# HD-DVD is Dead (was: First Signs of Blu-Ray Dominance)



## John Crichton (Jan 5, 2008)

http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsroom/pr/0,20812,1700383,00.html

This is a huge blow to HD-DVD.  And most likely the beginning of the end of the format wars for HD media discs.  Universal & Paramount studios are the remaining big companies to be HD-DVD exclusive.  All the rest will support Blu-Ray exclusively or both formats.

Thoughts?


----------



## Mallus (Jan 5, 2008)

Hello Battlestar Galatica on Blu-ray!!


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jan 5, 2008)

I still feel the same as I have since this whole thing started. Its all just an annoying grab for money due to the whole exclusive thing. I don't care who wins, and honestly would like to see both lose to dual format players.

Its sad, because I have a wonderful HD TV but I just won't commit to either format in this thing...so no HD movies for me.


----------



## Andre (Jan 5, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsroom/pr/0,20812,1700383,00.html
> 
> This is a huge blow to HD-DVD.  And most likely the beginning of the end of the format wars for HD media discs.  Universal & Paramount studios are the remaining big companies to be HD-DVD exclusive.  All the rest will support Blu-Ray exclusively or both formats.
> 
> Thoughts?




You may be right, but I still think it's too early to tell. Warner will be producing material in both formats until May, and even then, their stuff will work on dual-format players. I expect at least another year or two before the war ends, and possibly longer.

Which is a shame, as it just hurts both companies and consumers.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 5, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsroom/pr/0,20812,1700383,00.html
> 
> This is a huge blow to HD-DVD.  And most likely the beginning of the end of the format wars for HD media discs.  Universal & Paramount studios are the remaining big companies to be HD-DVD exclusive.  All the rest will support Blu-Ray exclusively or both formats.
> 
> Thoughts?




I don't know....given both HD and Blu-Ray together make up like 2.5% of the market, really, standard DVD is the winner.

Maybe HDDVD will be eliminated.  Which is unfortunate, as I bought a player on sale shortly before Christmas, and I'm past the 30 day return policy to get my money back.  But it's a great player, I really like the format, and have enjoyed the movies so far.

I don't know if it's over though.  Sony's supposedly losing money hand over fist trying to win this war, and their pockets aren't as deep as Microsoft's and Toshiba's.

In any case, I can't bring myself to support Sony by spending $400 on an overpriced Blu-Ray player.  Maybe when they come down to the $100-150 range.  Otherwise, I can wait.  If everyone panics and jumps ship from HDDVD it *will* be the nail in the coffin.  I'll likely keep purchasing those movies I really want on HDDVD, and the rest on DVD.  Eventually, dual-format players will come down in price (I hope), and that'll allow me to enjoy the best of both worlds.  Not a big fan of Sony though....they've shown a consistent trend over the last 30 years of having overpriced equipment, and trying to establish proprietary formats that are non-inclusive, and over which they keep control.

I wonder how much it cost them to buy Warner?

I've heard that it won't really matter in another 2 years anyways, because it's going to likely go all online, via delivery of movies over the internet, and that *this* means of delivering content would likely kill both HD and Blu-Ray.  I have concerns about that, however....what I've seen of downloadable content to date is that it's good, but that they've got the ability to make it expire on you after x many days since you bought/rented it, etc.  And it requires an immense amount of storage space as well, if you want to have more than 2-3 movies.

A Blu-Ray question though....I've heard that if you have a non-PS3 Blu-Ray player, they are not compatible with Standard DVD.  That would really suck, and is frankly pretty stupid.  But I'm not sure if there's any truth to it.  Any research I've done just ends up in reading "nyah nyah" type posts from supporters of one camp vs. the other, with less actual content....just noise.

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 5, 2008)

Andre said:
			
		

> You may be right, but I still think it's too early to tell. Warner will be producing material in both formats until May, and even then, their stuff will work on dual-format players. I expect at least another year or two before the war ends, and possibly longer.
> 
> Which is a shame, as it just hurts both companies and consumers.




I just bought my wife the Harry Potter 5 season set on HDDVD for Christmas.....one thing that'll suck if Warner sticks to this decision, is I won't be able to get her the complete collection.

Banshee


----------



## Angel Tarragon (Jan 5, 2008)

Really doen't matter to me. I'll give my full support to HD-DVD and only buy BD if I have no other choice. Getting myself one of the combo players soon.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 5, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I just bought my wife the Harry Potter 5 season set on HDDVD for Christmas.....one thing that'll suck if Warner sticks to this decision, is I won't be able to get her the complete collection.



It's not a matter of if, WB is done with HD-DVD in 5 short months.

Worst case scenario with Harry Potter is getting her the 7 movie boxed set a few years from now on Blu-Ray which should be cheaper (in a few years) and discounted for having all the movies in one set.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 5, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I don't know....given both HD and Blu-Ray together make up like 2.5% of the market, really, standard DVD is the winner.



They really are different markets for the time being, especially with the buy-in cost of HD.  DVD saw it's first drop in sales last year, if that makes any difference.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> In any case, I can't bring myself to support Sony by spending $400 on an overpriced Blu-Ray player.  Maybe when they come down to the $100-150 range.  Otherwise, I can wait.  If everyone panics and jumps ship from HDDVD it *will* be the nail in the coffin.  I'll likely keep purchasing those movies I really want on HDDVD, and the rest on DVD.  Eventually, dual-format players will come down in price (I hope), and that'll allow me to enjoy the best of both worlds.  Not a big fan of Sony though....they've shown a consistent trend over the last 30 years of having overpriced equipment, and trying to establish proprietary formats that are non-inclusive, and over which they keep control.



If HD-DVD is dead, I'm not really worried about it.  Sony is not the sole owner of BR.  They have a big horse in the race, for sure.  But it's not just them.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I wonder how much it cost them to buy Warner?



I was thinking the same thing.  Early reports say they didn't get a dime from the BR patent holders (which are more companies than just Sony, BTW).  Time will tell on that one, tho.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I've heard that it won't really matter in another 2 years anyways, because it's going to likely go all online, via delivery of movies over the internet, and that *this* means of delivering content would likely kill both HD and Blu-Ray.  I have concerns about that, however....what I've seen of downloadable content to date is that it's good, but that they've got the ability to make it expire on you after x many days since you bought/rented it, etc.  And it requires an immense amount of storage space as well, if you want to have more than 2-3 movies.



Downloadable content rocks, but for HD I don't see it becoming the norm in a few years.  There will be similar problems with delivery and "who actually owns it" issues.  And some people just like having a hard copy they can bring to a friend's house, or pop into a laptop.  I'd love for the tech to get to that point, and fast, but it looks to be further down the road as something that would eliminate discs.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> A Blu-Ray question though....I've heard that if you have a non-PS3 Blu-Ray player, they are not compatible with Standard DVD.  That would really suck, and is frankly pretty stupid.  But I'm not sure if there's any truth to it.  Any research I've done just ends up in reading "nyah nyah" type posts from supporters of one camp vs. the other, with less actual content....just noise.



Ddoing a quick search reveals this quick example of backwards compatability: 

http://www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Sony...sem/rpsm/oid/184588/rpem/ccd/productDetail.do

I haven't personally tested a DVD on a stand alone BR player.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 5, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> It's not a matter of if, WB is done with HD-DVD in 5 short months.
> 
> Worst case scenario with Harry Potter is getting her the 7 movie boxed set a few years from now on Blu-Ray which should be cheaper (in a few years) and discounted for having all the movies in one set.




I've already got the first four on DVD.  Getting 5 on HDDVD was a surprise present.  I'm not paying *again* for the same movies.  I guess worst case is if HDDVD does lose, when the Blu-Ray players actually come down to sane pricing levels, I'll buy one, or a dual-format player, and just buy the final two movies in Blu-Ray, and put them in the box with the 5 HDDVD ones (the box of both the HDDVD and Blu-Ray sets leaves room for the final two movies).  At the amount of money we're talking about, I'm not going to spend $150 getting all 7 movies just so they can match.

I'm still not sure that it's over.  Five months is a lot of time, and frankly, there's been a lot of back and forth in this.  Warner announced this today, but who knows if Microsoft/Toshiba are going to try stealing one of the companies Sony currently has in the Blu-Ray camp.  They're talking about getting HDDVD players into the market for $100, when Blu-Ray's still largely around $3-400.  If sales of the HDDVD players continue increasing due to lower cost, you don't think some of these companies might reconsider?  I've heard that if you eliminate the PS3's from the equation, HDDVD is actually kicking Blu-Ray's butt...

And my understanding is that, since HDDVD isn't region-coded, I can get a lot of movies in HDDVD that are currently only available in Blu-Ray in North America, simply by ordering them from Europe.  If that's the case, I'll totally investigate that option.

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 5, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> They really are different markets for the time being, especially with the buy-in cost of HD.  DVD saw it's first drop in sales last year, if that makes any difference.




But is that because of HDDVD and Blu-Ray, or because of the prevalence of downloadable movies via Torrents and such?  Tonnes of people I know are getting their movies from illicit channels these days.

Same thing with RPG books.  I question WotC's assertion of whether the edition change is needed now because the market is saturated, because I know a lot of people still loving 3.0/3.5....it's just that they get most of their books via Torrents and stuff.  I know it's not legal, and I don't support it, and frankly, I keep telling them it has a bad effect in terms of not reinforcing companies to create products we like, but they keep doing it.  I'm not convinced as to whether a new edition will improve revenues, given the book's likely be ripped within days of being released.



			
				John Crichton said:
			
		

> If HD-DVD is dead, I'm not really worried about it.  Sony is not the sole owner of BR.  They have a big horse in the race, for sure.  But it's not just them.
> 
> I was thinking the same thing.  Early reports say they didn't get a dime from the BR patent holders (which are more companies than just Sony, BTW).  Time will tell on that one, tho.
> 
> ...




Thanks for the link.  I'm no expert on this.....I've just seen a lot of posts about Blu-Ray not being backwards compatible.  So I was referencing those.

Frankly, the whole idea of a format war is dumb to begin with.  I'm not sure why it's needed.  If I'm happy with my HDDVD player, and you're happy with your Blu-Ray player, why don't we each just buy disks in the appropriate technology?  This whole idea of Warner and Disney and all these companies having exclusivity deals is just dumb.

Also, is the Blu-Ray Association still being investigated for anti-trust violations?  The Wikipedia entry I saw indicated that there have been investigations into them, since Phillips, Sony, and Panasonic had members on the DVD Forum steering committee, and used their votes to torpedo some of the technology proposals put forward by the group that eventually created HDDVD......before they announced the creation of the Blu-Ray Association.  But those references were from 2005, and I have no idea if it went anywhere.

Banshee


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 5, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I've already got the first four on DVD.



Oh, didn't know that.  Forget what I posted.  



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> (the box of both the HDDVD and Blu-Ray sets leaves room for the final two movies).



I didn't know they left room for the last two!  That's pretty cool and a damn good idea.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I'm still not sure that it's over.  Five months is a lot of time, and frankly, there's been a lot of back and forth in this.



I'm not sure either.  However, WB is a huge player in the game.  Have you seen the amount of titles they have?  I didn't know until I looked.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Warner announced this today, but who knows if Microsoft/Toshiba are going to try stealing one of the companies Sony currently has in the Blu-Ray camp.  They're talking about getting HDDVD players into the market for $100, when Blu-Ray's still largely around $3-400.  If sales of the HDDVD players continue increasing due to lower cost, you don't think some of these companies might reconsider?



Cheaper players may not make much of a difference at this point if the content isn't there.  It will be interesting to see where this goes.  All it really means, for the time being, is that come May and then the 2008 holiday season, assuming things stay the same, is that BR will have more exclusive content than HD-DVD.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I've heard that if you eliminate the PS3's from the equation, HDDVD is actually kicking Blu-Ray's butt...



But, you can't take PS3's out of the equation.  They play the discs and do a fine job of doing so.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 5, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> But is that because of HDDVD and Blu-Ray, or because of the prevalence of downloadable movies via Torrents and such?  Tonnes of people I know are getting their movies from illicit channels these days.



I dunno.  It's just interesting that this is really the first year the HD discs have been out there and the first year DVD has taken a hit since it hit the market.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Same thing with RPG books.  I question WotC's assertion of whether the edition change is needed now because the market is saturated, because I know a lot of people still loving 3.0/3.5....it's just that they get most of their books via Torrents and stuff.  I know it's not legal, and I don't support it, and frankly, I keep telling them it has a bad effect in terms of not reinforcing companies to create products we like, but they keep doing it.  I'm not convinced as to whether a new edition will improve revenues, given the book's likely be ripped within days of being released.



I don't really want to get into a D&D 4e thing here.  

I do understand what you are saying and all these companies are certainly trying to make more money while keeping their content under their control.  It's their job to find out what we want to buy.  I have seen a significant upgrade in picture quality from these new formats.  There is certainly a market for HD discs vs DVD.  If people didn't want these new formats, they wouldn't buy them.  Marketing can only go so far before actual results are needed to sway someone.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Thanks for the link.  I'm no expert on this.....I've just seen a lot of posts about Blu-Ray not being backwards compatible.  So I was referencing those.



No prob.  I don't really go on lots of HD forums.  A few here and there but once the tech stuff and actual news turns to bickering, I go elsewhere.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Frankly, the whole idea of a format war is dumb to begin with.  I'm not sure why it's needed.  If I'm happy with my HDDVD player, and you're happy with your Blu-Ray player, why don't we each just buy disks in the appropriate technology?  This whole idea of Warner and Disney and all these companies having exclusivity deals is just dumb.



It is stupid.  But that's what happens when all these companies want the revenue that DVD created.  It's the whole reason MS got in the videogame market.  There is too much potential for financial gain to stay away.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Also, is the Blu-Ray Association still being investigated for anti-trust violations?  The Wikipedia entry I saw indicated that there have been investigations into them, since Phillips, Sony, and Panasonic had members on the DVD Forum steering committee, and used their votes to torpedo some of the technology proposals put forward by the group that eventually created HDDVD......before they announced the creation of the Blu-Ray Association.  But those references were from 2005, and I have no idea if it went anywhere.



No idea.  Hadn't followed that story since it dissappeared a while ago.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 5, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> I didn't know they left room for the last two!  That's pretty cool and a damn good idea.




