Best Buy unveils the Samsung BD-P2550
[Via Format War Central]
[Via Format War Central]
Relevant Posts
- Poll: Where do you buy your Blu-ray discs now, if you buy them at all? (43 days ago - 50 Comments)
- Toshiba's BDX2000 Blu-ray deck hits Best Buy for $199, sour grapes also on sale (35 days ago - 16 Comments)
- Netflix, Best Buy deal brings Watch Instantly streaming to even cheaper Blu-ray players (41 days ago - 11 Comments)
- Poll: What is the best Blu-ray player? (36 days ago - 95 Comments)
- Blu-ray releases on November 17th 2009 (14 days ago - 23 Comments)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Big Wizz @ Aug 21st 2008 2:37PM
$500
'Nuff said.
DIRAN ONI @ Aug 21st 2008 2:46PM
Anyone knows if the BD-P2550 has built in DTS-MA or can internally decodes DTS MA.
Aaron Smith @ Aug 21st 2008 5:07PM
Diran, I don't think you're going to get internal decoding of DTS-MA, but it most likely bitstreams it. It has the same chip as the previous players which is not 'supposed' to be able to decode MA.
HDinheblood @ Aug 21st 2008 11:51PM
On best buys website it says it has built in decoders
anseK @ Aug 22nd 2008 7:49AM
I read the manual last night from Samsung's website and it does not internally decode DTS-HD HR or MA. It bitstreams both. It will internally decode DD+ and TrueHD.
dad @ Aug 21st 2008 4:23PM
still no change in pricing on BD players that have other features besides playing the disc. :(
Gus @ Aug 21st 2008 9:46PM
So, it's this player or a Sony BDP-S350 and $150 in change, or a Panasonic DMP-BD30K and $200 change or even 3 (1 in every room)Toshiba XD E500 and $50 change, wooooooo.
EricDJ @ Aug 22nd 2008 3:57AM
The story behind the BD-P2550 is this. It is not 2.0, and is not BD-Live. It however will be as soon as their update goes online for it. Then it will be complete. Other stores will sell a similar unit under a different model but there is a 30 day exclusive to Best Buy.
anseK @ Aug 22nd 2008 7:53AM
Many people are asking why some would buy this player over cheaper alternatives with similar specs. The big difference is the Silicon Optix chip. For those seeking the upscaling performance delivered by this chip the premium is not a problem. I would consider this player if my experience with the BD-P1200 was not so bad and if it internally decoded DTS-HD HR and MA.
XDragon @ Aug 22nd 2008 9:39AM
Point being, everything is a waste of time and effort if a "new" Blu-Ray player is released with less features then the PS3 but costs around the same price as the cheapest PS3.
I don't get why these companies don't understand that the PS3 will rule the Blu-Ray market until they come out with much cheaper players with at least all the Blu-Ray non gaming features offered in the PS3.
squiggleslash @ Aug 22nd 2008 1:52PM
They do understand it.
Right now it's almost impossible to make a profitable Blu-ray player. It's better to make a few low volume units that sell for almost cost and do not result the building up of a massive inventory of the things than it is to try to hit the mass market with units that are priced well under cost in the desperate hope that sales will pick-up and volumes will increase to the level the players might become profitable.
They're keeping their hand in and showing their "support" for the format with units like these. These are not supposed to sell well.
XDragon @ Aug 22nd 2008 4:31PM
That's the most stupid comment I've read in regards to this topic.
The volume of new players being announced/released discredits your statement.
If you were right, there would be very few players being announced.
Support does not mean be dumb by having lots of inventory of outdated units.
If they aren't meant to sell, they wouldn't make them and just for support and presence, they'd make a 1 player and take a very long time to replace it.
Your argument about a profitable player is ridiculous. The PS3 is now profitable and theres a hell of a lot of parts in a PS3 that are not required to be in a 2.0 which means cheaper than a PS3 and still making a profit! You need to think a bit more before you make such ridiculous statements!
squiggleslash @ Aug 23rd 2008 8:22PM
: That's the most stupid comment I've read in regards to this topic.
