backtop

Hardware Binary Heroes: Format War Woes
Rob Mach (Blog) - December 4, 2007 1:21 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 158 comment(s) - last by SavagePotato.. on Dec 4 at 11:54 PM
'

 

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Interpretation
By darkfoon on 12/4/2007 3:09:25 AM , Rating: 5
I haven't noticed anybody else mentioning this, but isn't the only way out of a finger trap (other than cheating and cutting it) coming together?
So I think the artist is remarking that if they two formats came together, it could be much more peaceful, but Sony is ready to cheat to get free, rather than compromise.




RE: Interpretation
By James Holden on 12/4/2007 3:34:26 AM , Rating: 2
Neat analysis... and totally spot on!


RE: Interpretation
By ZavyZavy on 12/4/2007 7:13:07 AM , Rating: 2
It seems as if the Blu-Ray guy has homicidal intentions and wants to cut off the finger of the HD-DVD guy and have him bleed to death.

The HD-DVD guy knows that coming together is the best way out but it’s hard to trust someone with the sharp cutting instrument and that particular facial expression; and thus the HD-DVD guy instinctively tries to pulls away.


RE: Interpretation
By 16nm on 12/4/2007 9:27:50 AM , Rating: 3
Doesn't HD-DVD sound better and more marketable? When someone goes to buy their HD TV, will they not want to leave the store with an HD DVD, too? How are the non-tech savvy supposed to know what a Blu-ray is? I don't know what Sony were thinking when they drew up that name.


RE: Interpretation
By masher2 (blog) on 12/4/2007 9:45:11 AM , Rating: 2
> "I don't know what Sony were thinking when they drew up that name. "

They were thinking "Well, we can't use 'DVD' in the name, since we just left the DVD Alliance and they still own the rights."


RE: Interpretation
By theflux on 12/4/2007 11:12:01 AM , Rating: 3
Sony didn't leave the DVD Forum. The DVD Alliance is related to the writeable formats, and I don't believe they left it either.


RE: Interpretation
By 16nm on 12/4/2007 4:49:31 PM , Rating: 2
But could they not have just kept it something simple like "Sony HD-Disc"? The key to all this new home theatre technology is the "HD" part. HD TV, HD DVD, HD CABLE, HD SAT., etc. Oh, and Blu-ray, let's not forget that one...

Sometimes, I think Sony really tries to annoy the industry and the consumer. Well, they've really succeeded this time.


RE: Interpretation
By Locutus465 on 12/4/2007 10:08:56 AM , Rating: 2
While I support HD DVD, I honestly thought "Blu Ray" was better marketing, at least for the high end market. I sounds cool and high tech. Too bad that this is a pretty good statement as to what Blu Ray is all about, high price "high end" players only, nothing available for the average joe at all... While HD DVD is all about high quality with a good measure of affordability for those that can't afford the best of the best.

It's a good thing to have a good selection of products ranging from low end to high end.


RE: Interpretation
By Kefner on 12/4/2007 10:36:57 AM , Rating: 3
Funny you say that. I was talking to a buddy who is not the most tech savy out there. We were talking about HD-DVD when I brought up Blu-Ray, his response, "What's Blu-Ray". He got what HD-DVD was just by hearing the name, but not a clue as to what Blu-Ray is. And just for full disclosure, I own both formats. Wasn't bad mouthing Blu-Ray, just pointing this out.


RE: Interpretation
By gochichi on 12/4/2007 10:44:13 AM , Rating: 1
I think HD DVD is confusing for newbies. Especially since they confuse it with HD up converting DVD players. The folks at Circuit City even made this mistake twice. I told them I was looking for an HD DVD player and they repeatedly pointed towards HD up converting DVD players.

Blu-ray is distinct enough, and I think much better marketing.


RE: Interpretation
By masher2 (blog) on 12/4/2007 10:52:39 AM , Rating: 2
> "Blu-ray is distinct enough, and I think much better marketing."

Stuff and nonsense. Billions of dollars have been spent in promoting the DVD brand; it has near universal name recognition among consumers. That's value you can't deny. If Sony had been able to use the name in its brand, you can bet they would have.

Does that mean Blu Ray will fail? No, of course not. But it does mean it requires a significantly higher marketing budget than it otherwise would. There's a higher degree of consumer education required.


RE: Interpretation
By theflux on 12/4/2007 11:10:31 AM , Rating: 3
And also a degree of consumer confusion based on the HD DVD name. Does grandma no it doesn't play in her DVD player on her HDTV? Probably not.


RE: Interpretation
By masher2 (blog) on 12/4/2007 11:28:26 AM , Rating: 2
Certainly no name is perfect, but the name "HD-DVD" alone informs the consumer that the product is an upgrade of DVD, a brand they are already very comfortable with.

And you've forgotten that "consumer confusion" isn't always detrimental from the vendor's perspective. If a few million grandmothers buy HD-DVDs thinking they'll play through their DVD player, that's a net gain for the HD-DVD camp. Confusion is bad only when it engenders a reluctance to purchase.


RE: Interpretation
By Screwballl on 12/4/2007 12:07:50 PM , Rating: 3
There is a problem though.... people in general think that HD-DVD is a high definition version of DVD so they buy it thinking they can just put it in their DVD player... most retail stores will not take a movie back once it has been opened so if these people want to watch that movie, they have to go back out and buy the regular DVD and are stuck with a useless HD-DVD version that if they are lucky may be able to sell.
Now on the other foot those that have a HD-DVD player can watch either one (DVD or HD-DVD) but it is likely downscaled as many people bought it as a DVD player replacement as they only have a standard definition TV.

Only the educated know to use a HD player with a HD TV. A majority of the market is not educated towards this.
My in laws are a perfect example of this, if they saw a movie they liked, they would pick it up and buy it. This was not a problem when it was VHS or DVD. Now there is not only those two but also HD-DVD and BluRay and PSP and whatever else the store decides to carry.
What better way to inflate sales then to have 5 formats all next to each other to confuse people.


RE: Interpretation
By masher2 (blog) on 12/4/2007 12:12:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There is a problem though.... people in general think that HD-DVD is a high definition version of DVD so they buy it thinking they can just put it in their DVD player... most retail stores will not take a movie back once it has been opened...
You're still missing the point. That's a problem for the consumer, but not for HD-DVD. That brand name actually convinced a consumer to purchase product he can't even use! How much better can it get?

