They did say that it can support high def, and higher bandwidth later on. Might be worth it. All the reviews I see are pretty good.

We're already pretty close at our place. At this point, a good percentage of our "TV" viewing is downloadable content through TiVo. Essentially, video podcasts that are downloaded by our TiVo and show up in our menu just like regular television.

Theoretically we could also be using the TiVo to stream our music, but a lot of our music is iTunes and it doesn't support music in the AAC format, even stuff that's just been ripped from CDs, not downloaded with the copy protection. We've switched and now rip into MP3 instead of AAC, but there's a good chunk of our library that's still in AAC. But theoretically...

We can rent movies through our TiVo via Amazon Unbox.

We can view photos.

We can surf the internet using the Wii.

A LOT of stuff is readily available entirely while sitting in front of the TV. While the delivery systems are changing drastically, one thing remains the same. If you want to be successful, make it so that you can get it on the TV. Even in our household, where technology is no stranger, I was not sold on the internet-delivered video as replacement for traditional in-home watching until it got to the point that it was easy to get it off the computer monitor or laptop and onto the TV.

For me, the last holdup is high-def. I just can't stomach watching 480 stuff on my TV if I can help it.

Meh. While the difference between SDTV and HDTV is stunning, I'm less enamored by the difference between standard digital media formats and HDTV. Blu Ray's pretty damn nice, but not enough nicer than my standard DVD player, or an upscaling player, or a standard definition digitally downloaded movie for me to go out of my way. I'll welcome the change once it becomes default and available at average consumer prices. But I just don't see the push.

I am sorry of this sounds like bragging, because it is not meant to be, but we have a 65" set. The difference become much more visible at that size.

I've seen it on huge screens. And I see the difference. I just don't care about the difference, and I think the average consumer would agree. If the film transfer was done well, a standard DVD upscaled on an HDTV provides a very very good picture, and the incremental difference from a Blu Ray DVD just does not make that much of an impression (save perhaps animation to some degree).

And where I have noticed a marked difference, it's been a detriment. Like one blu ray movie I saw playing in the store (don't recall which) that was so clear that the sets looked like sets. It's the equivalent of the HDTV/makeup issue and I'm sure set designers will eventually compensate. But so much of my DVD watching is of older movies, so it'll remain an issue for a while.

I'm no luddite by any stretch. But to me, the changes in delivery paradigms are far more interesting than incremental image quality upgrades.

I've had this experience as well. The Best Buy across the street has a very good HDTV/Blu-Ray set up and the last two movies I've seen there (Transformers and Pirates 3) I quite honestly had this reaction:

"Oh my god. It looks so good that it looks like crap!"

I agree that for me the quality step up from standard TV to HDTV (particularly for sports) is phenomenal but the DVD to HD step up doesn't particularly wow me.

Ok, that makes more since now. I thought you were saying that the difference between old DVD and Hi Def was not that great. But you are saying upconverted 1080 DVD compared to BlueRay is not that noticeable. I agree, and at $40 a pop for the DVDs I plan to go with an upconversion player myself once I get my HDTV. A lot of surround sound systems come with the upconversion DVD players anyway. Then, once the Blueray DVDs come down in price, and the BlueRay Players get cheeper and have the software and PC hookups all resolved then I'll jump on board. Perhaps the 2009 holiday season.

Actually, even standard DVD->bluray doesn't excite me.