I thought it was pretty neat too!  At least if they're double-dipping, they're leaving room so I can buy the individual movies later on, and add them to the set.



			
				John Crichton said:
			
		

> I'm not sure either.  However, WB is a huge player in the game.  Have you seen the amount of titles they have?  I didn't know until I looked.




Do you have a link?  The only effect I *know* that's getting me hot under the collar at the moment is that Warner owns New Line, from what I've seen posted on some boards.....meaning that when the Lord of the Rings movies eventually come out in high-def, they'll be Blu-Ray only.  And that SUCKS.




			
				John Crichton said:
			
		

> Cheaper players may not make much of a difference at this point if the content isn't there.  It will be interesting to see where this goes.  All it really means, for the time being, is that come May and then the 2008 holiday season, assuming things stay the same, is that BR will have more exclusive content than HD-DVD.
> 
> But, you can't take PS3's out of the equation.  They play the discs and do a fine job of doing so.




I think the cheaper players will make a difference.  The way I see it, is that Blu-Ray has benefited from Sony including it in the PS3.  There are lots of gamers out there who like movies, and some gamers who probably don't.  By making the device both a game platform and a movie platform, they're merging both worlds.  But the number of customers who are gamers is probably a small subset of the number of customers who want to watch movies at home.  I know lots of non-gamers who would never consider the PS3, but will look for a Blu-Ray or HDDVD stand alone player.

If there is a sizeable group of people out there who haven't made the jump, who are willing to eventually move to HD, but don't care about the PS3, and the PS3 is the primary engine behind Blu-Ray's dominance, then there's a huge market out there for inexpensive high-definition players, and HDDVD is better set to capitalize on it.  If they get $100 players out there, and sales start picking up, I'm betting some of those movie studios will start changing their tune.  I think Microsoft/Toshiba could still turn this around.  Announce a deal or launch a $100 player, or a $200 player discounted to $100, and try to cut Sony's throat by flooding the market with new consumers with $100 players.

I'm sure there are tonnes of people on the fence, who'll never get a PS3 player, but would love HD movies.  Even thinking back to my own wife....frankly, if I bought a PS3 tomorrow, even if I say it's just for watching movies, she'd kill me.  I've already got the 360, and she would not support adding in another game system.

But if I bought a stand alone Blu-Ray player?  I probably wouldn't have an issue.  That's one of the reasons I bought HDDVD to begin with (not the XBox unit).....it's far less expensive to get into it.  I think my player was $260, and came with 9 movies.  The Blu-Ray players were all in the $400-600 price range at the time.  Unless I bought a PS3....and I value my life 

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 5, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> It is stupid.  But that's what happens when all these companies want the revenue that DVD created.  It's the whole reason MS got in the videogame market.  There is too much potential for financial gain to stay away.




That's the rub.....whether I spend $35 on a copy of Pirates of the Caribbean in HDDVD or in Blu-Ray, Disney would still get my money for instance.  Same thing with Transformers.

I remember the Betamax war, and this is the same thing all over again.  I've read that Sony has lost almost every format war that they've fought, and they never learn their lesson.  Maybe this isn't over, or maybe those were all learning experiences, and this time they'll get it right.

Makes me question whether to buy further HDDVD disks though.  I'm really, really impressed with the ones I've already picked up.  And I know it's not like the gestapo's going to come to my door, unhook my player, and take off with it.  But if I buy a bunch of disks and the format *does* die, and eventually my player breaks, then there'll be no way to get a replacement, and the disks will end up as coasters.

Banshee


----------



## trancejeremy (Jan 6, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I remember the Betamax war, and this is the same thing all over again.  I've read that Sony has lost almost every format war that they've fought, and they never learn their lesson.  Maybe this isn't over, or maybe those were all learning experiences, and this time they'll get it right.




People seem to think that Blu Ray is Sony only, but it's not, by any means. It's pretty much the entire DVD group except Toshiba.

The DVD group was:

    * Hitachi, Ltd.
    * Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. Ltd.
    * Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
    * Pioneer Electronic Corporation
    * Royal Philips Electronics N.V.
    * Sony Corporation
    * Thomson
    * Time Warner Inc.
    * Toshiba Corporation
    * Victor Company of Japan, Ltd. (JVC)


The Blue Ray Group was

    Hitachi, LG, Panasonic, Pioneer, Philips, Samsung, Sharp, Sony, and Thomson


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 6, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Makes me question whether to buy further HDDVD disks though.



This is the thing that is really going to hurt HD-DVD; owners and potential owners.  Once they get a whiff of this news it will place doubt in their minds about pulling the trigger on a purchase or not.  And even if the format doesn't appear dead and discs are still coming out people not so much in the know will start to wonder why "that other format" has so much more selection.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I'm really, really impressed with the ones I've already picked up.  And I know it's not like the gestapo's going to come to my door, unhook my player, and take off with it.  But if I buy a bunch of disks and the format *does* die, and eventually my player breaks, then there'll be no way to get a replacement, and the disks will end up as coasters.



I like both my HD-DVDs and BRs.  The Blu-Rays look a tad better but that's probably because the PS3 plays them better than the Xbox 360 plays HD-DVDs.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Jan 6, 2008)

I have stayed out of this "format war" as I can't afford to get into it. DVDs do a good job of showing movies in great detail on my computer (which is where I watch all my DVDs). I don't have a HD tv. Probably will have to look into them the closer it comes to the mandatory conversion to digital.... Although I wonder how my having digital cable will aid in that.... The LCD tvs I've seen at Wal-Mart make my 13" tube look sharp. The picture quality is rather crappy for something that's supposed to be "digital" and "HD". They only look good when they have Shrek 3 running on them (or other high-FX movies) than they do for regular content.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 6, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I thought it was pretty neat too!  At least if they're double-dipping, they're leaving room so I can buy the individual movies later on, and add them to the set.



Yeah, it was a good plan on their part.  I'd like to see other franchises do this in the future, if possible.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Do you have a link?  The only effect I *know* that's getting me hot under the collar at the moment is that Warner owns New Line, from what I've seen posted on some boards.....meaning that when the Lord of the Rings movies eventually come out in high-def, they'll be Blu-Ray only.  And that SUCKS.



I didn't get the list here (and didn't save the link) but this is a pretty good site for HD news RE: HD-DVD & BR.

http://www.highdefdigest.com/

And yeah, it appears that New Line is coming over to BR, but they weren't part of the WB deal and made the choice separately.

Here's just a list of the WB films, not counting any of the other studios they own:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Warner_Bros._films

Which are linked here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I think the cheaper players will make a difference.  The way I see it, is that Blu-Ray has benefited from Sony including it in the PS3.  There are lots of gamers out there who like movies, and some gamers who probably don't.  By making the device both a game platform and a movie platform, they're merging both worlds.  But the number of customers who are gamers is probably a small subset of the number of customers who want to watch movies at home.  I know lots of non-gamers who would never consider the PS3, but will look for a Blu-Ray or HDDVD stand alone player.



I'll just disagree here.  The amount of crossover between movie watchers and gamers is huge.  And the cheaper players to date haven't helped HD-DVD very much.  Now that the holiday season is past it will be hard to play catch up.  



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> If there is a sizeable group of people out there who haven't made the jump, who are willing to eventually move to HD, but don't care about the PS3, and the PS3 is the primary engine behind Blu-Ray's dominance, then there's a huge market out there for inexpensive high-definition players, and HDDVD is better set to capitalize on it.  If they get $100 players out there, and sales start picking up, I'm betting some of those movie studios will start changing their tune.  I think Microsoft/Toshiba could still turn this around.  Announce a deal or launch a $100 player, or a $200 player discounted to $100, and try to cut Sony's throat by flooding the market with new consumers with $100 players.



The problem is where are they going to get their content from?  Disney, Sony, WB, not to mention many others have exclusivity deals on BR.  A cheaper player will be fine but if folks don't have much of a selection to choose from it won't matter.  It will also start to effect what stores stock as well.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I'm sure there are tonnes of people on the fence, who'll never get a PS3 player, but would love HD movies.  Even thinking back to my own wife....frankly, if I bought a PS3 tomorrow, even if I say it's just for watching movies, she'd kill me.  I've already got the 360, and she would not support adding in another game system.



This is assuming BR players don't come down in comparable price.  The industry would be silly to not be competitive and put an end to all the confusion.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> But if I bought a stand alone Blu-Ray player?  I probably wouldn't have an issue.  That's one of the reasons I bought HDDVD to begin with (not the XBox unit).....it's far less expensive to get into it.  I think my player was $260, and came with 9 movies.  The Blu-Ray players were all in the $400-600 price range at the time.  Unless I bought a PS3....and I value my life



Typically, these kinds of things are really decided during the holiday shopping season.  The way I see it, the two formats have all of 2008 to decide this thing by offering promos (like have already been popping up like crazy for both!), slashing prices and advertising.  HD-DVD has an uphill battle ahead of it and it's quite possible that without WB they are already dead in the water.  Will be interesting to see how it plays out.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 6, 2008)

Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> I have stayed out of this "format war" as I can't afford to get into it. DVDs do a good job of showing movies in great detail on my computer (which is where I watch all my DVDs). I don't have a HD tv. Probably will have to look into them the closer it comes to the mandatory conversion to digital.... Although I wonder how my having digital cable will aid in that....



I wouldn't worry about it too much.  The TVs will come down in price and even if you don't upgrade, your cable company will probably provide an adapter to make it work with your TV.



			
				Darth K'Trava said:
			
		

> The LCD tvs I've seen at Wal-Mart make my 13" tube look sharp. The picture quality is rather crappy for something that's supposed to be "digital" and "HD". They only look good when they have Shrek 3 running on them (or other high-FX movies) than they do for regular content.



Don't trust Walmart or many other stores for their "HD" displays.  Most of them have standard definition signals running to all TVs.  It's so stupid if they really want to sell them.  Go to a Best Buy/Tweeter/Circuit City/Sears with a decent setup and ask the salesperson to pop in a HD disc to demo for you.


----------



## Orius (Jan 6, 2008)

*yawn*

Wake me when the format war is over.  I don't have the money to sink into either format to risk watching it go obsolete in two years.  Besides, DVD is still good enough for me at this point.


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 6, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> But, you can't take PS3's out of the equation.  They play the discs and do a fine job of doing so.



Indeed, for months the Blu-Ray discs have been outselling the HD-DVD discs about 2-1.  The conventional wisdom has been that HD-DVD was losing.  It seems likely that this decision by Warner is the point where HD-DVD is going to be all downhill.


----------



## Bront (Jan 6, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> They really are different markets for the time being, especially with the buy-in cost of HD.  DVD saw it's first drop in sales last year, if that makes any difference.



I atribute that to more of a dip in spending overall.

The problem is, that neither of these right now drive the market.  There isn't a lot of extra features that the average joe is clamering for, and I can buy an upconverting DVD player for $50-100 that plays all my current DVDs in HD (And some apparently do a very nice job at that).  This isn't like VHS vs Beta, since neither is something entirely new, different, and useful.  I wouldn't be suprised if this lingers on for ANOTHER 2-3 years.

Or maybe we can hope someone comes out with something like Super HDDVD that makes both formats obsolite with no cost difference from current HDDVD/BR.


----------



## Bront (Jan 6, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> That's the rub.....whether I spend $35 on a copy of Pirates of the Caribbean in HDDVD or in Blu-Ray, Disney would still get my money for instance.  Same thing with Transformers.



It's a matter of production costs and inventory.

Idealy, a company would like to make exactly however many units of it's product people will buy, and no more.  Some err on the side of too little (Consols often do this), most err on the side of too many, because of the value of bulk production.

Now, with DVD, there was 1 format, and everyone was happy.  Now, we have HD, BR, and DVD.  Most people have DVD, so I need to produce those.  it will cost me money to produce BR or HD, and even more to produce both.  If I do both, I'll likely have to over produce by quite a bit to be able to price it competitively, and sit on a lot of stock, and I'm admitting that one of these production lines will not survive into the future (longevity cuts costs).

So, it's saner business sence to aim for one or the other in a smaller, niche market, for the most part.


----------



## Ron (Jan 6, 2008)

I really think this battle was already decided a few months back when Blockbuster decided to give much more support to Blu-Ray than HD-DVD. Still, I pretty much satisfied with normal DVD quality and, thus, I have no hurry to buy a new player or to replace my DVD collection.


----------



## Aus_Snow (Jan 6, 2008)

Hehe.

As predicted by me, more than a year and a half ago. 

I'm not sad, either: more storage capacity = good.


----------



## Thanee (Jan 6, 2008)

I could also not care less about that currently. DVD is fine for now. When they have ironed out a true standard, I will start thinking about upgrading. 

Bye
Thanee


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 6, 2008)

Bront said:
			
		

> I atribute that to more of a dip in spending overall.



Is that compared to holiday season 06?  I didn't see any numbers (not that there aren't any) that indicate a significant drop in people buying stuff.



			
				Bront said:
			
		

> The problem is, that neither of these right now drive the market.  There isn't a lot of extra features that the average joe is clamering for, and I can buy an upconverting DVD player for $50-100 that plays all my current DVDs in HD (And some apparently do a very nice job at that).  This isn't like VHS vs Beta, since neither is something entirely new, different, and useful.  I wouldn't be suprised if this lingers on for ANOTHER 2-3 years.



The HD formats don't need to drive the market.  The reason this is a big deal is just that: wew are closer to one HD format.

Upconverting DVD players are great and some movies/shows look really good with them.  However, when you compare a movie upconverted on a true HDTV with a decent sized screen to a BR/HD-DVD, the upgrade is significant and obvious.  Upconverting worked for me until I was able to acquire the equipment needed to watch real HD.  And down the line folks will be able to get the HD formats at much better prices.  There will be no reason to not get the new formats.



			
				Bront said:
			
		

> Or maybe we can hope someone comes out with something like Super HDDVD that makes both formats obsolite with no cost difference from current HDDVD/BR.



With this news, there most likely won't be much of a need if BR wins.


----------



## HeavenShallBurn (Jan 6, 2008)

I don't care but until they settle down on a single industry standard format I'll just stick with what I've got and use DVD or pirated if those aren't available.


----------



## Darth K'Trava (Jan 6, 2008)

Orius said:
			
		

> *yawn*
> 
> Wake me when the format war is over.  I don't have the money to sink into either format to risk watching it go obsolete in two years.  Besides, DVD is still good enough for me at this point.