From the perspective of brand recognition alone, you really can't get any better than the name "HD-DVD". Even when it confuses consumers, they win.


RE: Interpretation
By aos007 on 12/4/2007 1:48:28 PM , Rating: 2
They don't win if consumer buys an upconverting DVD player (HD DVD as they like to advertise them) instead of a HD-DVD player due to confusion. And that seems to be happening, in Canada at least.


RE: Interpretation
By qwertyz on 12/4/2007 11:33:18 AM , Rating: 2
Just bring sub 100 $ PC HD or BD burners and HD and BD media at the price of current DVD-R media and any format will win the war


RE: Interpretation
By leexgx on 12/4/2007 2:17:05 PM , Rating: 2
that be BD due to the amount you can store per disk at 480P/720p quality, soon as thay get to £100 i be getting one


RE: Interpretation
By xsilver on 12/4/2007 4:17:46 AM , Rating: 3
Shouldnt the picture be of a poor beggar boy wearing a sony t-shirt that says "have pity on me, I havent won any fights in over 20 years"
and in front of him is some hardware such as betamax / MD etc.
with a sign that says "Free to a good home"


RE: Interpretation
By BansheeX on 12/4/2007 6:04:00 AM , Rating: 1
There really haven't been many format transitions in the last twenty years, so that number seems arbitrary and intended to instill a sense of perpetual failure that just isn't there. Sony was responsible for 3.5" floppy disks. CD-ROM was a joint development between Philips and Sony. DVD was a unified effort including Sony and pushed on the PS2. UMD is a niche format that works great for PSP games and its movies were never intended to compete with or replace DVD. And now Blu-Ray, a joint development between Matsushita, Pioneer, Philips, Thomson, LG Electronics, Hitachi, Sharp, Samsung and Sony is outselling HD-DVD 3 to 1.

It's also funny how many people call the clearly depicted "Blu-Ray" person as "Sony." That viral hate is obviously working its magic in the blogosphere. Just because Sony is the only BRA member in the console market and using the format doubly for such doesn't make them the format's sole proprietor.


RE: Interpretation
By retrospooty on 12/4/07, Rating: -1
RE: Interpretation
By retrospooty on 12/4/2007 9:46:29 AM , Rating: 3
I personally dislike Sony, becasue as long as I remember, since I was a child, they are always involved in a format war and cant ever seem to get it through their heads to just work and play well with others. They are stubborn, expensive, and never learn. The benefits of some of their tech is FAR outweighed by the negatives of their management decisions. And dont kid yourself. Allthough there are other players on the blueray bandwagon, it IS a Sony format and Sony is the reason its so expensive, and the reason there is yet again, another war slowing HD adoption for all of us.

I finally found what I was looking for when I made my first post earlier, it was posted many months ago by a user named dice11

"It's Sony's own fault. For something to go right, they should;

*improve their unethical business practices
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Sony_CD_copy_pro...
http://dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3837

*lower costs on overpriced products
http://dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3780
http://dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3438

*stop making half-assed hardware
http://dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3744

*stop being so proprietary
-memory stick
-umd format
-betamax
-bluray?
-all of their hardware?

*and stop making bad batteries.
http://dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3824 "


RE: Interpretation
By masher2 (blog) on 12/4/2007 9:43:58 AM , Rating: 3
In addition to Betamax and UMD, you forgot several other failed Sony formats:

Minidisc (MD)
HiMD (the even more dubious MD replacement)
HiFD (Sony's "floppy killer")
SA-CD
ATRAC
MMCD (abandoned in favor of DVD)
SDDS

I would also list things like Memory Stick and Hi8, but its more difficult to call these outright failures.

> "It's also funny how many people call the clearly depicted "Blu-Ray" person as "Sony."...

Sony is more than "just a member" of the BDA. They founded the Alliance, they own a majority of the IP (and thus the license fees) behind BD; and they are, by far, the corporation with the largest financial stake in BD, and correspondingly the one pushing BD the hardest.

Equating Blu Ray to Sony is incorrect by only the most trivial of technicalities.


RE: Interpretation
By gochichi on 12/4/2007 10:25:09 AM , Rating: 3
MiniDiscs were always cool, they are so cool, that I almost want to go buy a MiniDisc walkman right now b/c I always wanted one.

Remember that just b/c these formats weren't adopted by you, and people around you it doesn't mean that they weren't a success. Chicago and the coasts embraced MiniDiscs far more than places where people drive to work.

I absolutely love UMD video disks, unfortunately Sony got too greedy with them... b/c at $5.00 to $9.00 a movie, I would own easily own 25+ of these disks. I really enjoy they're simplicity and the fact that they aren't pirated. I especially enjoy the PSP's sharp screen and the fact that I can watch a movie without my glasses for a change.

Sony makes cool stuff, and it's not really important stuff either. They don't affect anything vital. I think that while there may be some profit motives, these odd formats are more about fun, elegance, uniqueness, branding, quality control, pizazz and probably piracy control than they are about pure greed as people tend to suggest.

Oddly enough, so many of these formats you mentioned are really freaking cool. I mean, I kind of wish that SA-CD had succeeded, instead everyone went with crappier than CD quality for all of their music. Can't really get too excited about that move. Why even rip your CD in lossless right? It's not like quality matters to ANYONE ON THIS PLANET. Let's instead carry with us 10 days worth of low quality music in our pockets... YAY! NOT!

Quality matters to Sony, they have a brand equated with quality, and I'm not sure they're mistaken in pushing for quality even when they could sell junk at a higher profit like everyone else. Sony is so big it thought it could afford to be lofty and stand by quality, but as it turns out, taste level is so low that we may just prove them wrong.

By all the Sony hating, I gather that many believe that even huge companies have to lower themselves to the lowest common denominator in order to survive. I think it's a bad model for profit, but I'm not about to lynch Sony over this nice thing they're doing.

On the off chance that Blu-ray does fail, I'll be getting Blu-ray just for posterity b/c if Blu-ray fails I doubt we'll ever see a company release something better... like ever. Do you see something better than SA-CD coming any time soon?

