television penetration is about the same now as it was when DVD was hitting the market (pretty darn close to 100% in the US). So there were no other required purchases that required anyone to hold back from jumping into DVD. To get into Blu-ray, an HDTV is pretty much required. Granted, a lot of people had HDTV's before Blu was introduced, but we all know that the penetration of HDTV's in households is not anywhere near the penetration of SDTV's when DVD came out. I think we can all agree that the options available on cable/satellite are a lot better now than when DVD came out too. All in all, I think the deck against Blu-ray is stacked a little higher than it was against DVD, and yet it's outperforming DVD over the same period in it's lifecycle. Pretty impressive.
“That iconic Klipsch sound is here in full force, with crisp highs, delicate mids (which can easily have a bit more meat added with an EQ tweak) and tight, booming bass.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Reminds me that you can cook any number to benefit you.
I wonder, out loud of course, how those sales relate to the percentage of households with TVs, with HDTVs, with cable/satellite programming, between this past year and when DVD first came out years ago.
Sure it's good to see sales increases, but you have to remember that 'just buying someone a couple of DVDs for xmas' didn't exist as an acceptably-lame xmas present until after DVD established itself. Blu has the advantage of piggybacking on that cop-out present. ;)
Agreed that % of top 20 chart is pure junk. That is way too much number spinning for my tastes.
Kumar, there are valid questions about the state of home entertainment between now and when DVD came out, but the probable answers to those questions actually make the BD performance even more impressive. The only thing necessary for anyone to make the jump to DVD was a television, and I think it's pretty safe to assume that television penetration is about the same now as it was when DVD was hitting the market (pretty darn close to 100% in the US). So there were no other required purchases that required anyone to hold back from jumping into DVD. To get into Blu-ray, an HDTV is pretty much required. Granted, a lot of people had HDTV's before Blu was introduced, but we all know that the penetration of HDTV's in households is not anywhere near the penetration of SDTV's when DVD came out. I think we can all agree that the options available on cable/satellite are a lot better now than when DVD came out too. All in all, I think the deck against Blu-ray is stacked a little higher than it was against DVD, and yet it's outperforming DVD over the same period in it's lifecycle. Pretty impressive.