I agree with you. Get you a damn good computer monitor and run DVDs thru your computer. The quality is awesome! Granted I had better resolution on my old 17" CRT monitor than I do on my 17" widescreen LCD monitor....


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 7, 2008)

Aus_Snow said:
			
		

> Hehe.
> 
> As predicted by me, more than a year and a half ago.
> 
> I'm not sad, either: more storage capacity = good.




To be fair, currently they're equal, as per the 3 layer HDDVD disks....which actually get one more gig than Blu-Ray.  Blu-Ray is improving though....but of course, HDDVD would then seek to improve.

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-ent...to-51gb-with-triple-layer-goodness-228801.php

HDDVD is internet enabled, whereas Blu-Ray isn't.  From what I've read, an upcoming new BD release was going to enable internet capability....but the players which allow it are not compatible with the existing Blu-Ray disks..

I definitely think Blu-Ray is benefiting from better marketing....it's not a case closed as to which technology is better, though, from what I'm seeing.

It may be redundant in the end, but oh well...

Banshee


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 7, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> To be fair, currently they're equal, as per the 3 layer HDDVD disks....which actually get one more gig than Blu-Ray.  Blu-Ray is improving though....but of course, HDDVD would then seek to improve.
> 
> http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-ent...to-51gb-with-triple-layer-goodness-228801.php




Given that there are no shipping or AFAIK even announced movies on triple layer disks. It's purely theoretical. Blu-Ray can pull off the same trick and at 25gb vs 17gb per layer, they'll continue to hold a significant edge in capacity. They're due to come out with at least 4 layer disks FWIW.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> HDDVD is internet enabled, whereas Blu-Ray isn't.  From what I've read, an upcoming new BD release was going to enable internet capability....but the players which allow it are not compatible with the existing Blu-Ray disks..




I can see no reason why an internet connected Blu-Ray player should be incompatible with older blu-ray disks. Perhaps you meant the "existing players"?

I'm not really seeing the point of an "internet" connected disk movie player to be perfectly honest. Granted it does add some ability to "update" the disks and I suppose potentially make for some sort of downloadable movie source. But it seems mostly like a feature in search of a use. I mean if they've got the content produced, why can't they just stick it on an additional disk? It's not like multi-disk movies and/or additional content disks are rare, unknown or horribly more expensive. 

It also opens the specter of what happens when the service or servers that provide this content get shut down. A number of people have already gotten burned by various download services, like Wal-mart's recently shuttered one, that left what people had payed for either crippled or even unavailable.

While yes most of the older Blu-Ray players won't be able to support internet connectivity (they lack an ethernet port), by factors of ten, the most common Blu-Ray player is the PS3 which has all the necessary hardware (and then some like wireless). So I'm not seeing this as being a major liability, since all PS3s should need is a software update (they already support internet access after all).

Has anyone come out with some compelling additional content that does take advantage of it? I know that "300" is supposed to take advantage of this feature, but it seems to largely consist of being able to create your own "cuts" of the movie.

http://krisabel.ctv.ca/blog/_archives/2007/7/31/3131033.html


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 7, 2008)

Rackhir said:
			
		

> Has anyone come out with some compelling additional content that does take advantage of it? I know that "300" is supposed to take advantage of this feature, but it seems to largely consist of being able to create your own "cuts" of the movie.
> 
> http://krisabel.ctv.ca/blog/_archives/2007/7/31/3131033.html




My understanding is that they've got content using those features with "300", Bourne Ultimatum, and Blood Diamond so far.

My player isn't hooked up to the net, as I don't have a router near my TV, so I haven't experienced this content, though I do have all three of the movies.

As to its utility.....well.....everyone can find uses, or lack of use in particular features.  Personally, I question how useful a 200 GB Blu-Ray disk is.  Movies don't require *that* much space, and as a means of backing up a system it's sub-optimal.  Would you really *want* to put 200 gig of content on a disk that can be wrecked by a simple scratch or by being slightly bent or something, when trying to get it out of a case?

Personally, I'd rather a good portal HD unit.  I've got DVD-R's that I barely use as is.  Sure, they're cheap, but storing them's a pain, and I find my $100 portable hard drive that I can connect via USB to be way more useful.

I'm not blasting either technology.  I wish they would just merge the two or something.  The whole thing is largely a "who's got the biggest d#$%" contest by a bunch of nerds   I think both technologies are good....frankly, there's no picture difference that I can see, as I've got one player, and have seen the other elsewhere.  There was really no need to have a format war in the first place, if Sony had been willing to share its toys, instead of trying to develop control over their standard of choice.  The unfortunate thing is that this is all largely in the interests of the companies, but not the customers.  At this point, if one technology wins, you're either going to have millions of people with HDDVD players who are left out in the cold, or millions of people with Blu-Ray players.  Which isn't good for customers in any case.

Hopefully development/sales of dual-format players continues, prices come down, etc. and in another year, instead of getting a Blu-Ray player, I get a dual-format one, and then I'll be covered, whoever wins.

It's a hard choice....stay out of the next gen completely, and remain with standard DVD?  Well, if you do, whenever a clear standard is determined, you've got *that* many more standard DVDs to replace.  Or buy in, and risk choosing the wrong side.

It'll be interesting to see what will happen though.  If Blu-Ray does win, what happens to XBox?  Does Sony turn around and deny Microsoft the right to use a Blu-Ray drive in the XBox 3?  That could be grounds for an anti-trust lawsuit right there.

Banshee


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 7, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Personally, I'd rather a good portal HD unit.  I've got DVD-R's that I barely use as is.  Sure, they're cheap, but storing them's a pain, and I find my $100 portable hard drive that I can connect via USB to be way more useful.




Yeah, HD are definitely better overall and with Terabyte drives continually dropping in price some sort of media server IS definitely going to be the ultimate end point of this sort of product. But that isn't really going to happen until Hollywood pulls it's head out of its... 

There's also something to be said for having a backup for stuff like this in disk form though. HD will and will always crash eventually.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> There was really no need to have a format war in the first place, if Sony had been willing to share its toys, instead of trying to develop control over their standard of choice.




There's enough blame to go around on all sides for this format war. Toshiba made a ton of money off of their DVD patents and wanted to continue that. While Sony wanted in on the gravy train as well. It wasn't a simple matter of intransigence on just one side or the other.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> It'll be interesting to see what will happen though.  If Blu-Ray does win, what happens to XBox?  Does Sony turn around and deny Microsoft the right to use a Blu-Ray drive in the XBox 3?  That could be grounds for an anti-trust lawsuit right there.




From what I understand of things. Blu-Ray is no more completely controlled by Sony than DVD was by Toshiba/Philips. It's controlled and licensed by a consortium, like with DVDs and CDs. Sony does indeed have the major patents on the technology, but this doesn't mean that they have control over the end products. So AFAIK, there's no reason why MS couldn't buy a "raw" blu-ray drive from one of the chinese hardware manufacturers for use with an X-Box, just like they do now with DVD and HD-DVD drive hardware. 

I'm sure Sony would love to screw over MS in the way you suggest. However, I've long been of the opinion that Sony views the battle over the disk format and the patent revenues as more important than the fight over the consoles. After all, the drives and disks are both used far more widely than any console ever could be and a cut of that revenue stream is going to be immensely lucrative. That's why they included it in the PS3, despite the extra expense it added to the PS3. They wanted to help ensure that Blu-Ray would win the format war, as it appears to have done. So I doubt they'd jeopardize that by such a raw abuse of power, assuming they even could.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 7, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> From what I've read, an upcoming new BD release was going to enable internet capability....but the players which allow it are not compatible with the existing Blu-Ray disks..




My main thing with the HDWar is that I'm not sure how long either format will be around for, given near constant advances in both formats. Sure it's all hypothetical/ developmental stuff, but a lot of it is incompatible with the current players.

I'm in no rush to upgrade either way. (Amazon had a Bourne Trilogy HD-DVD for free with the 360 player and it made me consider it, but eh I don't really watch that many DVD's.)



> I definitely think Blu-Ray is benefiting from better marketing....it's not a case closed as to which technology is better, though, from what I'm seeing.




I'm a bit cynical, so take it with a grain of salt, but I think both companies are simply paying off studios to go their way and it has nothing to do with the companies giving any thought to the actual format or it's advantages.

Seriously, why go exclusively BluRay? Do the HD-DVD sales not pay for themselves? Going exclusive removes sales, it can't possibly add any. Mind you, it's such a small market that perhaps the HD-DVD production runs don't pay for themselves, but consolidating into one format won't be the thing to expand the market, IMO. The HD-Wars can end, but that doesn't mean suddenly everyone will buy.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 7, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> As to its utility.....well.....everyone can find uses, or lack of use in particular features.  Personally, I question how useful a 200 GB Blu-Ray disk is.  Movies don't require *that* much space, and as a means of backing up a system it's sub-optimal.



You'd be surprised at how much space uncompressed video and audio can take up when you want it to look HD awesome.  



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I'm not blasting either technology.  I wish they would just merge the two or something.  The whole thing is largely a "who's got the biggest d#$%" contest by a bunch of nerds   I think both technologies are good....frankly, there's no picture difference that I can see, as I've got one player, and have seen the other elsewhere.



Both techs are cool with me and I own the ability to enjoy both.  However, I've always been in favor of the better tech winning out, which in this case would be Blu-Ray.  



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> There was really no need to have a format war in the first place, if Sony had been willing to share its toys, instead of trying to develop control over their standard of choice.  The unfortunate thing is that this is all largely in the interests of the companies, but not the customers.  At this point, if one technology wins, you're either going to have millions of people with HDDVD players who are left out in the cold, or millions of people with Blu-Ray players.  Which isn't good for customers in any case.



No need to blame Sony.  The "format war" isn't their fault.  It's every company with an interests fault, if you want to call it that.  Can't blame a company for trying to make money.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> It'll be interesting to see what will happen though.  If Blu-Ray does win, what happens to XBox?  Does Sony turn around and deny Microsoft the right to use a Blu-Ray drive in the XBox 3?  That could be grounds for an anti-trust lawsuit right there



No, the BR folks will gladly take MS's money.  It's that simple.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 7, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> It'll be interesting to see what will happen though.  If Blu-Ray does win, what happens to XBox?  Does Sony turn around and deny Microsoft the right to use a Blu-Ray drive in the XBox 3?  That could be grounds for an anti-trust lawsuit right there.
> 
> Banshee




The studio's have already been doing digital downloads for the 360, including those publishing on Bluray, so not a huge hurdle. The real hurdle is the fact you're usually renting the properties rather than owning.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 7, 2008)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> I'm a bit cynical, so take it with a grain of salt, but I think both companies are simply paying off studios to go their way and it has nothing to do with the companies giving any thought to the actual format or it's advantages.



It's possible, even though WB is denying it.



			
				Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> Seriously, why go exclusively BluRay? Do the HD-DVD sales not pay for themselves? Going exclusive removes sales, it can't possibly add any. Mind you, it's such a small market that perhaps the HD-DVD production runs don't pay for themselves, but consolidating into one format won't be the thing to expand the market, IMO. The HD-Wars can end, but that doesn't mean suddenly everyone will buy.



I can see the advantage of wanting a unified format.  If backing one side means the end of the format war and the upside is that it becomes the next DVD, I'd do it.  WB swings a pretty big club in this fight.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 7, 2008)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> The HD-Wars can end, but that doesn't mean suddenly everyone will buy.



The idea is that _more_ people will buy when there's a single format. Sounds reasonable to me.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 7, 2008)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> My main thing with the HDWar is that I'm not sure how long either format will be around for, given near constant advances in both formats. Sure it's all hypothetical/ developmental stuff, but a lot of it is incompatible with the current players.
> 
> I'm in no rush to upgrade either way. (Amazon had a Bourne Trilogy HD-DVD for free with the 360 player and it made me consider it, but eh I don't really watch that many DVD's.)
> 
> ...




I agree.....all Disney, Warner etc. have done by becoming exclusive is ensure that I stop paying for their products, as a consumer who possibly chose the wrong side.

It doesn't mean I'm going to run out and buy the other technology, because as others have said (and as I've said) there's no guarantee that Blu-Ray will win either.  Maybe Blu-Ray beats HDDVD, and then Blu-Ray gets crushed by something else in another year.

There are different ways to look at it.  Are the majority of people refraining from buying *because* there's a format war?  Because the both new technologies are expensive?  I don't know.  I suspect it's a little of both A and B.  Personally, I'd intended to stay out of it until there was a clear winner, and only got in when there were deals offered for the XBox player, since I already have the 360.  But at the store I got sold into a stand alone player that was a little more expensive.  But I hadn't *intended* to buy until this war was resolved.  Oh well, guess I was sucked in by all the demos I was seeing at the stores.  They do look nice though   I did convince 3 other people to buy HDDVD players, once they saw mine though....mainly with Boxing Day sales etc.

You're probably right about the companies paying studios to get on side.  I'd prefer there were no exclusives, and you just had the ability to buy content for whichever of the two you want.

As to XBox, and whether it'll be hurt, it's interesting to see some of the announcements coming out regarding the XBox getting access to digital movie content from Disney and MGM, and streaming IPTV in Britain (with PVR type features, I think).  Maybe Microsoft is going to push against Sony through these other avenues?  Of course, these are big deals, so I doubt any of them are in response to Friday's announcement.

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 7, 2008)

Mallus said:
			
		

> The idea is that _more_ people will buy when there's a single format. Sounds reasonable to me.




*If* prices are reasonable....which they're not, currently....though HDDVD is a little better priced.  They're both still very expensive for the majority of people.

Maybe by end of 2008 though?

Banshee


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 7, 2008)

Mallus said:
			
		

> The idea is that _more_ people will buy when there's a single format. Sounds reasonable to me.




Definetly, but even if sales increase 400% over the next year, that's what, 10% of the market? Until the HD tv's and such are out there, and people want to pay the money for the stuff, it's gonna be second fiddle.

My boss went in to buy DVD's, and accidentelly bought two regular, 1 HD-DVD and 1 Bluray. He had no clue what they were, and I don't think either studio is doing a great job of informing the uninformed about the actual advantages. A single format will help, but screaming "it looks better! No, Really!" doesn't really get the message out there to the normal folks.