People still collect and covet Neo-Geo consoles... bad profit model, but they made some awesome stuff. I put Sony in that category in some respects. Right next to $200-$300 cartridge based games like Fatal Fury.

You may see that as an insult, I certainly don't.

So popular vote is the only thing that matters then? So I guess I have to love George Bush too then right? Just b/c the tyrannical majority must favor cheap junk and downgrades, doesn't mean I have to hate Sony for being different than that.

Downloadable content in HD that is less than 15GB for a movie is simply not true HD, it may very well succeed as has the iPod and countless other junk, but it won't make it right. Democracy may make it so, but it sure as hell doesn't necessarily make it right.


RE: Interpretation
By masher2 (blog) on 12/4/2007 10:50:01 AM , Rating: 3
> "Oddly enough, so many of these formats you mentioned are really freaking cool."

Certainly, many of them are technically superior to their alternatives. However, the usefulness of a format is defined by its ubiquity. What use is a videoplayer that outputs 4320p in 48 bit color, if the only media you can get for it is a copy of "Plan 9 from Outer Space" and some "Brady Bunch" reruns?

> "Just b/c the tyrannical majority must favor cheap junk and downgrades"

Now you're just being silly. First of all, many of Sony's endeavors really are no better. Secondly, the "tyrannical majority" isn't forcing you to buy anything. You could have bought your MiniDiscs forever...had Sony not chosen to stop making them. Guess they care about the profit motive after all, eh?

> "I absolutely love UMD video disks, unfortunately Sony got too greedy with them... b/c at $5.00 to $9.00 a movie, I would own easily own 25+ of these disks"

Are you the same person complaining about people buying only "cheap junk"? And you won't shell out to keep your favored format afloat?

I sense a little bit of a disconnect here...


RE: Interpretation
By wallijonn on 12/4/2007 10:59:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I absolutely love UMD video disks, unfortunately Sony got too greedy with them... b/c at $5.00 to $9.00 a movie, I would own easily own 25+ of these disks.


What you are not saying is that UMD discs are priced the same as DVDS. (Actually many are priced like BD or HD).

What ever happened to the Sony promise of downloading 10 movies to a 4G memstick for the PSP?


RE: Interpretation
By JoshuaBuss on 12/4/07, Rating: 0
RE: Interpretation
By BansheeX on 12/4/2007 11:40:44 AM , Rating: 1
The thing is though, people who selectively focus on the failures while ignoring the successful formats aren't making any sense. I don't think people understand the current or historical implications of boycotting Sony. For one, you'll have to dump all of your music and game CDs. Nintendo fans can go back and imagine the Genesis doing much better against the SNES with a comparable sound chip, possibly winning over developers like Square and killing off Nintendo before they reached unkillable status. Trying to put blu-ray in a bad light with poor analogies and selective logic makes even less sense, and those are the attacks I defend Sony against. Sony is a massive electronics company who have developed far more great things that bad things, and frankly, they're not the only ones in the business of making formats. Royalties are lucrative and everyone is vying for them. It's business. There is not some inherent evil quality in a Sony attempt to bring something to the market and see if it sells. No one is defending the rootkit debacle or arrogant decisions that led to betamax's failure, but those are separate issues and deserve separate criticisms. You even list MMCD as a "failure" but Sony actually reached a compromise spec with the competing format. So even when Sony takes people's advice with DVD, it gets listed as a "failure"? See what I mean... there is no deeper consideration anymore, it's just parroted junk from Maddox and 360 forums that exaggerate Sony's faults to unrealistic proportions.


RE: Interpretation
By masher2 (blog) on 12/4/2007 12:09:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You even list MMCD as a "failure" but Sony actually reached a compromise spec with the competing format. So even when Sony takes people's advice with DVD, it gets listed as a "failure"?
For the people who bought MMCD drives, Sony's subsequent compromise didn't help them, now did it?

Yes, Sony has had quite a few succesful formats. But you're missing the point. Most companies don't attempt to create proprietary standards in areas where ubiquity and standardization is so important, like audio and video. Sony has backed quite a few losers though...and the consumers that bought into those formats suffered as a result. Does it help them to know some other Sony format succeeded? It wouldn't soothe me much.

Does this have much relevance to Blu Ray? Not really...Sony learned from its mistakes, and enlisted much more to its cause this time around. BD isn't a proprietary format, its more of a "semi-proprietary standard". Sony controls the BDA, but the additional stakeholders gives the format far more chance of survival.

Do I hate Sony? No; they're one of my favored brands, in fact even today. But that doesn't change the fact that Son'y missteps in the past have been expensive, both for it and many consumers.


RE: Interpretation
By thartist on 12/4/2007 2:36:45 PM , Rating: 2
That's sooo NERD, sounds so biased and isn't even intelligent.

The author of the comic achieved it best in the opposite way.


RE: Interpretation
By Schadenfroh on 12/4/2007 9:47:09 AM , Rating: 2
Eh? Toshiba is the one resorting to paying studios off to go exclusive to HD-DVD.

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/format-war/hd-dvd-paid-...


RE: Interpretation
By porkpie on 12/4/2007 10:17:50 AM , Rating: 5
Whereas Sony bought several entire studios outright, then forced them to use BD exclusively.


RE: Interpretation
By mcnabney on 12/4/2007 4:11:02 PM , Rating: 1
Which actually is going to seriously screw the general public when HD-DVD wins out and the Sony studios are still only releasing on BD.

Sony is the ultimate monopolist. They make Microsoft look like a Linux user. Microsoft has been developing for Apple for decades. Sony won't play unless it is on their field and using their rules.


RE: Interpretation
By Schadenfroh on 12/4/2007 6:05:46 PM , Rating: 2
Eh? That happened long before BluRay disc was even on the drawing boards, wasn't Columbia bought back in the very early 1990s?


RE: Interpretation
By AstroCreep on 12/4/2007 10:45:43 AM , Rating: 2
I appreciate the analysis; I took a look at it and went "WTF?".
Guess I'm not as quick-witted as my mom thinks. :p


RE: Interpretation
By cubby1223 on 12/4/2007 1:22:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
but Sony is ready to cheat to get free, rather than compromise.

