backtop


Print 104 comment(s) - last by inighthawki.. on Jan 11 at 3:04 PM


"HD better start giving out those $120 million dollars checks to stay alive. Maybe they can give me some so I can give it to my Make-A-Wish charity, just to shut me up."  (Source: michaelbay.com)
Michael Bay gets back on his soap box

One of the most vocal persons in the Blu-ray vs. HD DVD format wars has been none other than “Transformers” executive producer Michael Bay. Bay is known for his high-flying, over-the-top blockbusters with monstrous explosions, over-dramatic slow-motion sequences and chest-thumping, American flag waving patriotism.

Bay first dipped his toes into the whole debate when Paramount and DreamWorks decided to side with Toshiba and go solely with HD DVD. The move caused Bay to blow a few gaskets.

"I want people to see my movies in the best formats possible. For them to deny people who have Blu-ray sucks! They were progressive by having two formats. No Transformers 2 for me," said Bay in late August.

The very next day -- no doubt after taking his blood pressure medicine -- Bay offered a more calm reaction to the move. "Last night at dinner I was having dinner with three blu-ray owners, they were pissed about no Transformers Blu-ray and I drank the kool aid hook line and sinker," remarked Bay. "As a director, I'm all about people seeing films in the best quality possible, and I saw and heard firsthand people upset about a corporate decision. So today I saw 300 on HD, it rocks! So I think I might be back on to do Transformers 2!"

Two months later, Bay was once again singing the praises of Blu-ray and expressed his support for the standard. “It's short-sighted and it has delayed consumers' moving to HD (home video). As a director, my critical eye is that Blu-ray is where my money is. Consumers are smart, and they are going to wait it out.”

In early December, Michael Bay turned his sights towards Microsoft and blamed the software giant for attempting to sabotage both HD DVD and Blu-ray.

“What you don't understand is corporate politics. Microsoft wants both formats to fail so they can be heroes and make the world move to digital downloads. That is the dirty secret no one is talking about,” exclaimed Bay. “That is why Microsoft is handing out $100 million dollar checks to studios just embrace the HD DVD and not the leading, and superior Blu Ray. They want confusion in the market until they perfect the digital downloads. Time will tell and you will see the truth.”

With the latest turn of events sparked by Warner Bros., we all knew that it wouldn't be long before Bay would step in and offer his own insight on the decision. Lock clockwork, Bay was ready to deliver: 

Well another studio down. Maybe I was right? Blu ray is just better. HD will die a slow death. It's what I predicted a year ago. Now with Warner's down for the count with Blu Ray. That makes it easier for Wal-Mart to push Blu Ray. And whatever Wal-Mart pushes - wins. Hd better start giving out those $120 million dollars checks to stay alive. Maybe they can give me some so I can give it to my Make-A-Wish charity, just to shut me up. Have faith people Transformers will come out in Blu-ray one day!

Why Bay is so concerned about who wins when regular DVDs account for the bulk of the sales anyway remains a mystery to me -- "Transformers" sold 190,000 units on HD DVD during the first week while the standard DVD version raked in sales of 8.3 million during the same period.

Bay should just leave the bickering to Sony, Toshiba and the movie studios and get back to producing kickass movies.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Near Identical
By inighthawki on 1/5/2008 11:21:09 PM , Rating: 4
The fact of the matter is that most people don't realize that both formats are near identical. Both are able to sport 1080p video resolution in mpeg2, and the audio is the same, only depending mainly on what compression the studio wishes to use. Those who say "blu-ray has enough space to have uncompressed audio"...well loss-less compressed audio is the exact same after uncompressed...the SAME, bit for bit. Overall, HD-DVD can easily catch up to blu-ray by adding a second layer, managing 30GB compared to the single layer blu-ray which is 25, both MORE than enough for any HD movie. Not to mention, HD-DVD is region-free, which is a plus for some people, as well as much cheaper overall, with $100-$200 players.