That's probably because you didn't understand what I said. We'll come to that in a moment. It's also, perhaps, because you didn't even understand what YOU were writing. You claimed that Samsung doesn't realize that Blu-ray players that cost more than a PS3 aren't going to sell well. Really?
You actually think Samsung doesn't know this.
Really?
So, let me see: You think Samsung isn't aware that the PS3 dominates 90% of Blu-ray player sales. Or perhaps you think it is aware, but it doesn't know why. Really?
Ok, back to my comment and your "response": look at this:
: The volume of new players being announced/released discredits your statement.
It would if it was in any way contradicting my statement.
There are many, many, players being announced. Very, very, very, few of them are lower in cost than a PS3. In order for my comment to be "stupid", you'd have to demonstrate not that lots of players are being released, but that virtually everyone is putting out low cost players and making a profit.
They're not. What we have is a small handful of players being released for under $400 that, in all honesty, are being released at a loss in order to grow the market. The majority of players are above $400, with a surprisingly large number over $1,000, catering at niche audiences.
This player is Samsung keeping its hand in. It doesn't want to lose too much money, so it's producing a player more or less at cost, perhaps with a little margin to make the shareholders happy. It's not going to make bargain basement players until it becomes profitable to do so.
And I'd like to see the statement the PS3 is sold at a profit backed-up. The overall business MAY be profitable, but the last I heard Sony is still losing money on each unit sold and making up the difference on game sales. If it wasn't losing money, it'd be dropping the price, it wants as many of the things out there as possible. Blu-ray still isn't established, and the PS3 is central to Sony's attempts to get it out there.
But, hey, why am I arguing with you? You know things even SAMSUNG doesn't know. You's smarts you are!
XDragon @ Aug 23rd 2008 8:49PM
I couldn't find the post about the PS3 making a profit because I don't remember where I read that so I'll let you have that.
Samsung and everyone else "knows" so my wording was off but the point is that its a waste for them to even try to replace existing players if they come in around $400 or release lower priced players that aren't 2.0 compliant. They have players on the market already so they shouldn't bother releasing newer players until they can come out at a competitive price. They are being represented on the shelves but that bring no value to anything other than presence because virtually no one is buying a Blu-Ray player that isn’t a PS3. The part of your comment that I found profoundly stupid was that you said they're not supposed to sell well. No one releases a product that they don't expect to "sell". That’s just stupid and that’s why I was saying that they don't understand that they're wasting their time. They have 1.0 and 1.1 players on the market already and some are cheaper then $400. Stick with those if you want your "name" on the shelf and release a 2.0 player when it can be competitive. If they feel they need to have a 2.0 player to say that they're up to date, then only have 1 player released at the dumb prices and keep very low inventory on them. My point is that they keep releasing and announcing more players and none are worth even thinking about compared to the PS3 for value. They need to release more players once they are putting out something people will consider purchasing.
I could have better pointed out the issue I had with your post and worded my opinion in a way that was much more specific but I think that’s been cleared up now.
Tiemark @ Aug 22nd 2008 11:49AM
When are we going to get a reasonably priced Blu-Ray?!!! Rumors?????
JBDragon @ Aug 22nd 2008 11:33PM
So there's Expensive Blu-Ray players, and Very Expensive Blu-Ray players, WOW, what a choice and they still aren't full Profile 2.0 players. This is pretty weak. So we have this $500 waste of money, and the Pioneer Elite for $2200. WOW again. So still after all this time, the only worthwhile Blu-Ray Movie player to buy STILL is the Ugly and lacking a built in IR port, PS3. I don't see prices dropping at all, they in fact seem to go UP. Who knows, a couple more years and maybe there will be a $399 Profile 2.0 player released. Not that I really care about Blu-Ray anyway.