We all know Dailytech users vastly favor HD DVD which is the only reason this crap got rated up to 5. Let's take bets how fast my comments get rated down.

Sony is the one that should have compromised? The BDA had the Blu-ray format created first. Then when it came time to decide a standard for movies, Toshiba jumped in and said "I don't want to lose out on my dvd royalties" and convinced the DVD Forum that it's in their best interest too not to lose out on dvd royalties. Thus the DVD Forum chose HD DVD. But the DVD Forum is not the all powerful deciding group in movie formats, the DVD Forum handles DVD, and as much as no one wants to admit, HD DVD is a competing format to DVD, not an extension of it.

Toshiba and the HD DVD group's goal is for co-existence, they've been talking about it all year. Not because that's how they feel, but that's the realistic best-case scenario for them. Just end the format war now and let everyone be happy buying high definition on optical instead of Microsoft's dream of drm-filled non-interactive downloaded crap. Oh, have I mentioned which side Microsoft stands on the format war issue?


RE: Interpretation
By masher2 (blog) on 12/4/2007 2:45:37 PM , Rating: 2
> "HD DVD is a competing format to DVD, not an extension of it..."

HD-DVD is owned (and promoted) by the DVD Forum. It's not a competing format.

> "Oh, have I mentioned which side Microsoft stands on the format war issue? ..."

From Wikipedia (sourced from a Videobusiness.com article):

quote:
At the end of June 2005, Sun announced that the Blu-ray Association had chosen the Java-based BD-J interactivity layer instead of Microsoft's HDi. This was based on a BDA board vote favouring BD-J 10 to 4, despite a technical committee previously favouring HDi by a vote of 7 to 5.


Where is the third guy?
By phatboye on 12/4/2007 2:38:20 AM , Rating: 4
This drawing should have had a third guy who plays the smart consumer who sits in the background pointing and laughing at HD-DVD and Blu-Ray idiots fight over a stupid format war. At the same time the third guy is kicking back on a Lay-Z-Boy enjoying his up-scaled DVDs which are good enough to satisfy his HD needs till one of the other two idiots loses in battle.




RE: Where is the third guy?
By zerocool84 on 12/4/2007 4:55:10 AM , Rating: 3
While that may be you, most of the world are not smart consumers and only listen to marketing hype


RE: Where is the third guy?
By FITCamaro on 12/4/2007 7:40:25 AM , Rating: 4
Sales numbers would disagree with you. They can taunt their sales figures all they want, DVDs are still vastly outselling them both.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By gochichi on 12/4/2007 9:54:49 AM , Rating: 2
I kind of agree about DVD. But that assumes that this generation wasn't meant to be more special, more video-phile-esque than frigging me-too DVDs.

I mean in the time of VHS/BETA (which by the way, Beta was frigging awesome, I don't even understand why people can't just acknowledge that USA went with the lesser format already. Beta tapes were slicker, smaller and had better image quality, these are well known FACTS.)there was LaserDisc which was incredibly cool and unique.

So while "waiting out" is perfectly understandable for those of us with mediocre HDTVs, it can't be called anything other than wasteful and stupid to spend $2k+ on an HDTV and then have some meager upscaled junk on them... c'mon, that would be ridiculous. That's like having an Escalade with the struts and wheels of a Corolla. If you want an Escalade, get one, if you want a Corolla, get one of those then.

I bought my HDTV second hand and it's pretty sweet, it's only 34" though and it handles DVDs better than can be believed due to the small image size and in great part b/c CRTs handle low-res content SO MUCH better than newer technology. Not to speak of how much better they handle black and colors... but anyhow, I spent $175.00 on my HDTV and broke my back carrying the classic beauty Sony's first HDTV... so going to the library and borrowing DVDs for free and over the air HD makes sense for me. If I were to unload $2K+ on a TV, particularly a 1080P TV, I'd surely be glad to have a true HD movie... though I may be satisfied with a cheapo quality 1/4 the info HD XBOX download I suppose.

This gets me to the truly ridiculous thing, why buy $2k+ HDTVs when you can't tell the difference between a 5.2GB HD download and a 30GB Blu-ray movie? Frankly, I'd get some deluxe corrective LASIK for $3k before that so that I could see WT heck all the hoopla is about first and foremost.

Things should match fellas. Things should match, so no it's not silly and there's definitely a market for Blu-ray. It may never quite hit the level of mainstream that DVD has, but I frankly don't see that as a bad thing AT ALL, for anybody (including Sony).

If not because Blu-ray's so much better, then at least b/c HDTVs also started out as overpriced junk that didn't look any better than CRT technology, but now... wow, TVs are clearly better than ever now, and at a great price. CRTs like the one I own can't be produced and shipped (at a profit) for under $1,000.00 that's all there is to it. Blu-ray will make it for sure, I think merging with HD DVD would be spectacular and ensure faster success for both parties. If they called a truce with Sony at the leadership, I could totally see a PS3 that handled both formats, like an actual high end feature on the high end PS3. Rather than a slightly less awful hard drive for $100.00.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By mcnabney on 12/4/2007 10:16:21 AM , Rating: 2
VHS won because it was cheaper and had longer recording tapes.

Why is a new HD media that important when there are only a few hundred titles available on either of the new formats? People know they are going to be stuck watching regular DVDs for a while now - why pay the early adopter premium and also risk having a $500 paperweight in three years?

You answered your own question. 720p HDTVs make regular DVDs look pretty sweet. Why upgrade?

Why should things match? I didn't see SVHS taking off even though it offered better picture quality through the S-video port. And it was around for a decade when all the TVs came with the S-video ability.

One of the invisible factors is the uncertainty of people with the idea of having to buy a whole new collection of media. They look at the hundred discs on the shelf and know that they look great on their new TV. They don't see the need to make that investment obsolete so quickly.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By gochichi on 12/4/2007 10:40:52 AM , Rating: 1
Longer recording tapes... meaning, a cheap junkie quality setting that stretched that tape into holding hours of horrible video. I remember, and I wince.

You pay the early adopter fee of $500.00 b/c you paid the early adopter fee for 1080P.

My TV is not 720p. It only does 1080i, and DVD magic mode... seriously, DVDs look damn good on high end CRTs. DVDs however, look pretty horrid on a 55" Rear projection LCD HDTV and they look pretty horrid on my 24" computer monitor.