So, lets say in 5 years Bluray has 50% of the market for new sales. In that 5 years, there will be so many advances in storage that the format will be outdated. Once a cable company or internet company delivers an easy interface for "turn on your TV, buy a movie, own it forever!" and they can deliver it for less than Bluray...


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 7, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> *If* prices are reasonable....which they're not, currently....though HDDVD is a little better priced.  They're both still very expensive for the majority of people.
> 
> Maybe by end of 2008 though?



By the end 0f '08, all the HD equipment will cost much less.  And the discs will come down in price over time, too.  DVDs were about the same prices as BR/HD-DVDs are now in the first couple years.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 7, 2008)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> The studio's have already been doing digital downloads for the 360, including those publishing on Bluray, so not a huge hurdle. The real hurdle is the fact you're usually renting the properties rather than owning.




I've been checking this out, since the last update, and it's neat.  I haven't tried downloading one yet, because I find the selection very limited.  There's not really anything I feel like downloading at the moment.  I don't have a Media Center PC....I'm just using Zune to stream songs and pictures, though the Zune device isn't for sale in Canada yet.

I suspect that in time they'll change to allow people the option to download and keep content.  However, that will be limited by the 360's hard drive.  It would be nice if there was an easy way to buy the bigger hard drive, and then transfer your content (saved games, etc.) over, but as I understand it, it's not easy to do.

I know Media Center PCs have a much greater selection of media you can get through your XBox, but the 360 hadn't been launched when I bought my OS for my PC, and I didn't see a use for Media Center at the time.  And I'm not sure about buying a new XP ME disc because I just hate setting up the OS all over again.

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 7, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> By the end 0f '08, all the HD equipment will cost much less.  And the discs will come down in price over time, too.  DVDs were about the same prices as BR/HD-DVDs are now in the first couple years.




I'm noticing this on some discs already.  I'm thinking of picking up Batman Begins and the Last Samurai on HDDVD, as they're both $20 at Future Shop, which is pretty good.  I have noticed the prices creeping up though, as they're doing more and more dual format discs, which they charge more for.

Banshee


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 7, 2008)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> Definetly, but even if sales increase 400% over the next year, that's what, 10% of the market? Until the HD tv's and such are out there, and people want to pay the money for the stuff, it's gonna be second fiddle.



I expect the US standard changing to HD in Feb 2009 will push awareness and the public in general to start getting new equipment.  Not everyone, of course.  But this will be the chance for many people to learn and upgrade.  As it stands now, HD stuff is flying off the shelves.  Not at DVD rates, but HD isn't for everyone just yet.  It needs to come down in price.



			
				Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> So, lets say in 5 years Bluray has 50% of the market for new sales. In that 5 years, there will be so many advances in storage that the format will be outdated. Once a cable company or internet company delivers an easy interface for "turn on your TV, buy a movie, own it forever!" and they can deliver it for less than Bluray...



That holds true for any new media.  So far, it hasn't happened and there are just as many problems with that kind of imagitech (rights, distribution fees, storage, playback, etc) than there is with discs, which have always sold well.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 7, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I suspect that in time they'll change to allow people the option to download and keep content.  However, that will be limited by the 360's hard drive.  It would be nice if there was an easy way to buy the bigger hard drive, and then transfer your content (saved games, etc.) over, but as I understand it, it's not easy to do.




Yeah, chalk it up to something else MS really needs to alter. They need a USB connected Hard Drive. (Unless of course you can already use a Mybook or whatever with the 360, then screw me, I'm just out of the loop. 

As for "keep forever", I think it's just a matter of studio's not wanting it to impact "real" DVD sales, but that is just another short sighted side effect of the studios.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 7, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I'm noticing this on some discs already.  I'm thinking of picking up Batman Begins and the Last Samurai on HDDVD, as they're both $20 at Future Shop, which is pretty good.  I have noticed the prices creeping up though, as they're doing more and more dual format discs, which they charge more for.
> 
> Banshee



 Yup, the same stuff that was $35 a year ago is now available for $15-20.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 7, 2008)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> Once a cable company or internet company delivers an easy interface for "turn on your TV, buy a movie, own it forever!" and they can deliver it for less than Bluray...




The only thing I am leery about with respect to downloadable content is the bandwidth.  I shudder to think of how much bandwidth will get used downloading movies.  Many providers I know in Canada throttle bandwidth usage, so you get X amount of downloading for your monthly service fee.  Go over it, and  you pay extra.  How quickly will people hit those limits if they're downloading high-def movies?  And how long will downloading movies take?  Try to download a 30 gig file......especially if you have a wireless network, it's not quick.

The XBox wireless adapter, for instance, does B+G or A.  But B+G channels are slower.  A's really quick, but routers that broadcast over that channel are hard to find in North America, easier to find in Europe.  And now in North America, I'm starting to see the N channel routers, which are also fast.....but the XBox wireless adapter isn't compatible with it (I have no idea if the PS3 is compatible with it either).

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 7, 2008)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> Yeah, chalk it up to something else MS really needs to alter. They need a USB connected Hard Drive. (Unless of course you can already use a Mybook or whatever with the 360, then screw me, I'm just out of the loop.
> 
> As for "keep forever", I think it's just a matter of studio's not wanting it to impact "real" DVD sales, but that is just another short sighted side effect of the studios.




I'm thinking that whether they make $30 on selling a DVD, or on allowing someone to download and keep a file, it's still $30.  From their perspective, as long as the anti-piracy technology is strong enough, it shouldn't matter whether it's a disc or a download.

I *think* that the 360 *can* support a USB connected hard drive....but *only* for viewing movies, pics, and music that you've loaded onto the hard drive in advance from your PC.  You can't use it for saved games, content downloaded from Marketplace etc.  Keep in mind, I *think* this is the case, but I'm not 100% sure.

Banshee


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 7, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> I expect the US standard changing to HD in Feb 2009 will push awareness and the public in general to start getting new equipment.  Not everyone, of course.  But this will be the chance for many people to learn and upgrade.  As it stands now, HD stuff is flying off the shelves.  Not at DVD rates, but HD isn't for everyone just yet.  It needs to come down in price.



I assume you mean "digital" not HD... 
I've already had to explain the digital transition to a few of my fellow employee's. (I'm 34, everyone else in my shop is over 50) They all see the cable company saying not to worry, and they've all got cable. Most of the folks that will really be affected by the digital transition will be too poor to buy a new HD-TV to replace the old rabbit ears.



> That holds true for any new media.  So far, it hasn't happened and there are just as many problems with that kind of imagitech (rights, distribution fees, storage, playback, etc) than there is with discs, which have always sold well.




Most of the problems with such a system are more problems for the distributors rather than the consumer. Right now people are used to Pay Per View and I think a shift to "pay once and watch forever" is certainly easy enough for them to get behind. Including DVR/ TiVo and such, the market seems to accept digital delivery, but the producers don't.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 7, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I'm thinking that whether they make $30 on selling a DVD, or on allowing someone to download and keep a file, it's still $30.  From their perspective, as long as the anti-piracy technology is strong enough, it shouldn't matter whether it's a disc or a download.



Well, they don't make $30 either way, so that's what I mean. There's really no accurate way to predict Digital Delivery and whether it'd be more or less profitable.



> I *think* that the 360 *can* support a USB connected hard drive....but *only* for viewing movies, pics, and music that you've loaded onto the hard drive in advance from your PC.  You can't use it for saved games, content downloaded from Marketplace etc.  Keep in mind, I *think* this is the case, but I'm not 100% sure.
> 
> Banshee




Neither am I, it's certainly not advertised either way, so that's certainly a failure if so.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 7, 2008)

Awesome news about WB an Blu-Ray. Anything that moves toward a clear(er) winner is good for consumers.

And no, WB won't be changing back. Making an announcement like that and being clear about sales in said announcement shows they've made their decision. It won't be changing.

Great news, in any case.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 7, 2008)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> Neither am I, it's certainly not advertised either way, so that's certainly a failure if so.




I'll ask a coworker tomorrow....he's one of the guys who mods stuff, and is always on the bleeding edge of what he can get his system to do.  If it's possible, I'm sure he'll know.

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 7, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> Awesome news about WB an Blu-Ray. Anything that moves toward a clear(er) winner is good for consumers.
> 
> And no, WB won't be changing back. Making an announcement like that and being clear about sales in said announcement shows they've made their decision. It won't be changing.
> 
> Great news, in any case.




Guess we'll see.  If HDDVD players continue increasing, it would be silly not to entertain changing.  At least through the holiday season, they were kicking the butts of Blu-Ray.  If HDDVD player sales tank as a result of this announcement, then yeah, it ends up looking like a great idea.

Banshee


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 8, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Guess we'll see.  If HDDVD players continue increasing, it would be silly not to entertain changing.  At least through the holiday season, they were kicking the butts of Blu-Ray.  If HDDVD player sales tank as a result of this announcement, then yeah, it ends up looking like a great idea.



 I'm not trying to be snarky or mean here.  Sorry if it comes off that way...

I think you are missing the point of the exclusivity deal WB signed.  They can't decide to all of a sudden change their minds.  It's a contract and why this is such a big deal to those following this and anyone interested in HD content.  They are locked in to producing only BR after May 2008.  And what they will put out for HD-DVD until that point is still up in the air.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 8, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> I think you are missing the point of the exclusivity deal WB signed.




From the sound of the press release from the HD-DVD guys, they may have broke some contracts there.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Jan 8, 2008)

> I *think* that the 360 *can* support a USB connected hard drive....but *only* for viewing movies, pics, and music that you've loaded onto the hard drive in advance from your PC. You can't use it for saved games, content downloaded from Marketplace etc. Keep in mind, I *think* this is the case, but I'm not 100% sure.




Correct. Fat 32 drives are supported for this purpose now - including USB flash drives.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 8, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> I'm not trying to be snarky or mean here.  Sorry if it comes off that way...
> 
> I think you are missing the point of the exclusivity deal WB signed.  They can't decide to all of a sudden change their minds.  It's a contract and why this is such a big deal to those following this and anyone interested in HD content.  They are locked in to producing only BR after May 2008.  And what they will put out for HD-DVD until that point is still up in the air.




Maybe what I'm missing is that I haven't seen anything about a contract.  I know they've said they've decided to only produce Blu-Ray, but as far as I know, it's only theory that they've actually signed a contract.  Toshiba has come forward and indicated that Warner seems to be in breech of contracts they've signed regarding HDDVD....that's the only contract talk I've heard.

And I know you're not being snarky.  This isn't an AV forum, so I haven't seen much "nyah nyah nyah" type behaviour here.  I'd like to think we're all more mature than that, but many of the AV forums, it's a different matter.  I kind of want to ask some of these guys if they know what a female looks like .

In any case, I'll go take another look.  Maybe I missed something when I was reading the press release.

Banshee


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 8, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Maybe what I'm missing is that I haven't seen anything about a contract.  I know they've said they've decided to only produce Blu-Ray, but as far as I know, it's only theory that they've actually signed a contract.  Toshiba has come forward and indicated that Warner seems to be in breech of contracts they've signed regarding HDDVD....that's the only contract talk I've heard.



Yeah, I imagine there is going to be alot of that flying around and some damage control by both sides.  That typically happens when it's big companies butting heads like this.

I'm still waiting to find out if WB is lying and they actually were paid off to support BR.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> And I know you're not being snarky.  This isn't an AV forum, so I haven't seen much "nyah nyah nyah" type behaviour here.  I'd like to think we're all more mature than that, but many of the AV forums, it's a different matter.  I kind of want to ask some of these guys if they know what a female looks like .



It's so hard to convey non-snark sometimes, so I just wanted to be sure.    I've quite enjoyed the conversations here lately and I want to keep them that way.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 8, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Yeah, I imagine there is going to be alot of that flying around and some damage control by both sides.  That typically happens when it's big companies butting heads like this.
> 
> I'm still waiting to find out if WB is lying and they actually were paid off to support BR.
> 
> It's so hard to convey non-snark sometimes, so I just wanted to be sure.    I've quite enjoyed the conversations here lately and I want to keep them that way.




Nah, this board is great, though I'm trying to stay out of the 4E forum now 

At work though, I'm surrounded by a bunch of Sony fans in my area, so I've been taking a bruising the last several days   I remember thinking on Friday night, after hearing of the announcement, that maybe I could call in sick on Monday .

I heard on one of the forums though, that Warner stocks actually went down after the announcement....though whether that has anything to do with it, who really knows?  HD vs. Blu is really just a tiny portion of their revenues.

Banshee


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 8, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Guess we'll see.  If HDDVD players continue increasing, it would be silly not to entertain changing.  At least through the holiday season, they were kicking the butts of Blu-Ray.  If HDDVD player sales tank as a result of this announcement, then yeah, it ends up looking like a great idea.



Really? HD-DVD players vs. Blu-Ray players + PS3s? I do find that unlikely.

If it _is_ true, then too bad the HDDVD player consumers aren't appropriately stepping up and actually, you know, buying HDDVDs. Whoops on their part.

(As for internet connectivity - as noted, the most popular BD player, the PS3, supports internet connectivity and has already used it for firmware upgrades.)


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 8, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> Really? HD-DVD players vs. Blu-Ray players + PS3s? I do find that unlikely.
> 
> If it _is_ true, then too bad the HDDVD player consumers aren't appropriately stepping up and actually, you know, buying HDDVDs. Whoops on their part.
> 
> (As for internet connectivity - as noted, the most popular BD player, the PS3, supports internet connectivity and has already used it for firmware upgrades.)




HD-DVD stand alone players (or even including the 360 add on) do in fact significantly outsell the stand alone Blu-Ray players. However, if you toss the PS3 into the equation they are getting crushed in numbers. As the PS3 is as you said, by far the most popular Blu-Ray player. Also according to some reports I've seen even in the stand alone players Blu-Ray players have been doing much better of late, even when you take into account all the $100-$200 HD-DVD player blow out sales between black friday and christmas.

The Blu-Ray movies are according to all the figures I've seen outselling the HD-DVD movies about 2 to 1 in both total volume and where the same movie is available in both formats.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 9, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> Really? HD-DVD players vs. Blu-Ray players + PS3s? I do find that unlikely.
> 
> If it _is_ true, then too bad the HDDVD player consumers aren't appropriately stepping up and actually, you know, buying HDDVDs. Whoops on their part.
> 
> (As for internet connectivity - as noted, the most popular BD player, the PS3, supports internet connectivity and has already used it for firmware upgrades.)




