Were you sane while writing this? What's more elitist than suggesting that people will all be downloading movies in a couple of years. 20 percent of the country doesn't even have broadband, and a lot of them probably have the sub-1Mbps speeds. I have a 3Mbps connection, but I'm one of the few I know with one that fast. It still takes about an hour to download a full movie from iTunes. It takes 15 minutes to hit a store.
Did you read what I said or did you just want to post something angry? I no more implied that 100% of the population would be downloading movies than Blu-ray's fanbois are implying 100% of the population have Blu-ray players thanks to HD DVD's defeat.
What I said is that it's far from certain that Blu-ray will supplant DVD, and I also said that online downloads will be practical enough for hard media to be less important. Both I sincerely believe are true, even with "20% of the population" not having broadband available. I would hazard a guess that the number of people who actually have broadband (not just available, I mean who actually, today, subscribe to cable or DSL) is considerably higher than the number of people with an HDTV, and is almost certainly a factor of 10-20 over the number of people who have a Blu-ray player, be it a PS3 they never use as a player, or something they actually do use.
As far as Blu-ray, just wow. Those files are at least 4GB for 720p. Blu-ray Discs are slowly starting to see discounts again (after the Christmas rush) and will start dropping in price as more people get them.
Blu-ray prices actually jumped a little in the aftermath of the HD DVD discontinuation, and they're pretty steady at the moment. Blu-ray's current manufacturers are currently locking out the manufacturers who have brought us $20 DVD players, largely because they've invested billions in the format and they need to recoup that money. It's improbable to say the least that we'll see sub-$200 Blu-ray players any time within the next two years, everyone who controls the format on the hardware side is opposed to that, and the studios don't have the clout they did when there was a format war going on.
So no, Blu-ray isn't suddenly going to become an everyman's format for a while. It's going to remain expensive, and those who buy them are going to badmouth the format after paying $400-600 for players that are obsolete despite still coming off the assembly lines.
The format won't be the HUGE success that DVD has been, but downloads sure as heck won't kill it in the next few years. You can't port an HD movie to another location any better than with a Blu-ray Disc.
It's not going to be much of a success at all. It's essentially the next laserdisc, a format guaranteed to only appeal to a minority that'll be passed by by the vast majority of people who have much better options.
And here's the critical part, the part you're ignoring: the AppleTV is all about downloads. That's the format Apple, and I, and presumably millions of others, are seeing as the everyman format. This whole discussion is about whether it's worth Apple's while incorporating a Blu-ray drive into the AppleTV. The answer is no. Blu-ray is not a significant improvement on online downloads and DVD. So incorporating such a drive would drive up the price of an AppleTV to $400 but wouldn't offer customers a significant improvement in capabilities.
Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not overly happy about this. I want to BUY movies, not rent them. That's why I bought an HD DVD player. I like HD DVD, and the best part was that if the dice had rolled the other way in January, an HD format would have been available that was affordable, whose players were not obsolete (even the original A1 was capable of HDi - the thing BD Live is supposed to match), and which was available in an affordable form both to big studios and smaller studios and publishers. The availability of Combo discs also meant that multi-player homes didn't need to rush out and upgrade every player. The mandatory managed copy feature made it possible to envisage some pretty great services built upon HD DVD. But it didn't happen, the industry settled on the format that was the most expensive, had the poorest backward compatibility, had the least potential, and was the most in flux and unsettled.
The vast majority of people will settle for downloads. The hardware is cheaper. The movies are more accessible and the system more easily satisfies the "instant gratification" gene in all of us. And the transitory nature of the system means that there's less likelihood of obsolete hardware discrediting the service as Blu-ray's current players will undoubtedly do to Blu-ray. It's going to take at least two years for Blu-ray to fall into an affordable price bracket, and by then online downloads will be so entrenched it's hard to see consumers rushing out to buy it.
Blu-ray will be the next laserdisc. You need special, overpriced, equipment to watch it and the only advantage it offers over the mainstream format (DVD) is better picture quality. Your disks will not play in any of your other equipment. And, ultimately, if you're planning to rent anything, well, the easiest systems will bypass the format completely.
And Apple's right there providing the easiest systems. They're about as likely to offer Blu-ray on the AppleTV as JVC was likely to try to make a mainstream VHS-Laserdisc combo player.
TV is that it isn't really all that dynamic (or powerful). I'm banking on an updated Mini to play my current 1080p content. The current gen Mini is capable at 720p, but chokes on 1080p. Give me a Mini that can play it while patting it's head and rubbing it's tummy and I'm happy as a pig in ... well, you get the picture.