SVHS... well if you haven't noticed, I don't like to turn my back on old things that were superior and yet failed. It's too bad SVHS wasn't nearly as obvious of a purchase for $500.00 TVs with S-video as Blu-ray is for $1.5k+ HDTVs today. SVHS was cool, thanks for pointing that out.

Surely, having to buy a whole new collection of media is not very enticing, which is why all the hardware overload that Blu-ray requires makes so much sense in the coming years. I liken S-VHS to HD DVD and LaserDisc to Blu-ray. Eventually you'll be able to buy a Blu-ray drive for $50.00 but your collection will still be worth having.

The fact that DVD is as good as it is, means that it should be followed with the best available technology and not the cheapest trick available.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By porkpie on 12/4/2007 11:05:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The fact that DVD is as good as it is, means that it should be followed with the best available technology and not the cheapest trick available.
Right. That's why I didn't buy into the cheap trick of BD with its region-locked discs, players without PiP or Internet connectivity or crappy BD-Java. Thankfully they seem to have stopped those incredibly bad MPEG-2 encoded discs at least.

HD-DVD is the better format. Same audio, same video, more functionality.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By BansheeX on 12/4/2007 12:07:16 PM , Rating: 1
Same audio - Wrong. There are far more blu-rays with lossless audio tracks. Transformers itself couldn't feature a lossless audio track for space reasons.

Same video - True.

More functionality - debatable, and who really cares? It's a movie for god's sake. Is PiP (lol?) and having to wait three months for Harry Potter to come to your region more important than audio quality or 10gb larger single layer recordables? No, it isn't. So overall, BD is the better justification at the prospect of rebuying all your DVD movies in a new format.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By porkpie on 12/4/2007 12:23:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"There are far more blu-rays with lossless audio tracks."
Lol, like that helps anything. 98% of all movies are stil MASTERED in 24-bit 48khz sound or less, and nearly all movie theatres are still scaling it down by playing in low-bitrate AC-3. 192 khz DTS-HD is so far above that as to be silly...lossless audio is a buzzword for geeks who like to think they're getting something better. You aren't going to hear any difference, especially when the film itself is being recorded at a standard so far below.

When it comes down to a choice between struggling with region-locked discs, less on-disc interactivity, no PiP, no Internet connectivity, versus "lossless audio", I'll take the former.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By BansheeX on 12/4/2007 5:03:46 PM , Rating: 1
The difference between lossy and lossless compression is far more noticeable than increasing the frequency past 48khz, but I welcome both upgrades and blu-ray's capacity to allow for them. Of course, it all depends on the quality of the source and your speakers to hear the difference, just like HD video largely depends on having a great tv set to see the benefit over DVD.

Anything past 24/96, though, is truly a marketing facade. There are limits to human hearing. But yes, the idea that consumers are going to commit to HD-DVD over BD with sketchy arguments like "you won't be able to tell, trust me" just doesn't strike me as something a smart person would risk to save a bit on player cost. Lossless GUARANTEES that you are getting no perceived degradation from compression. You don't have to believe in an algorithm removing data to save space because it thinks you can't hear it.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By porkpie on 12/4/2007 5:16:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Lossless GUARANTEES that you are getting no perceived degradation from compression. You don't have to believe in an algorithm removing data to save space because it thinks you can't hear it.
A. HD-DVD supports lossless compression.
B. Most BD releases have used lossy compression, not lossless.
C. You don't need to "believe" in an algorithm to know you're not losing anything you can hear. You just have to use your ears. Time and time again, its been proven that people can't hear any difference. Our ears are much less sensitive than our eyes, and if we can't see artifacts in the (much more heavily compressed) video, we certainly won't hear any in the audio.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By BansheeX on 12/4/2007 7:34:01 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
A. HD-DVD supports lossless compression.


No duh. Support for something doesn't automatically result in its use. 30GB often isn't enough for both lossless audio and bonus content (Transformers comes to mind), and even though they're capable of using two discs, that again is besides the point when studios have the opportunity to squeeze on 1 with some sacrifices save money. When you have a 50GB disc, however, the studios have no reason not to, so it gets done a lot more.

quote:
B. Most BD releases have used lossy compression, not lossless.


Wrong, 61% (MOST) blu-ray discs use lossless audio compared to only 20% for HD-DVD. If I were admin I would flat out ban you right now for blatant spreading of FUD. You seem to think that if you respond with the opposite every time, you can win, regardless of facts. That's not how debates are supposed to work.

http://www.blu-raystats.com/index.php

quote:
C. You don't need to "believe" in an algorithm to know you're not losing anything you can hear. You just have to use your ears. Time and time again, its been proven that people can't hear any difference. Our ears are much less sensitive than our eyes, and if we can't see artifacts in the (much more heavily compressed) video, we certainly won't hear any in the audio.


Totally subjective to say that it's been proven people can't hear the difference. I want to see some links to your claims that it's been proven. I can definitely hear the difference on my high end speakers between compressed modern soundtrack and a lossless one. It's why I use FLAC instead of MP3 when ripping my CDs. I say it's a benefit greater than that of PiP or some other minor feature because it improves or has the potential to improve the enjoyment of the film itself.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By Locutus465 on 12/4/2007 8:10:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No duh. Support for something doesn't automatically result in its use. 30GB often isn't enough for both lossless audio and bonus content (Transformers comes to mind), and even though they're capable of using two discs, that again is besides the point when studios have the opportunity to squeeze on 1 with some sacrifices save money. When you have a 50GB disc, however, the studios have no reason not to, so it gets done a lot more.