I believe the equation they were referring to was discounting the XBox and PS3 players, and just comparing dedicated players.  In that case, the HDDVD players are more common.  And the rate of growth of purchasing them is higher as well.  But that still leaves a lot of PS3 Blu-Ray players.

As to buying disks, as I understand it, HDDVD purchases are higher, they're also claiming.  The "attach rates" are greater on HDDVD.  I've had mine just over a month, and I've purchased 7 movies so far.  I was planning on purchasing more, but I think I'm kind of holding right now.  At least for this week.

Banshee


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 9, 2008)

Rackhir said:
			
		

> HD-DVD stand alone players (or even including the 360 add on) do in fact significantly outsell the stand alone Blu-Ray players.



Oh... well, I do certainly believe that. Of course, that a completely irrelevant comparison, that's not only misleading it's also disingenuous.



> The Blu-Ray movies are according to all the figures I've seen outselling the HD-DVD movies about 2 to 1 in both total volume and where the same movie is available in both formats.



Yes - I've seen that reported on multiple occasions, from multiple sources.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> As to buying disks, as I understand it, HDDVD purchases are higher, they're also claiming.



Doesn't sound like it.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 9, 2008)

As an aside, I just saw a terrific film on Blu-ray, Paul Verhooven's first Dutch-language film in many years, Black Book. It's a ridiculously entertaining big-budget melodrama about one Jewish woman's involvement with the Dutch resistance during the last days of WWII. 

So unless you simply can't forgive Verhooven for his crimes against Heinlein, check it out.


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 9, 2008)

Mallus said:
			
		

> As an aside, I just saw a terrific film on Blu-ray, Paul Verhooven's first Dutch-language film in many years, Black Book. It's a ridiculously entertaining big-budget melodrama about one Jewish woman's involvement with the Dutch resistance during the last days of WWII.
> 
> So unless you simply can't forgive Verhooven for his crimes against Heinlein, check it out.




Blade Runner on Blu-Ray (and presumably HD-DVD) looks amazing and is a great "Demo" title to show off what the high-def formats can do.


----------



## Mallus (Jan 9, 2008)

Rackhir said:
			
		

> Blade Runner on Blu-Ray (and presumably HD-DVD) looks amazing and is a great "Demo" title to show off what the high-def formats can do.



You own this, yes? It is possible you could bring it over to my place of residence? (Sorry, I've got part of my brain working on the accent/diction I'm going to use for my character in shil's new campaign).


----------



## Darkwolf71 (Jan 9, 2008)

Haha, If I was anywhere near Philly, I'd bring mine over. Just for the excuse to watch it again.

Side note: I just got the Resident Evil trilogy on BD and RE: Extinction has the first use of PiP features (first I have seen, anyway). Very nice.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 9, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> Oh... well, I do certainly believe that. Of course, that a completely irrelevant comparison, that's not only misleading it's also disingenuous.
> 
> 
> Yes - I've seen that reported on multiple occasions, from multiple sources.
> ...




Not if you listen to Sony fans   I think the reference I read was that Blu-Ray has an attach rate of 0.6, whereas HDDVD is 3, or something like that.  But I don't know if the numbers are correct.  Maybe Blu-Ray is winning because they've got more players out there, but HDDVD generates more sales *per* owner.

Interestingly, Paramount has apparently denied rumours that it's planning on switching sides (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aZzib5lwheBc).  That would lead to the suspicion that Dreamworks remains with HDDVD as well.  If Universal also stays, then the war ain't over.

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 9, 2008)

Mallus said:
			
		

> You own this, yes? It is possible you could bring it over to my place of residence? (Sorry, I've got part of my brain working on the accent/diction I'm going to use for my character in shil's new campaign).




I have a "legit" question about that....I don't care about HDDVD or Blu-Ray for these purposes.  When getting older movies into high-def format, does the high-def actually improve the picture?  I've got DVD copies of Excalibur and Blade Runner.....but both movies are really grainy, with poor image quality.  Would getting an HDDVD (or Blu-Ray) version of these movies really make a difference?  Are they actually remastered?  Or am I just getting more pixels of a poor image?

Banshee


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 9, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Maybe Blu-Ray is winning because they've got more players out there




Yes, this is exactly the point. Because of the PS3s Blu-Ray has a massive edge in players and irregardless of what the "attach" rate is, the volume of sales is much higher (on average 2 to 1) vs HD-DVD.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> but HDDVD generates more sales *per* owner.




While HD-DVDs are somewhat less expensive to make than Blu-Ray disks, the costs of mastering or creating the source materials are equal. In fact the same "master" is generally used for creating both the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray versions, when you have the same movie released in both formats. So it doesn't really matter how many disks an individual buys, when you are selling half the total numbers and thus spreading your fixed costs over half the number of disks. These attach rate figures are basically an attempt by the HD-DVD camp to slice up the data in a way that makes their situation look better.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I have a "legit" question about that....I don't care about HDDVD or Blu-Ray for these purposes.  When getting older movies into high-def format, does the high-def actually improve the picture?  I've got DVD copies of Excalibur and Blade Runner.....but both movies are really grainy, with poor image quality.  Would getting an HDDVD (or Blu-Ray) version of these movies really make a difference?  Are they actually remastered?  Or am I just getting more pixels of a poor image?




It's like anything else, it depends on the effort put into it. The original Blu-Ray release of the "Fifth Element" was only barely better than the previous DVD release. It was so bad that they actually gave free replacement disks to people, when they released a newer version where they remastered it properly. Just google blu-ray and fifth element picture quality to get some comparison shots. It's night and day.

I'm assuming you have the older Blade Runner DVD release? From what I can tell from Amazon reviews, the 1997 DVD release had very poor picture quality, but I did not own that so I can't comment on it directly. 

For the current release, it was extensively remastered, cleaned up and prepared with the high def formats in mind (It came out just before christmas, IIRC) and offers basically every cut of the movie that's ever been released. Along with all the extras ever created. This release looks absolutely pristine on my setup. They even went back and reshot some sequences (such as the Snake Lady running through the glass panes) where the special effects weren't up to snuff, even back in 1982. I haven't sat through the entire movie yet, but what I did see was stunning. It seems unlikely that the picture quality would be as much worse on the DVD version of this release as what you are describing, but I can't rule it out. 



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Interestingly, Paramount has apparently denied rumours that it's planning on switching sides (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aZzib5lwheBc).  That would lead to the suspicion that Dreamworks remains with HDDVD as well.  If Universal also stays, then the war ain't over.
> 
> Banshee




Eh. So it goes. I think everyone would be better off the sooner the format war ends.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 9, 2008)

Rackhir said:
			
		

> Eh. So it goes. I think everyone would be better off the sooner the format war ends.




It would be nice if they could just merge the two, and be done with it.

Not sure if that's possible without screwing everyone who's already bought a player.

Both formats may end up getting killed by downloadable content anyways.  Maybe Microsoft keeps HDDVD for mass storage on computers, and then kills Blu-Ray by putting its efforts into pushing downloadable high-def content....which is kind of what they're pushing with things liek the XBox 360 being upgraded to serve as a set-top box in Britain, and signing deals for MGM and Disney to start selling/renting high-def content through the Live Marketplace.  And Apple's getting into the game too, by starting to provide movies through the iTunes store.

Maybe that's part of the "plan".  Making Sony kill itself fighting the HDDVD vs. Blu-Ray war, and then turn around and hit them with a heavy push on downloadable content.  Microsoft is far more capable of absorbing losses than Sony can...

Banshee


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 9, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Interestingly, Paramount has apparently denied rumours that it's planning on switching sides (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601080&sid=aZzib5lwheBc).  That would lead to the suspicion that Dreamworks remains with HDDVD as well.  If Universal also stays, then the war ain't over.



That's been their stance for a while.  WB was firmly in the middle for a while until the shocking news last Friday about signing the exclusivity deal to produce BR only.  So, unless they have something in place that holds them to HD-DVD for X amount of time it really only a matter of time.  If only two major studios are producing for a format, that's not enough to keep it alive.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 9, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> It would be nice if they could just merge the two, and be done with it.
> 
> Not sure if that's possible without screwing everyone who's already bought a player.
> 
> ...



 I can't get behind DL content killing discs anytime soon.  There is still a huge portion of the population not willing to spend money on something they don't own or can't hold in their hand.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 9, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Both formats may end up getting killed by downloadable content anyways.  Maybe Microsoft keeps HDDVD for mass storage on computers, and then kills Blu-Ray by putting its efforts into pushing downloadable high-def content....




It's odd, I always figured the problem would be more of "I want content I can keep" being the primary reason for hard copies. In a discussion on another forum, folks were in favor of a winner (either way), simply so they could only have one player, et cetera.

Most of them said they just Netflix anyway, and rarely buy even DVD's now. So, I wonder if the digital stuff is more about selection, rather than about "keeping" the movie.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 9, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> I can't get behind DL content killing discs anytime soon.  There is still a huge portion of the population not willing to spend money on something they don't own or can't hold in their hand.



I agree. This won't be happening for quite some time.

Besides - I can zip to the video store and return a disc (likely on the way to/from the office) in a _fraction_ of the time it takes to download a HD movie - without wasting HDD space, too.


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 9, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Maybe that's part of the "plan".  Making Sony kill itself fighting the HDDVD vs. Blu-Ray war, and then turn around and hit them with a heavy push on downloadable content.  Microsoft is far more capable of absorbing losses than Sony can...
> 
> Banshee




While I'm sure eventually downloads will kill off disk formats eventually, IF they can settle the format wars before a strong candidate/service emerges. I think they can get at least 10 yrs out of the disk format.

The major bar to any sort of download service killing media based formats is less the delivery than the security. The MPAA and the studios have a completely paranoid fetish about being able to maintain complete control over the content and if they have any choice in the matter will completely eliminate things like "fair use", with the ultimate goal of extracting money from people any time their product is viewed/used in any shape, format or machine. 

That their concerns about downloads are pointless, since the current technology is essentially already permitting all the things they are afraid of with downloads (movie exchanges over the internet, movie copying, pirated copies, etc..), has done nothing to disuade them from such stupid and pointless demands as insisting that downloaded movies cost the same as a DVD, with no extras like commentary tracks or "making of" documentaries, while being locked to individual machines with no flexibility in transfers or viewing. If anyone thinks I'm kidding, just google some info on the Wal-mart download service that was recently shuttered.

With these kinds of restrictions and pricing it's really not surprising that all of the download services have gone over like lead balloons and generally failled horribly. None of them are going to succeed until Hollywood and the content providers recognize that they are going to have to charge less, make the DRM less draconian and increase, rather than decreease the flexibility of use. What they seem to have missed completely about iTune's success with music was that it struck a reasonable balance with cost, ease of use and flexibility, while the DRM was basically transparent to the users.


----------



## Orius (Jan 10, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> I can't get behind DL content killing discs anytime soon.  There is still a huge portion of the population not willing to spend money on something they don't own or can't hold in their hand.




I agree.  I'd rather actually buy a disc than download a video if I'm paying the money for it.  To me, the disc is more durable than DLed content, so it's worth more.  Plus if the studios through in some decent extras, it's worth the money.  I've noticed a lot of recent DVDs have been getting disappointing on content.  Less commentary, no trailers (I like watching the trailers!), and loading down ads for other movies.  I really hate that last part, I like buying the DVDs to build up a collection, and previews of movies that I tend to view as crap taints that collection to me.


----------



## Glyfair (Jan 10, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Not if you listen to Sony fans   I think the reference I read was that Blu-Ray has an attach rate of 0.6, whereas HDDVD is 3, or something like that.  But I don't know if the numbers are correct.  Maybe Blu-Ray is winning because they've got more players out there, but HDDVD generates more sales *per* owner.



That makes sense.  A lot of the Blu-Ray players out there are PS3s.  A good percentage of those are game players who may rarely or never use it for anything else.  That there are so many PS3s will cut into that stat, and make it appear deceptively low.

The real important figure is that Blue-Ray is selling 2 to 1.  The real telling stat is that the ratio stands up for titles out for both formats.

Imagine you wanted to put out an RPG product and had the choice between two systems (let's use AD&D and BD&D for references most here understand).   Which would you choose if I told you that you would sell twice as many if you released if for AD&D, but if you released it for BD&D you'd sell it to a higher percentage of those who played BD&D regularly?  Of course you'd go with AD&D since the percentage of the audience isn't important, just your total sales.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 10, 2008)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> That makes sense.  A lot of the Blu-Ray players out there are PS3s.  A good percentage of those are game players who may rarely or never use it for anything else.  That there are so many PS3s will cut into that stat, and make it appear deceptively low.
> 
> The real important figure is that Blue-Ray is selling 2 to 1.  The real telling stat is that the ratio stands up for titles out for both formats.
> 
> Imagine you wanted to put out an RPG product and had the choice between two systems (let's use AD&D and BD&D for references most here understand).   Which would you choose if I told you that you would sell twice as many if you released if for AD&D, but if you released it for BD&D you'd sell it to a higher percentage of those who played BD&D regularly?  Of course you'd go with AD&D since the percentage of the audience isn't important, just your total sales.




You're right....the total numbers *are* important.....but they're related to percentages, and all that can change in time.  My understanding is that towards the end of 2007, there was more Blu-Ray, but HDDVD was growing faster.  Obviously, if that's the case, eventually it'll overtake Blu-Ray, if the growth rates remained the same.

It's all moot though.  HDDVD won't grow if movie producers stop releasing for it.  I have been somewhat relieved to see that Paramount/Dreamworks don't seem quite so hot to change as rumours would have it.  And Microsoft isn't jumping ship...in fact, they've released a statement which calls into doubt the whole idea that they're going to give up, and make a Blu-Ray player for the XBox.

I was really aggravated by all of this earlier this week, but I've been thinking about it, and well, I can't return my player, because i'm past the 30 days.  For $260, I got my player, and 9 free movies.  Even at $20/movie, that means I just bought 9 movies, and a player for $80.  Several of those movies are ones I wanted anyways.  And most importantly, many of the HDDVD discs I have (and many I still want) are dual format.  So if HDDVD folded tomorrow, and someone came and took my player away, I just flip the disc over, and play it in my regular DVD player.  So there's really no reason not to continue to support the format, until there's a definitive decision.