Completely false, Paramount doesn't put TrueHD tracks on any realease (short of star trek) speacial features or no... On the other hand WB puts TrueHD & DD+ tracks & Loads of speacial features on all of their HD DVD content. In fact the average WB disc has more SF's on them then Transformers disc 1 did, Harry Potter OOTP will even have a remote play SF (not possible with bd btw) and still contain a TrueHD track. So lets stop with this "not enough space" FUD and just come to terms with the fact that Paramount doesn't like to include lossless audio on their HD content. It should be noted that Paramounts BD releases generally also failed to include any sort of lossless audio... I'm sure they told people that 50GB wasn't enough space then too.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By porkpie on 12/4/2007 8:28:43 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
30GB often isn't enough for both lossless audio and bonus content
So why are half the BD releases that have lossless audio on 25GB single-layer discs? Last time I checked, 25 was less than 30.

quote:
"Wrong, 61% (MOST) blu-ray discs use lossless audio. If I were admin I would flat out ban you right now for blatant spreading of FUD"
Lol, what a total p***ses you BD freaks are. The last time I looked, the stat was in 45% range. Now that its up another 15%, you think I should be banned for quoting the old figure?

Fact facts. No one can hear the difference in lossless audio and, even if they could, most movies could fit it easily on a 30GB disc.

What REALLY matters to the consumer is price...and all the extra DRM crap they'll get with BD, once Sony finally gets BD-Java working. Sony has come out flat and ADMITTED the extra DRM capabilities are a major reason studios should support BD

Honestly, is your freaking PS3 purchase worth voting for extra DRM for the next ten years? Get a clue.

quote:
I can definitely hear the difference on my high end speakers
See "placebo effect" for an explanation.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By SavagePotato on 12/4/2007 8:44:20 PM , Rating: 1
Bothering to converse with the two hd-dvd evangelists your wasting your time on is like debating racial tolerance with Adolph Hitler.

You are dealing with people that actualy beleive their own lies, that sums up the entirety of hd-dvd support.

When hd-dvd is hanging by a thread(read soon) and every major studio has ditched it, they will still argue that it is winning or actualy is superior because despite being inferior it has magic powers because it's not made by Sony.

In short, it's a lost cause. Change the name of this site to hd-dvd fud-tech.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By porkpie on 12/4/2007 9:19:45 PM , Rating: 1
Because you're not debating. You haven't once answered a single point we've made:

1. HD-DVD sales are increasing (fact)
2. HD-DVD studio support is increasing (fact)
3. HD-DVD has a richer feature set (fact)
4. HD-DVD has less intrusive DRM (fact)
5. HD-DVD costs less (most important fact)

All you keep doing is whining "but BD is BETTER!", ignoring the fact that real consumers wouldn't give a rats ass about lossless audio even if they COULD hear a difference (which they can't).

Now you're comparing hd-dvd supporters to Hitler. You really are a true fanatic, aren't you? I salute you.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By SavagePotato on 12/4/2007 11:54:59 PM , Rating: 3
You like to make up your own facts.

1, hd dvd sales are increasing much slower than blu ray sales which double them and are pulling ahead further.

2, hd studio support is not increasing, paramount was bought off on an 18 month deal which does have an expiration.

3 hd-dvd has one feature not currently in blu ray's spec, network support.

4 good luck copying your hd-dvd disc without commiting piracy.

5 hd dvd players cost a minor amount less, $100 for comparatively specced players (no the hda3 is not a real hd player), in the end there will be little to no difference to the mass market consumer in cost.

....

BD is in fact superior, this is established, even you yourself know this, however choose to tell yourself hd-dvd is. Reason, you hate sony primarily, reason two, you are ignorant to reality.

reason 1, more space, more bitrate. the prime reason you ignore like all heavy denial-dvd users.

reason 2, futureproofing. Given the inevitable price drop to next to nothing for both technologies, blu ray offers the customer more.(yes that includes offering every single feature hd-dvd does including network support in profile 2.0.) More space equals more on one disc, inevitable 100gb discs equal the possibility of full 1080p extras in addition to superior audio and video.

Now you will come back with IT HAS THE SAME VIDEO! NOONE WANTS LOSSLESS AUDIO! I WANT TO SAVE 100$ NOW AND SCREW EVERYONE OVER FOR THE FUTURE BECUASE I'M A TIGHTWAD THAT HATES SONY WAAAAH.

Does that sum it up for you? Call me when you are willing to accept reality.

1 your format is inferior.
2 your sales suck.
3 your industry support is poor.
4 your POS format is holding up HD adoption which would already have seen much lower blu ray prices if fools weren't clinging to the idea of supporting an inferior format to spite sony.
5 after the lackluster holliday sales continue more studio support is going to vaporize for your format.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By mcnabney on 12/4/2007 12:28:23 PM , Rating: 2
Nobody cares about lossless audio. Most people can't tell the difference between a 256k MP3 and a CD. The shape of your room and your acoustically live or dead furniture have a far greater impact on how your movie 'sounds' than any compression.

If you buy DVDs for the extra features, which I do not, you will value all the HDDVD gimmicks. I imagine the early-adopter consumer falls into that category.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By wallijonn on 12/4/2007 11:18:22 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
They look at the hundred discs on the shelf and know that they look great on their new TV.


Ignorance IS bliss, so long as an HD/BD movie isn't directly compared to an SD all will go well. But once you see the difference first hand it is hard to accept even upconverted movies.

Me, I'm still trying to find more SuperBit movies, if only to get rid of the trailers, the documentaries, the 'making-of's, the artwork, the deleted scenes and out takes, the myriad languages, the numerous subtitles, the three differnet audio codecs.

All that filler translates to poorer quality on a DVD, especially when there are two versions of the film on the disc (wide screen and full, or theatrical and extended, or theatrical and director's cut.) Then you no longer have 4.5G (just one layer) for the movie, you've got a lot less. Compression. Causes degradation.

Some of us can tell the difference, even with an Oppo 981HD. I shutter to think what a $50 up converting DVD player looks like.

Yes, I have a friend who has her 56" Aquos up converting a 480p player. She says it looks great to her. I couldn't get home fast enough to watch my HD setup. She still has analogue cable, too. I prefer OTA rabbit ears to cable. Nah, I just hate cable, period.


RE: Where is the third guy?
By mcnabney on 12/4/2007 12:30:31 PM , Rating: 2
So you are getting on the 4K bandwagon now, right?


Innuendo
By wordsworm on 12/4/2007 2:32:25 AM , Rating: 1
Are you suggesting, by using a Chinese finger trap, that China somehow has something to do with this trap? Are you trying to say that while Japan is duking it out, some Chinese manufacturer is going to find out a way to offer both formats for a mere $100 or so?




RE: Innuendo
By James Holden on 12/4/2007 2:35:42 AM , Rating: 5
Or maybe he's suggesting these two formats are playing stupid games with each other when downloadable media (and on-demand media) already won the format war...


RE: Innuendo
By cunning plan on 12/4/2007 3:22:55 AM , Rating: 2
Yup..


RE: Innuendo
By zinfamous on 12/4/2007 9:26:34 AM , Rating: 1
please don't let downloadable media win this war...the quality is simply horrendous.

at least, I haven't seen anything that comes close to rivaling the content that you get on Blu Ray or HD DVD. It's well known that HD transfers broadcast on television are sub-par compared to their HDM counterparts. Band of Brothers (available in Japan...sort of) HD DVD apparently blows away the broadcast version on HBO HD. The same applies for any film released on HDM in comparison to it's broadcast on network HD channels or Hd Net and the like.

all that aside...the Sony hate really is strong on these forums. sad, really.


RE: Innuendo
By mcnabney on 12/4/2007 10:01:18 AM , Rating: 2
Hate and dislike is the normal reaction to the actions of a bully.


RE: Innuendo
By cochy on 12/4/2007 10:09:18 AM , Rating: 2
Are you crazy? I don't think much of the world let alone America has the bandwidth to offer on-demand or downloadable 1080p digital video with high definition surround sound + extra features. Maybe in another 20 years, but certainly we can't be downloading 20GB movies on-demand. There's still a huge market for physical media, DVDs and soon to be Blu-ray/HD-DVD. CDs may be going the way of the Dodo but the same does not hold true for video quite yet.


RE: Innuendo
By mcnabney on 12/4/2007 10:19:52 AM , Rating: 2
Why is 1080p the target download resolution. Far less than 1% of the TVs in use today can display that resolution. I would actually expect high quality downloads to be around 720p natively, which can be downloaded pretty well.


RE: Innuendo
By masher2 (blog) on 12/4/2007 10:29:24 AM , Rating: 2
> "Far less than 1% of the TVs in use today can display that resolution."

I don't believe that's correct, given that for 2007, the majority of TVs sold have been 1080p, and most people don't upgrade their TVs on 100-year (the inverse of 1%) cycles. Even in 2006, a substantial percentage of HDTVs sold were 1080p.

Where did you get that figure?


RE: Innuendo
By SigmaHyperion on 12/4/2007 11:41:57 AM , Rating: 2
I'd like to where you got YOUR figures...

As of reports filed just 2 weeks ago, Worldwide 1080p sets only made up 6% (that's SIX percent) of total TV purchases for the 3rd Quarter of 2007. And that's up almost double from last year when it was less than 4%.

Now, while I grant that that number is worldwide and not just the US, there's no way that demand for 1080p sets in the US could possibly be a majority of sales here but only 6% of the total worldwide. We're too big of a piece of the TV-purchasing pie.

I can't find anything breaking down the US market in particular. I have found numerous mentions throughout the 3Q of 2007 that within the next year 1080p sales are expected eclipse 720p sales here -- indicating that they have not yet done so, and aren't expected to for at least another year.

Here's the results of the report:

http://www.digitalhome.ca/content/view/2121/206/


RE: Innuendo
By masher2 (blog) on 12/4/2007 11:59:24 AM , Rating: 2
My apologies. In Japan/North America, 1080p is a majority of 40" and larger HDTVs, not of all sets.

Worldwide, among all set sizes, 1080p was 14% of all LCD sales, 74% of all DLP/LCOS sales, and 10% of all plasma sales. Converting that to an overall for just N.A. is a bit problematic, but probably works out to about a 20-25% share. Still, that means total 1080p market penetration is certainly far above the "much less than 1%" the OP quoted.

Source: http://www.displaysearch.com/cps/rde/xchg/SID-0A42...


RE: Innuendo
By mcnabney on 12/4/2007 12:45:50 PM , Rating: 2
Also, we aren't talking sales from last month. We are talking installed base. That means all the old analog sets, 1080i-only sets, and the ocean of 720p sets.


RE: Innuendo
By masher2 (blog) on 12/4/2007 3:27:06 PM , Rating: 2
> "We are talking installed base. "

So am I. And if 1080p sets are currently 25% of total sales, their market penetration has to be considerably higher than "far less than 1%". Most people buy a new TV set at least once per decade, which mean any given year, 10% of the buying public purchase a set. If 1/4 of those purchased an 1080p set, thats a 2.5% market share right there, even discounting any sales from 2006 or earlier.


RE: Innuendo
By SavagePotato on 12/4/2007 10:40:07 AM , Rating: 1
Even a regular DVD is to large for the majority of North American internet users to download in a reasonable time frame.

So I guess only FIOS customers in the states will be able to get HD content? That is supposed to be the better bet for HD content distribution?

Downloadable HD is a complete utter pipe dream that is in no way feasible with the current infrastructure.


RE: Innuendo
By cochy on 12/4/2007 1:15:42 PM , Rating: 2
It doesn't have to be the target downloadable resolution. I'm just saying that because that's the resolution offered by the HD video formats. TVs will catch up faster to 1080p before the average American can real-time stream the contents of a Blu-ray disc.


RE: Innuendo
By Misty Dingos on 12/4/2007 7:41:33 AM , Rating: 5
The only way that a Chinese manufacturer could offer both formats in one package for less that $100 would be to:

1. Not pay their workers (use slave labor).
2. Steal the technology and not pay royalties.
3. Have government backing to backfill their losses.
4. The two format owners let the Chinese company sell their slave labor built, stolen technology and government backed product on the open market.

It looked do’able until I got to 4.


RE: Innuendo
By mcnabney on 12/4/2007 10:05:03 AM , Rating: 2
The Walmart deal for HD players was for $50 per player, cost to Walmart. Since they can use the same transport, case, and power supply, the only difference is the proprietary chips. So I imagine a dual format player could be produced for around $75. There will obviously be markup from there, but I would think that low $125-150 is a doable price in 2008 if they are serious about a new format actually winning customers.


RE: Innuendo
By thartist on 12/4/2007 2:39:58 PM , Rating: 2
You deserve no less than a 5, maybe the golden 6. Even if green.