And I remain convinced that Blu-Ray isn't ready for consumption by the public yet, because they're not necessarily ensuring that their systems are backwards compatible etc.....like with the 1.1 standard upgrade being incompatible with discs produced before the 1.1 standard came out.  I'd rather not pay for them to do their product development.  I'll wait until they're done before I buy into Blu-Ray.

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 10, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> That's been their stance for a while.  WB was firmly in the middle for a while until the shocking news last Friday about signing the exclusivity deal to produce BR only.  So, unless they have something in place that holds them to HD-DVD for X amount of time it really only a matter of time.  If only two major studios are producing for a format, that's not enough to keep it alive.




Unless Microsoft turns around and steals some companies from the Blu-Ray camp 

Interesting times, regardless.

Banshee


----------



## Darkwolf71 (Jan 10, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> My understanding is that towards the end of 2007, there was more Blu-Ray, but HDDVD was growing faster.  Obviously, if that's the case, eventually it'll overtake Blu-Ray, if the growth rates remained the same.



I have doubts as to the accuracy of this. For one big reason: If it was still in question and HDDVD was (or even might be) growing faster, why would WB abandon it now? After sitting on the fence for so long, the timing wouldn't make sense unless they had indication the BR had a solid lead.


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 10, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> And I remain convinced that Blu-Ray isn't ready for consumption by the public yet, because they're not necessarily ensuring that their systems are backwards compatible etc.....like with the 1.1 standard upgrade being incompatible with discs produced before the 1.1 standard came out.  I'd rather not pay for them to do their product development.  I'll wait until they're done before I buy into Blu-Ray.




This is incorrect. The 1.1 standard players work just fine with older blu-ray disks. Where ever you got this from it's very bad information. 

For Blu-Ray PLAYERS that are 1.0 standard and not upgradeable to 1.1 (which admittedly is a good chunk of the early stand alone players) you are going to get some incompatibility with 1.1 spec disks (mostly with the newer PiP features, but some disks probably flat out won't work). But this is hardly a new phenomena, nor is it confined to Blu-Ray. 

Of course as mentioned several times, the PS3 is by far the most popular Blu-Ray player and it is trivially upgradeable to the 1.1 spec and I suspect the 2.0 spec as well. Though I have no specific information on this, from what I've seen of the 2.0 spec requirements it should have no problems meeting them.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 10, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Unless Microsoft turns around and steals some companies from the Blu-Ray camp



 If they have exclusivity deals, it won't matter.  Microsoft isn't a huge player in the format wars.  They are more off to the side.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Interesting times, regardless.



Agreed.


----------



## Ankh-Morpork Guard (Jan 10, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> If they have exclusivity deals, it won't matter.  Microsoft isn't a huge player in the format wars.  They are more off to the side.
> 
> Agreed.



 Yeah, MS has even said that, were Blu-Ray to win, seeing a Blu-Ray player for the 360 wouldn't be unlikely at all.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 10, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> You're right....the total numbers *are* important.....but they're related to percentages, and all that can change in time.  My understanding is that towards the end of 2007, there was more Blu-Ray, but HDDVD was growing faster.  Obviously, if that's the case, eventually it'll overtake Blu-Ray, if the growth rates remained the same.



I suspect Warner Bros have analyzed their own growth trends, and have _clearly_ seen this is not the case.

I highly doubt the above statement is true.



> Unless Microsoft turns around and steals some companies from the Blu-Ray camp



Well, this isn't MS vs Sony, so nothing will happen there. And as John Crichton notes, MS is a bit player in this whole thing.


----------



## Goldmoon (Jan 10, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> I suspect Warner Bros have analyzed their own growth trends, and have _clearly_ seen this is not the case.
> 
> I highly doubt the above statement is true.
> 
> ...





True but having released a HD-DVD add on for the 360 theyve got a good reason to help HD-DVD win.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 10, 2008)

Goldmoon said:
			
		

> True but having released a HD-DVD add on for the 360 theyve got a good reason to help HD-DVD win.



 I wouldn't count on it.  They could just as easily release a BR add-on.  That peripheral isn't much of a cog in the MS plan.


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 10, 2008)

Goldmoon said:
			
		

> True but having released a HD-DVD add on for the 360 they've got a good reason to help HD-DVD win.




Not so much. If the 360 had shipped with a built in HD-DVD drive and it was the format for all of the games I'd agree. Given that it's a rarely purchased add-on and it's almost certain that no 360 games will ever ship on HD-DVD, it's hardly integral to the success of the 360. Nor do they have any significant commitments/dependences on the computer front.

If HD-DVD vanished from the planet this instance MS wouldn't even notice.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 10, 2008)

Rackhir said:
			
		

> This is incorrect. The 1.1 standard players work just fine with older blu-ray disks. Where ever you got this from it's very bad information.
> 
> For Blu-Ray PLAYERS that are 1.0 standard and not upgradeable to 1.1 (which admittedly is a good chunk of the early stand alone players) you are going to get some incompatibility with 1.1 spec disks (mostly with the newer PiP features, but some disks probably flat out won't work). But this is hardly a new phenomena, nor is it confined to Blu-Ray.
> 
> Of course as mentioned several times, the PS3 is by far the most popular Blu-Ray player and it is trivially upgradeable to the 1.1 spec and I suspect the 2.0 spec as well. Though I have no specific information on this, from what I've seen of the 2.0 spec requirements it should have no problems meeting them.




It was on one of the AV message boards that I'd heard this....that the 1.1 spec was a problem with respect to older discs, but that it was only so on older players that didn't have an Ethernet port....and the PS3 has an Ethernet port, so it wasn't a problem for PS3 owners.

It's interesting to hear that the information is false.

Banshee


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 10, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> It was on one of the AV message boards that I'd heard this....that the 1.1 spec was a problem with respect to older discs, but that it was only so on older players that didn't have an Ethernet port....and the PS3 has an Ethernet port, so it wasn't a problem for PS3 owners.
> 
> It's interesting to hear that the information is false.
> 
> Banshee




Every Blu-Ray disk shipped up until like last week was a pre-1.1 spec disk (AFAIK there was 1 german movie before that which supported 1.1 spec features). Resident Evil : Extinction is I believe the first US release to support the full 1.1 spec features and I've not heard a lot about disks coming out that will support the 1.1 spec features. So if there was any truth to what you'd heard essentially every single blu-ray movie released in the previous year would have stopped working. You wouldn't have to hear about it on a message board if that was the case. You'd be able to hear the screams of rage as people tore down Sony's US headquarters.

It sounds like you got the likely occurrences of incompatibility of some 1.1 spec DISKS with some 1.0 spec PLAYERS switched around or you had some HD-DVD partisans spreading bad info.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 10, 2008)

Darkwolf71 said:
			
		

> I have doubts as to the accuracy of this. For one big reason: If it was still in question and HDDVD was (or even might be) growing faster, why would WB abandon it now? After sitting on the fence for so long, the timing wouldn't make sense unless they had indication the BR had a solid lead.




I'm no expert on this....I've just been bringing up things I've been reading in other places.

I guess all I can really point out is that WB abandoning one format or the other might have to do with sales trends, or it can have more to do with backroom deals.  I guess only they really know.  My suspicion is that on both sides, a lot of money is changing hands to try and win this war.  Some companies are probably just more open about it than others are.

Banshee


----------



## Bront (Jan 11, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Is that compared to holiday season 06?  I didn't see any numbers (not that there aren't any) that indicate a significant drop in people buying stuff.



I haven't seen actual numbers, but I remember hearing reports of stores seeing a significant drop in spending, and that's actualy year round.


----------



## Bront (Jan 11, 2008)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> So, lets say in 5 years Bluray has 50% of the market for new sales. In that 5 years, there will be so many advances in storage that the format will be outdated. Once a cable company or internet company delivers an easy interface for "turn on your TV, buy a movie, own it forever!" and they can deliver it for less than Bluray...



Not realy.

VHS was enough storage space for how many years?

DVD has been a usable format for how many years?

The only reason DVD has become outdated as far as size is concerned is because of HD.  For the most part, DVD is still fine for PC data storage, and SD video storage.


----------



## Bront (Jan 11, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> I can't get behind DL content killing discs anytime soon.  There is still a huge portion of the population not willing to spend money on something they don't own or can't hold in their hand.



There is real truth in this statement.

I still know people who don't like DVDs and prefer VHS.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 12, 2008)

Bront said:
			
		

> There is real truth in this statement.
> 
> I still know people who don't like DVDs and prefer VHS.




Why?

Banshee


----------



## ssampier (Jan 12, 2008)

Bront said:
			
		

> Not realy.
> 
> VHS was enough storage space for how many years?
> 
> ...




Yes. Call me a Luddite, but I only bought a DVD player a few years ago. If I get a HDTV, I'd probably get a DVD player with upconversion, not a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player.


----------



## Vocenoctum (Jan 12, 2008)

Bront said:
			
		

> Not realy.
> 
> VHS was enough storage space for how many years?
> 
> ...





I know more people that would prefer a bigger disc because they'd rather have a TV season on a single disc, rather than people that want a bigger disc for HiDef or better surround sound. Most folks I know with HDTV's still have basic speakers.


----------



## Bront (Jan 13, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Why?
> 
> Banshee



If I knew and understood, I think I'd understand one of the mysteries of the universe.

I think it's a general fear of tech.

These same people refused to use CDs till about 4 years ago, when they finaly got a car with a CD player.


----------



## Aus_Snow (Jan 13, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Why?



Disclaimer: I'm not one of _them_. . . 

But I can see how DVDs being so easily scratched, with their data being exposed like that, are more vulnerable (and therefore unworthy?) than video cassettes.

Other than that, I got nothin'. 

Though it reminds me of this guy I met years ago who preferred tapes to CDs, because they are more 'warm' or some #&@!. I think that was the angle. Eh, whatever.


----------



## drothgery (Jan 13, 2008)

Bront said:
			
		

> The only reason DVD has become outdated as far as size is concerned is because of HD.  For the most part, DVD is still fine for PC data storage, and SD video storage.




It's my understanding that most movies could fit on a double-layer DVD even in HD, given a high-compression codec (like WMV), and virtually all could fit on a double-sided/double-layer DVD. Now, if you want to encode an HD movie with the same codecs that are typically used for DVDs, that won't fit on a DVD. But almost no one does that (pretty much nothing except some early Blu-Ray movies).


----------



## Orius (Jan 13, 2008)

I still use VHS, it's a pretty cheap way of recording programs, but I think it'll soon reach the point of obsolesence for me.  For actually watching stuff, DVD is usually better (lasts longer and with better quality too, can more easily skip to a certain scene, etc.).

I didn't use CDs until a few years ago either, largely because of a lack of recording options.  I still use cassettes for listening, but only in cases were the cassette is my only copy, or if I just want background music and not specific tracks.  If I like the music, why should I throw it out if it's not on a CD or an .mp3? Cassettes still have their niche too, I've read they're still popular for audiobooks, because unlike a CD, you can simply stop the cassette and pick up where you left off.

I don't fear technology at all, but sometimes the older stuff has a certain appeal that newer stuff just can't emulate.  The best example I can think of is books.  I really prefer reading from a book than off a screen.


----------



## John Crichton (Jan 13, 2008)

Orius said:
			
		

> I don't fear technology at all, but sometimes the older stuff has a certain appeal that newer stuff just can't emulate.  The best example I can think of is books.  I really prefer reading from a book than off a screen.



I hear that.  PDFs that I get for work and even short things like cover letters and resumes I still like to print out and read.


----------



## Bront (Jan 13, 2008)

Aus_Snow said:
			
		

> Disclaimer: I'm not one of _them_. . .
> 
> But I can see how DVDs being so easily scratched, with their data being exposed like that, are more vulnerable (and therefore unworthy?) than video cassettes.
> 
> ...



It's more of "I'm happy with VHS, so why should I change?" I think. Also, they didn't have any room for one in their stereo cabinet.

I still use VHS to record stuff, as, since I have it, it's cheeper than DVR or a DVD recorder.  We also don't record to many shows though.

And I know what you mean about the "Warm"ness of sound, though that's usually reserved for LPs over CDs, not Tapes.  However, I haven't had a working tape player outside of a car since 2001, and haven't had one at all since 2007.  The only thing I have on tape I still want is the origional radio broadcast of Hitchhikers Guide (which varries from the book reads, other versions of the radio play I've heard, and the BBC movie ages ago.  I won't even mention the other perversion).


----------



## Bront (Jan 13, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> I hear that.  PDFs that I get for work and even short things like cover letters and resumes I still like to print out and read.



I'll take hard copy over PDF just about any time.

Unless I have to do a search in one of them


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 14, 2008)

Aus_Snow said:
			
		

> Disclaimer: I'm not one of _them_. . .
> 
> But I can see how DVDs being so easily scratched, with their data being exposed like that, are more vulnerable (and therefore unworthy?) than video cassettes.
> 
> ...




Maybe they like the sound of the scratches on the record?  I don't know...

I wonder sometimes if the difference is largely just nostalgia for the older technology?  I look at my VHS tapes, and compare them against my DVDs and they're lacking in picture quality, sound, and the whole thing with needing to rewind or fast forward is just a royal pain.

Banshee


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 15, 2008)

FWIW here's a guide to Blu-Ray movies in terms of their picture quality (not of how good a movie they are).

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=858316

One note, the same "master" is generally used for both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD movies. At least where the same movie is released for both formats. Often the same compression is used as well. So differences in picture quality between the formats is usually going to come down to the player and/or TV being used, IF there is any visible.


----------



## Simon Atavax (Jan 27, 2008)

Orius said:
			
		

> *yawn*
> 
> Wake me when the format war is over.  I don't have the money to sink into either format to risk watching it go obsolete in two years.  Besides, DVD is still good enough for me at this point.




Well said.  My wife and I finally bought a DVD player when we realized that all the good movies at the video store were *only* coming out in DVD.  

That's when we'll switch to BluRay / HD DVD.  When one of them is the *dominant* format at the video store.


----------



## Tharkun (Jan 31, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Frankly, the whole idea of a format war is dumb to begin with.  I'm not sure why it's needed.  If I'm happy with my HDDVD player, and you're happy with your Blu-Ray player, why don't we each just buy disks in the appropriate technology?  This whole idea of Warner and Disney and all these companies having exclusivity deals is just dumb.