To be honest.
By NullSubroutine on 12/4/2007 10:22:06 AM , Rating: 2
Blueray winning video sales right now, HD-DVD winning hardware.

HD-DVD had got a few number of big signings to HD-DVD exclusivity but these movies have not really started to trickle out right now.

When I go into a store and see more HD-DVD available to buy (and good selection that doesnt include the overpriced HD-DVD/DVD combos) I think HD-DVD will really start selling more movies. But right now, when I go into say...Walmart there are more Blueray movies to choose from and if there is a movie I want (and dont already own in my 21 HD-DVD collection) it is either on Blueray or DVD only.

If HD-DVD is really serious about winning they need to get more movies out there and at better prices (not those damn 30 dollar HD/DVD combo disks).




RE: To be honest.
By wallijonn on 12/4/2007 10:55:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But right now, when I go into say...Walmart there are more Blueray movies to choose from and if there is a movie I want (and don't already own in my 21 HD-DVD collection) it is either on Blueray or DVD only.


Faulty logic. The reason why there may be less product on the shelf is because everybody else is buying them, leaving little for you to choose from.

The other reason why there may be more BD is because they had to increase their inventory to fulfill the BOGO or 10 free movies with a PS3 purchase.


RE: To be honest.
By SavagePotato on 12/4/2007 11:00:31 AM , Rating: 2
Of course! theres less HD-DVD in stores because everyone is buying it so fast.

Talk about brilliance, that totally explains why HD-DVD has less than half the sales of blu-ray.

Oh wait, thats right you're talking out of your ass.


RE: To be honest.
By mcnabney on 12/4/2007 12:39:21 PM , Rating: 2
BD sales are exaggerated by PS3 owners who are still buying regular DVDs, but may buy one or two (if that) of the current blockbusters to use on their game player. Those are not the target market for a winning format, but their large numbers do inflate current BD sales. If they PS3 owners purchased media at the rate of HD-DVD component owners they would have 90-95% of the sales instead of 60%. Those PS3 owners will eventually buy a cheap HD-DVD player so they can watch both formats. Combined with the larger and growing base of HD-DVD component owners the media sales will shift toward HD-DVD. Well, unless Sony wises-up and sells a player for $150.


RE: To be honest.
By retrospooty on 12/4/2007 1:17:51 PM , Rating: 3
"Talk about brilliance, that totally explains why HD-DVD has less than half the sales of blu-ray. Oh wait, thats right you're talking out of your ass."

To look at it objectively, HD and Blue Ray sales combined are like 1% of the market. To say that BR is winning because it has .66% and HD-DVD has only .33% is like calling Hitler the WW2 victor after he invaded Czechoslovakia.

The sales have barely even begu heavy advantage. Sony has superior tech on this one, but n for either format and wont start selling in high volume until its cheap. Whichever offers cheapest first will get aneeds to match prices or lose.


RE: To be honest.
By retrospooty on 12/4/2007 1:20:18 PM , Rating: 2
/damn no edit button and mouse jumps..

The sales have barely even begun for either format and wont start selling in high volume until its cheap. Sony has superior tech on this one, but whichever offers cheapest first will have a heavy advantage - Sony needs to match prices or lose.


Wha?
By Trisagion on 12/4/2007 2:41:42 AM , Rating: 2
I don't get it :(




RE: Wha?
By bupkus on 12/4/2007 5:25:10 AM , Rating: 2
LOL


RE: Wha?
By wushuktl on 12/4/2007 6:42:14 AM , Rating: 2
well that makes one of us...

what's not to get?


RE: Wha?
By aos007 on 12/4/2007 1:37:21 PM , Rating: 2
I don't get it either. Must be an American thing.


Just want it to end and BluRay misconception
By da360 on 12/4/2007 11:37:13 AM , Rating: 2
Personally, I just want ONE of them to finally win. Sick of seeing format-exclusive movies. Because I essentally have a BluRay player with my PS3 (I have an Xbox 360, but don't have a HD-DVD drive) and sick of being able to get some movies I want but unable to get some others (like Shrek the Third, which is only on HD-DVD) due to that. It would also severely help the HD movie (as well as the HDTV) market as people don't have to "choose a side" anymore.

Also, there's always been one large misconception by some that they think Sony is mainly controlling the BluRay Association and created the format. In reality, its much like the DVD (or HD-DVD) group were several companies collaborated to create it, Sony is just one of the major players on creating it and running it (obviously too, the PS3 plays a very large role with BluRay):
From Wikipedia: "Blu-ray Disc was started by Hitachi, LG, Panasonic, Pioneer, Philips, Samsung, Sharp, Sony, and Thomson in February 19, 2002, with Panasonic, Sony, Pioneer, and Philips as the back-bone of the foundation."




RE: Just want it to end and BluRay misconception
By mcnabney on 12/4/2007 12:41:55 PM , Rating: 2
Sony owns most of the IP. The rest of them are just groupies trying to stay on top of evolving tech.


RE: Just want it to end and BluRay misconception
By aos007 on 12/4/2007 1:44:42 PM , Rating: 2
Do you have a proof of that? There's a lot of big companies with history of innovation on that list.


By da360 on 12/4/2007 11:09:05 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I just stumbled upon that once while reading Wikipedia, but I also found it on the BluRay Association's website via searching Google. Its apperently on the first press release when they changed the BluRay Founders group to the BluRay Association. It lists the companies that helped create the format.

http://www.blu-raydisc.com/Section-14029/Section-1...

Also, here's a Wikipedia Article about the BluRay founders:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc_Founders

Though reading up, BluRay did originally start out as DVR Blue, a format Sony and Pioneer were working on so obviously Sony did play a big role but once again, they didn't create the format entirely.

But still, I just wish one of them would finally win, or we come to some kind of stalemate to where HD-DVD and BluRay become like the burnable DVD formats, the + and - discs. Basically players drives support will all eventually both and companies release for both. But I doubt that's going to happen soon unfortunately.


Seems accurate
By theflux on 12/4/2007 2:11:55 AM , Rating: 1
Looks like HD DVD is going all out and about to fall.




RE: Seems accurate
By FuzionMonkey on 12/4/2007 2:23:51 AM , Rating: 3
Looks like Sony is about to get a lawsuit for assualt.