I think it's about controlling the channels that sell discs, you can't maximize profits if you have an opposing format.  Remember America is a capitalist country and that means profit is what is important not compatibility.


----------



## werk (Jan 31, 2008)

Tharkun said:
			
		

> I think it's about controlling the channels that sell discs, you can't maximize profits if you have an opposing format.  Remember America is a capitalist country and that means profit is what is important not compatibility.




Well...if you want to think of it that way...Sony, Toshiba, NEC are Japanese companies and Blu-Ray was developed by a consortium of corps mostly based in America like Apple, Dell, Sun, but also Hitatchi, Pioneer, LG, etc...  So we're talking about mostly international players in a global competition...it's not really about America.

I think HD DVD will win out simply because the term DVD is in it's title, and is owned by Sony, just like CD is.  Sony is incredible at making media formats, but terrible at selling them, so it really could go either way depending on how well they put it out there.


----------



## Rackhir (Jan 31, 2008)

werk said:
			
		

> Well...if you want to think of it that way...Sony, Toshiba, NEC are Japanese companies and Blu-Ray was developed by a consortium of corps mostly based in America like Apple, Dell, Sun, but also Hitatchi, Pioneer, LG, etc...  So we're talking about mostly international players in a global competition...it's not really about America.
> 
> I think HD DVD will win out simply because the term DVD is in it's title, and is owned by Sony, just like CD is.  Sony is incredible at making media formats, but terrible at selling them, so it really could go either way depending on how well they put it out there.




Er. Just about everything you put in this post is incorrect.

Sony developed Blu-Ray (not HD-DVD), thus it's use in the PS3. They have attempted to promulgate it as a standard akin to that for DVD or CDs. So there are a number of other companies that have "signed on" to the standard, such as Apple (though they have not actually released any Blu-Ray hardware for some reason).

HD-DVD was developed by Toshiba (who owns a lot of the patents related to DVDs). So basically you have two Japanese companies warring over the standard (So you are right at least in it having nothing to do with America). Their offering was adopted by the DVD standards body as the "high def" sequel to DVD. But the DVD portion of the name has proven to have exactly zero influence on consumers, who largely seem baffled, clueless or simply uninterested in the Hi-Def formats.

Neither Sony nor Toshiba owns the CD format, its a standard which is independent of any one company. As is DVD. The CD standard was developed in a collaboration between Philips and Sony though. Patent income has played a large roll in fueling the hi-def format war, as there are fees involved in licensing the patents necessary for any of the standards. This income is the main reason why Sony and Toshiba have been fighting this war.


----------



## werk (Jan 31, 2008)

Rackhir said:
			
		

> Er. Just about everything you put in this post is incorrect.
> 
> Sony developed Blu-Ray (not HD-DVD), thus it's use in the PS3. They have attempted to promulgate it as a standard akin to that for DVD or CDs. So there are a number of other companies that have "signed on" to the standard, such as Apple (though they have not actually released any Blu-Ray hardware for some reason).
> 
> ...





Sources?




Haha, just kidding.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 14, 2008)

And now Netflix has dropped HD-DVD and Best Buy is going to recommend and showcase BR in stores but still stock HD-DVD.

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080211/20080211006384.html?.v=1

http://netflix.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=265


----------



## Man in the Funny Hat (Feb 16, 2008)

According to news this morning Walmart is dropping HD-DVD players for only Blu-ray.  Target already decided to do so.  Blu-ray is favored by Blockbuster, Netflix, Best Buy, 5 major movie studios...

I think the format war is all over except for the shouting.  While HD is not yet completely dead it's only because the ink is not yet dry on the death certificate.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 16, 2008)

Man in the Funny Hat said:
			
		

> According to news this morning Walmart is dropping HD-DVD players for only Blu-ray.  Target already decided to do so.  Blu-ray is favored by Blockbuster, Netflix, Best Buy, 5 major movie studios...
> 
> I think the format war is all over except for the shouting.  While HD is not yet completely dead it's only because the ink is not yet dry on the death certificate.



Yeah, this was another shot on the way down for HD-DVD.  And if this is to be belived, Toshiba is about to drop out of HD-DVD.  That is a huge deal, too.

With any luck, we'll have one format only by the holiday shopping season.  That would be great.  This is supposed to be huge year for HD media in general.


----------



## ssampier (Feb 16, 2008)

Poor HD-DVD. For me this is the year of the high definition TV. Everything is going digital why not? I think I'll wait for a few years for a high-def player; I think the upscale converters will work for me.

I realize that digital does not mean high def, nor does that mean I have to get rid of my analog tv. It's just something I have been waiting on.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 16, 2008)

ssampier said:
			
		

> Poor HD-DVD. For me this is the year of the high definition TV. Everything is going digital why not? I think I'll wait for a few years for a high-def player; I think the upscale converters will work for me.
> 
> I realize that digital does not mean high def, nor does that mean I have to get rid of my analog tv. It's just something I have been waiting on.



 What size are you looking at?  

Upconverting DVDs was working great on my 32" HDTV for a while.  Once we got the 50" 1080p it just didn't do the trick anymore.


----------



## ssampier (Feb 16, 2008)

Nothing that big; 32 inches at _most_. We have 27" CRT in the living room and a 19" in the bedroom.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 16, 2008)

ssampier said:
			
		

> Nothing that big; 32 inches at _most_. We have 27" CRT in the living room and a 19" in the bedroom.



 Ah.  You don't even need 1080p at that size.  Is it a small space?


----------



## Vocenoctum (Feb 18, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Yeah, this was another shot on the way down for HD-DVD.  And if this is to be belived, Toshiba is about to drop out of HD-DVD.  That is a huge deal, too.
> 
> With any luck, we'll have one format only by the holiday shopping season.  That would be great.  This is supposed to be huge year for HD media in general.





I think we've reached the part where Toshiba starts looking for means to recoup before pronouncing the format dead. See if they can assign blame and put a dollar figure on it.


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 19, 2008)

Vocenoctum said:
			
		

> I think we've reached the part where Toshiba starts looking for means to recoup before pronouncing the format dead. See if they can assign blame and put a dollar figure on it.



 That and now is a good time to drop it.  Start concentrating on other areas of tech.


----------



## trancejeremy (Feb 19, 2008)

Unless this is a really impressive fake, looks like Toshiba just pulled the plug

http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2008_02/pr1903.htm

_Toshiba Announces Discontinuation of HD DVD Businesses

19 February, 2008

Company Remains Focused on Championing Consumer Access to High Definition Content

TOKYO--Toshiba Corporation today announced that it has undertaken a thorough review of its overall strategy for HD DVD and has decided it will no longer develop, manufacture and market HD DVD players and recorders. This decision has been made following recent major changes in the market. Toshiba will continue, however, to provide full product support and after-sales service for all owners of Toshiba HD DVD products._

I have to give them props for pulling the plug so quickly. They could have stuck in it much longer, which was probably no good for anyone.


----------



## Rackhir (Feb 19, 2008)

trancejeremy said:
			
		

> Unless this is a really impressive fake, looks like Toshiba just pulled the plug
> 
> http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2008_02/pr1903.htm
> 
> ...




I'm seeing something similar on the english version of the Daily Yomiuri (a Japanese newspaper), though the byline is Associated Press.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...SECTION=HOSTED_ASIA&TEMPLATE=ap_business.html


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 19, 2008)

This one, too:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7252172.stm

Yup, stick a fork in HD-DVD.  It's done.

Wow, that format war ended *much *quicker than I thought it would before the WB announcement.  I'm still a little stunned, but mostly relieved.


----------



## Arnwyn (Feb 19, 2008)

Yes, it's over.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/money/national/2008/02/19/toshiba.html

I know a few people were (overly, AFAIC) optimistic about HD-DVD, but it's nice to see a clear and definite winner - along with it being the superior technology, too (for once!). And surprisingly soon... the consumers only _partially_ lost, this time.


----------



## drothgery (Feb 19, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> Yes, it's over.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/story/money/national/2008/02/19/toshiba.html
> 
> I know a few people were (overly, AFAIC) optimistic about HD-DVD, but it's nice to see a clear and definite winner - along with it being the superior technology, too (for once!). And surprisingly soon... the consumers only _partially_ lost, this time.




Eh. Blu-Ray holds more per layer. HD-DVD was significantly cheaper to produce, and had a better format for interactive content (which, now that the format wars are over, one hopes the Blu-Ray group quickly incorporates).


----------



## Aaron L (Feb 19, 2008)

They can make quad layer blu-ray disks that hold  100 gigs of data, can't they?  That's all I'm concerned with; which format can hold more data.  If I'm wrong, I'm wrong (which I could very well be), but I'm pretty sure I read that the most they can squeeze out of HD DVD is like 50 gigs or something.


----------



## Banshee16 (Feb 19, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> Yes, it's over.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/story/money/national/2008/02/19/toshiba.html
> 
> I know a few people were (overly, AFAIC) optimistic about HD-DVD, but it's nice to see a clear and definite winner - along with it being the superior technology, too (for once!). And surprisingly soon... the consumers only _partially_ lost, this time.




Not sure about the superior technology schtick.  Blu-Ray is just getting to the point *now* that HDDVD was at a year ago.  The only advantage they had was larger storage space, which was fairly useless, because, as explained on many tech sites, the technology will only take off when prices come down, but having prices come down is not a good incentive for companies to build a tonne of extra content to supplement movies.....because it costs money to produce that content.  And without having a bunch of extra content, what exactly do you need the extra storage space for?  To say nothing of the fact that Blu-Ray discs aren't dual format, they're more expensive to produce, etc.

In the end, it's moot.  Blu-Ray's the victor.  I doubt I'll be getting one any time soon, until the players are 2.0 compliant *and* below $200 in cost.  Ithink it was a CNET article I was reading that was recommending to go ahead and buy Blu-Ray but *only* the PS3 player, as none of the others are worth the risk, as Sony has stranded a lot of early adopters, who won't be able to get their players to be 2.0 compliant.  And there's a big class action suit being launched against Samsung over all of that, because the firmware they've been releasing hasn't been doing the job.

Sounds like Blu-Ray won via marketing, but isn't nearly as polished a product as HDDVD has been.

I don't think I'm going to ditch my HDDVD player.  I mean, likely I'd get 25-50% of what I paid for it.  As long as it keeps working, there's no sense in getting rid of it.  I doubt I'll get any more movies for it though.  I've actually only bought a few, and the rest came free due to various promotions.

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Feb 19, 2008)

Aaron L said:
			
		

> They can make quad layer blu-ray disks that hold  100 gigs of data, can't they?  That's all I'm concerned with; which format can hold more data.  If I'm wrong, I'm wrong (which I could very well be), but I'm pretty sure I read that the most they can squeeze out of HD DVD is like 50 gigs or something.




Given how easily discs break or scratch, does 50 GB of storage on a disc really matter?  That's trusting an awful lot of data to one disc..

HDDVD has been expanding in capacity, but I think Blu-Ray can expand more, whereas HDDVD discs would have a definite limit.

Banshee


----------



## drothgery (Feb 20, 2008)

Aaron L said:
			
		

> They can make quad layer blu-ray disks that hold  100 gigs of data, can't they?  That's all I'm concerned with; which format can hold more data.  If I'm wrong, I'm wrong (which I could very well be), but I'm pretty sure I read that the most they can squeeze out of HD DVD is like 50 gigs or something.




Blu-Ray is ~25 GB/layer. HD-DVD is ~18 GB/layer. Both Toshiba and Sony have demonstrated discs with 6+ layers, IIRC, but the likelyhood of 3+ layer media being produced in volume is very low.


----------



## trancejeremy (Feb 20, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Given how easily discs break or scratch, does 50 GB of storage on a disc really matter?  That's trusting an awful lot of data to one disc..




Supposedly Blu-Ray has a scratch resistant coating. I dunno though, since I've never even seen a Blu Ray disc.

I don't really care which is better, I just don't like Toshiba, because I have one of their regular DVD players and I hate it. Besides the fact it developed trouble with dual layer flipper discs (like Buck Rogers and Kolchak - I also hate Universal for using them in the first place) a month after I got it (Most players do eventually have trouble, but this was quick), it has the most irritating feature ever - when you hit the 'open' button when it's off, instead of opening, it turns on and loads the disc which takes 30 seconds. Ugh. If I wanted to turn it on, I would have turned it on, I pressed the open tray button because I wanted the tray open.

If their HD players were anything like that (and they were basically the only people making them), ugh!


----------



## Rackhir (Feb 20, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Not sure about the superior technology schtick.  Blu-Ray is just getting to the point *now* that HDDVD was at a year ago.




That's only with regards to the "internet connectivity" which has been completely pointless in practice and the Picture in Picture commentary. Which again seems to be less than impressive. PiP is cute and has the potential to be interesting or useful in the future, but that's going to take some re-thinking as to how they do commentaries and use the feature.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> The only advantage they had was larger storage space,




Disks are fundamentally a storage medium, more storage is never useless. It means you can use less or no compression (which always has downsides), more special features and/or ones of higher quality, fewer disks, etc... A 50% edge in storage per layer is not an insignificant edge. Blu-ray has the potential for further growth in the future, much as DVDs improved on CDs as a storage medium.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> which was fairly useless, because, as explained on many tech sites, the technology will only take off when prices come down, but having prices come down is not a good incentive for companies to build a tonne of extra content to supplement movies.....because it costs money to produce that content.  And without having a bunch of extra content, what exactly do you need the extra storage space for?




Yes, the cost of extra content has certainly prevented anyone from releasing DVDs with extra content. So obviously it precludes it for Blu-Ray, like the bare bones release of Blade Runner.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> To say nothing of the fact that Blu-Ray discs aren't dual format,




Well, having dual format disks certainly proved to be a major advantage for HD-DVD didn't it. No wait it was a complete flop. The dual format disks were more expensive than standard DVDs since they involved gluing a HD-DVD and a regular DVD together, they had some compatability problems and sold to essentially nobody who didn't have a HD-DVD player already. Which completely negated the point of the dual format disks in the first place.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> they're more expensive to produce, etc.




Yes the physical disks are somewhat more expensive at the moment, but the actual production cost of the disks is not a major portion of the cost of a Blu-Ray release (probably no more than 10% at most) and that is something that will drop rapidly as economies of scale start to kick in. DVDs were similarly expensive at this stage of their introduction.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> ...none of the others are worth the risk, as Sony has stranded a lot of early adopters, who won't be able to get their players to be 2.0 compliant.




Yes, the PS3 is the best and most future proof of the Blu-Ray players, however given that the PS3 is fully upgradeable to the 2.0 "final" spec Sony has hardly stranded a lot of early adopters. Most older players aren't going to be able to be upgraded to either the 1.1 or 2.0 spec, but given that most of these players were $500-1,000 dollars they were only selling to people who have more than enough money to replace them and probably would be doing so any way to get the latest bells and whistles. 

It's not like DVDs have been static in terms of features or capabilities. My old DVD player has neither an HDMI, nor a DVI, nor upscaling, is larger, heavier, etc...



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> And there's a big class action suit being launched against Samsung over all of that, because the firmware they've been releasing hasn't been doing the job.




The lawsuit against samsung has nothing to do with the 1.0/1.1/2.0 spec issues. They produced a lousy player and haven't done much to fix it.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Sounds like Blu-Ray won via marketing, but isn't nearly as polished a product as HDDVD has been.




Blu-ray won based on numbers. It won on numbers because of the PS3, which has sold something like 10x the numbers of stand alone HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players combined. So that even with the slow adoption of the High-Def formats, the Blu-Ray movies were outselling the HD-DVD versions by a factor of x2 or x3.



			
				Banshee16 said:
			
		

> Given how easily discs break or scratch, does 50 GB of storage on a disc really matter? That's trusting an awful lot of data to one disc..




The Blu-ray disks do not scratch any easier than DVDs. An early version of the Blu-Ray technology, which was sold as a storage medium was vulnerable to being damaged by scratches. So they came in a shell which protected them from being scratched. The consumer Blu-ray disks use an evolved version of the original disks with a much tougher coating that makes them no more vulnerable to being scratched than DVDs, HD-DVDs or CDs are. None of them are immune either.


----------



## Aaron L (Feb 20, 2008)

trancejeremy said:
			
		

> Supposedly Blu-Ray has a scratch resistant coating. I dunno though, since I've never even seen a Blu Ray disc.






Well, for the sake of experimental curiosity, I took a blank blu-ray disk and vigorously rubbed at it with the edge of a CD, and then rubbed at a different CD with the edge of the first CD.  The CD I rubbed got a fair gouge, but it produced nothing but a smudge on the blu-ray disk that was easily wiped off with a micro-fiber cloth.  So, take it for what it's worth.  However, all disks may not be made to the same exacting standards.


----------



## Rackhir (Feb 21, 2008)

Paramount, the last studio hold out, has now stated they will be releasing movies on Blu-Ray.

http://www.news.com/All-Hollywood-studios-now-back-Blu-ray/2100-1026_3-6231443.html?tag=nefd.top


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 21, 2008)

Everyone is going to fall in line now.  Amazon.com did the Best Buy thing, too.


----------



## Banshee16 (Feb 21, 2008)

John Crichton said:
			
		

> Everyone is going to fall in line now.  Amazon.com did the Best Buy thing, too.




Well, if Toshiba is not producing the players anymore, it really shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that companies will shift what they're selling.  Content that can't be played, because nobody's making the machines is kind of useless.

I'm pretty sure that things aren't going to go nearly as smoothly as Sony would like though.  Aside from the problems with their players, and the perception by much of the public that regular DVDs on an upscaling player produce quality almost as good as Blu-Ray or HDDVD, you're not going to get people running to pick them up.

In addition, we're either in, or going into a recession (well US is, Canada is teetering, but might not cross over), and during recessions people buy fewer luxury items (ie. high definition DVD players).  I'm pretty sure that that has a lot to do with the decrease in DVD business over the last year, which was one of the justifications Warner made in their announcement when they switched.  They might have partly misidentified *why* movie sales were going down.....or at least not given that situation enough credit.  

I guess we'll see, given time.  I know plenty of people who are switching into "save, and pay off debt mode", and moving out of the "buy cool new stuff" mode.  If you're not sure about your job because people are getting laid off, are you going to withhold spending $400 on a player because you're not sure which format will be around in a year?  Or because you want to have that $400 in your savings, in case you lose your own job?

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Feb 21, 2008)

Aaron L said:
			
		

> Well, for the sake of experimental curiosity, I took a blank blu-ray disk and vigorously rubbed at it with the edge of a CD, and then rubbed at a different CD with the edge of the first CD.  The CD I rubbed got a fair gouge, but it produced nothing but a smudge on the blu-ray disk that was easily wiped off with a micro-fiber cloth.  So, take it for what it's worth.  However, all disks may not be made to the same exacting standards.




That's good to know....

I don't know how that compares against HDDVD disks.  I'm not willing to buy an $18 blank disc (price at Future Shop) to test it out, either 

Even without scratching, there are all kinds of other factors as well, though.  Heat and cold can affect the discs, and they can be damaged by contact with air (ie. regular aging) from what I understand.  At least that's what I have been told by several professional photographers, who pointed out that DVDs are not an ideal means of storing photos etc. as they can become unreliable with time.  Whether there's any truth to that, I don't know.  They claimed to have gained that information through PK offered by DVD production companies.  Maybe it matters to them because their livelihoods depend on it, so a minor tendency towards flaws developing over time affect them, whereas to your average consumer, the risk is worth it?  I don't know.  And I have no idea if, assuming this aging thing is true, it also applies to Blu-Ray and HDDVD discs.

Banshee


----------



## Banshee16 (Feb 21, 2008)

Rackhir said:
			
		

> That's only with regards to the "internet connectivity" which has been completely pointless in practice and the Picture in Picture commentary. Which again seems to be less than impressive. PiP is cute and has the potential to be interesting or useful in the future, but that's going to take some re-thinking as to how they do commentaries and use the feature.




Has it been pointless?  As I understand it, several HDDVD movies have added content online, that they're accessing through the port.....surveys, updated info, and in some cases, the ability to share a movie through linked players, or something like that.  It's experimental, and supposedly has been well-received.  So you might think it's useless, but *is* it?

Personally, the internet connectivity is something I haven't benefited from.  My router is on the top floor, and my player is in the family room in my basement.....because it requires a cable, I haven't hooked it up online.  I'm not going to turn around to buy a wireless connector for it.  Now, if they had wireless internet capability built in, *that* would have been cool.



			
				Rackhir said:
			
		

> Disks are fundamentally a storage medium, more storage is never useless. It means you can use less or no compression (which always has downsides), more special features and/or ones of higher quality, fewer disks, etc... A 50% edge in storage per layer is not an insignificant edge. Blu-ray has the potential for further growth in the future, much as DVDs improved on CDs as a storage medium.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, the cost of extra content has certainly prevented anyone from releasing DVDs with extra content. So obviously it precludes it for Blu-Ray, like the bare bones release of Blade Runner.




Blade Runner is *one* example of a major, cult-favourite type movie.  Take a look at the list of Blu-Ray and HDDVD discs out there, and how many of them have addiitonal features that the regular DVDs don't.  I've read a tonne of reviews on www.highdefdigest.com and there are actually very, very few.  It costs money to produce those extra features.  That has to be paid for.  Yet they're trying to get the movies down in price, because people don't buy them at $40.  I and several others that I know buy our discs through Amazon.com, have them shipped to the U.S., then drive across the border, pick them up, and bring them back home, because even with crossing at customs etc. it's still better than the ridiculous prices they charge for them in Canada.






			
				Rackhir said:
			
		

> Well, having dual format disks certainly proved to be a major advantage for HD-DVD didn't it. No wait it was a complete flop. The dual format disks were more expensive than standard DVDs since they involved gluing a HD-DVD and a regular DVD together, they had some compatability problems and sold to essentially nobody who didn't have a HD-DVD player already. Which completely negated the point of the dual format disks in the first place.



Was it a complete flop?  I haven't seen that.  It's very useful.  I can buy a disc once, have one HDDVD player, and still play the movie anywhere in the house.  With a Blu-Ray, well, I need a player for my bedroom, one for my living room, and one for my family room....so that's $1200 worth of players.  Plenty of people are in the same boat.  Or, you can buy one disc that plays in both machines.

With Blu-Ray being the standard, I know very few people willing to buy multiple machines......so we're back to being forced, as consumers, to choose whether to buy a Blue-Ray disc (let's say $30) that plays on one machine, or an SDVD (let's say $20) that plays on 3+ machines in the same household.

To many consumers, that's still a problem.  In fact, the ability to have dual-format discs was a big reason *why* many people I know bought HDDVD players.  Because for lots of people, getting a disc they can only play on one machine is a significantly inferior investment to one that they can use in all the rooms in the house, up at the cottage, in the player in the car, on their laptop, etc.



			
				Rackhir said:
			
		

> Yes the physical disks are somewhat more expensive at the moment, but the actual production cost of the disks is not a major portion of the cost of a Blu-Ray release (probably no more than 10% at most) and that is something that will drop rapidly as economies of scale start to kick in. DVDs were similarly expensive at this stage of their introduction.




Even early on DVDs weren't that expensive.  *More* expensive than they are now, sure.....but I still find plenty of SDVD's that they charge $30 for.

But you're right, over time, the costs will come down.  Hopefully more than I think they will.  Sony has a tendency to charge a lot for things we can get better and cheaper from other companies.  Blu-Ray is not *just* Sony....but they are the leader, and that gives me some cause for concern.  Hopefully I'm wrong about it.



			
				Rackhir said:
			
		

> Yes, the PS3 is the best and most future proof of the Blu-Ray players, however given that the PS3 is fully upgradeable to the 2.0 "final" spec Sony has hardly stranded a lot of early adopters. Most older players aren't going to be able to be upgraded to either the 1.1 or 2.0 spec, but given that most of these players were $500-1,000 dollars they were only selling to people who have more than enough money to replace them and probably would be doing so any way to get the latest bells and whistles.
> 
> It's not like DVDs have been static in terms of features or capabilities. My old DVD player has neither an HDMI, nor a DVI, nor upscaling, is larger, heavier, etc...




I agree....and most tech sites agree the PS3 is the most future proof Blu-Ray player, which is why they're saying to *only* buy the PS3 for Blu-Ray players, as you're taking your chances with the others.

How many people bought $500-1000 players, and are going to be willing to get rid of them after a year, just to be able to play discs that came out after they bought their player?  You use the HDMI and DVI example, as well as upscaling, but those are not core features.  My understanding is that we're talking about "older" players not being able to play profile 2.0 discs....or at least get full features out of them.

When you bought your DVD player, and then new players came out with HDMI, it wasn't a matter of your DVD player not being able to play newer DVDs.  With Blu-Ray players, my understanding is that they can't play them.  At least that's what sites like CNET seem to say, which is why they say to stick with the PS3.

What I don't understand is......if the PS3 is updateable because it has an internet connection, and other players are not because they don't have an internet connection, can't they be updated other ways?  With HDDVD players, you had the choice of either using the ethernet port to update your firmware, or downloading the firmware update to your computer, burning it to a DVD, sticking the DVD into the player and playing it, which would also update the firmware.  Can't you do that with an older Blu-Ray player?  Or are they not designed to work that way?



			
				Rackhir said:
			
		

> The lawsuit against samsung has nothing to do with the 1.0/1.1/2.0 spec issues. They produced a lousy player and haven't done much to fix it.




What I read was that their player was an older spec, it has troubles with newer discs, and Samsung had promised to fix this with firmware, but have never produced firmware that actually fixed the problem, and that was the reason for the lawsuit.  I don't remember if I read that on CNET or EndGadget or somewhere else.

Are you saying that is incorrect?



			
				Rackhir said:
			
		

> Blu-ray won based on numbers. It won on numbers because of the PS3, which has sold something like 10x the numbers of stand alone HD-DVD and Blu-Ray players combined. So that even with the slow adoption of the High-Def formats, the Blu-Ray movies were outselling the HD-DVD versions by a factor of x2 or x3.




Numbers based on marketing, correct?  Sony ran a much better marketing campaign.  And their timing of punting HDDVD with the Warner announcement was impeccable.  Neither of those factors are technological superiority.

The PS3 was a definite advantage, and I think that in the long term, Microsoft's rush to get a next gen player on the market first will hurt them.  It got them to the 10 million mark first, but they're taking PR blows right now, and that will only increase, because the PS3 is at this point priced at the same level, but also plays high def movies, whereas the XBox needs an addition.  Many people who use their gaming system for gaming, and a DVD player for watching movies won't care.  But among gamers, yeah, it looks like a mistake now, because the PS3 is catching up fast.  Still doesn't have much software I like (in terms of exclusives), but oh well 

Banshee


----------



## John Crichton (Feb 22, 2008)

Banshee16 said:
			
		

> I'm pretty sure that things aren't going to go nearly as smoothly as Sony would like though.  Aside from the problems with their players, and the perception by much of the public that regular DVDs on an upscaling player produce quality almost as good as Blu-Ray or HDDVD, you're not going to get people running to pick them up.



HDM is still niche market, so for the most part you are right.  That said, this year is going to continue to be huge for HDTV sales.  With one format out there it's just going to make it easier to pick up a PS3/BR player with that new purchase.

As for public perception of upscaling, the only people who have any idea about that or care are those who aren't willing to shell out the cash for an HD setup and I don't blame them.  Most people have no idea what upscaling is in general.  With lots of focus on HD on the way and how much the stores will be pushing it along with the 2009 HD broadcast change the market will only increase from this point on.

It will be slow, but as with VHS > DVD, it will take years to gain real market share.  I recall buying $30 DVDs with my first player.  I can already get BR movies at $20.  Still, I see DVD being around for a while.


----------



## Banshee16 (Feb 22, 2008)

Rackhir said:
			
		

> Yes, the PS3 is the best and most future proof of the Blu-Ray players, however given that the PS3 is fully upgradeable to the 2.0 "final" spec Sony has hardly stranded a lot of early adopters. Most older players aren't going to be able to be upgraded to either the 1.1 or 2.0 spec, but given that most of these players were $500-1,000 dollars they were only selling to people who have more than enough money to replace them and probably would be doing so any way to get the latest bells and whistles.
> 
> It's not like DVDs have been static in terms of features or capabilities. My old DVD player has neither an HDMI, nor a DVI, nor upscaling, is larger, heavier, etc...




Here's one of the links I was looking for.

http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9864122-1.html

Banshee


----------