All in all, i'm not trying to start a flame war here, but just saying my 2 cents that i think HD-DVD is better...DONT TAKE THIS THE WRONG WAY, cause i know someone will get mad because of my post...




RE: Near Identical
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/5/2008 11:49:59 PM , Rating: 3
Your right in the tecnical aspect, short of the wavelength of the laser the two formats are exactly the same. The added capacity of blu-ray is merely the shorter wavelength laser being able to read/write smaller and thus cram more on to the disk. After that its all the same. Given that the video is pretty much VC-1 on nearly all movies on both formats, and that the audio is mostly the same between them as well (varies from movie to movie) the real winners here are Microsoft and the VC-1 codec, and Dolby's codecs for audio. What makes this format battle different from VHS/Betamax is that this time, the technical differences are nearly non-existent, enabling hybrid players to be produced very easily. Beta/VHS in the same player would have required 2 trays and 2 sets of mechanics. This is not so since both use CD sized disks this time around and the only real difference is the laser wavelength.


RE: Near Identical
By reader1 on 1/6/2008 4:33:05 AM , Rating: 3
Hybrids are't the solution. HD-DVD is dead.

Consumers want one format.
Studios want one format.
Player manufacturers want one format.

There's no benefit to having two formats. This is an all or nothing situation. There isn't enough incentive to have only part of the market. Now that Blu-ray has the upper hand all they have to do is apply pressure and wait for the other side to cave in. They'll stop producing hybrid players to force higher Blu-ray sales, that will force Universal and Paramount to drop HD-DVD due to lower sales. The only way hybrids had a chance is if it was a 50/50 split with no sign of changing. Right now it's 70/30, Blu-ray. If Universal and Paramount keep dragging out the war all it will do is continue to irritate and confuse people. Only one of them has to switch now to officially end it. This will likely happen soon.


RE: Near Identical
By DOSGuy on 1/6/2008 4:48:35 AM , Rating: 4
Well, this consumer doesn't want one format. I really don't see what the problem with having two formats is. I have a DVD burner that can read and write DVD+R, DVD-R and DVD-RAM, so it doesn't bother me one bit that no one ever won the format war. Once I have a dual format HD-DVD/Blu-Ray player, I won't care about the format war any more and I'll just buy the movies I want in whatever format they happen to be in. By the time hi-def movies make up a significant portion of movie sales, hybrid players will be affordable and no one will care that there are two formats.


RE: Near Identical
By reader1 on 1/6/2008 5:46:34 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
Well, this consumer doesn't want one format.

Why not? What are you gaining by having two?

quote:
I really don't see what the problem with having two formats is.


There isn't a problem as long as all players support both, but they don't and never will. The format companies don't want two formats, so they won't make hybrid players if they don't have to.

This isn't like DVD+-R. The sales of DVD players didn't depend on blank disc sales, so no company could force a winner. But with HD, studios can force a single format because HD players depend on HD movies to sell.


RE: Near Identical
By nosfe on 1/6/2008 7:31:46 AM , Rating: 4
what are we gaining by having 2 formats? a price war, thats what


RE: Near Identical
By reader1 on 1/6/2008 9:17:25 AM , Rating: 5
There's no monopoly on Blu-ray players or movies. Studios and manufacturers will still lower their prices to compete with each other even if there's only one format, just like they did with DVD and VHS.


RE: Near Identical
By nosfe on 1/6/2008 9:53:41 AM , Rating: 4
true, but with 2 formats there is another layer of competition , between those 2 formats, not just between the manufacturers of one format and thats why we already had 100$ players last year


RE: Near Identical
By reader1 on 1/6/08, Rating: 0
RE: Near Identical
By nosfe on 1/6/2008 2:36:56 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Those price drops were intended to eliminate Blu-ray, not to compete against it.

and then in response blue-ray lowers the prices to eliminate hd-dvd, and what we have is a price war


RE: Near Identical
By reader1 on 1/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: Near Identical
By mindless1 on 1/7/2008 6:54:46 AM , Rating: 2
Err, no. It is a price war and people are not choosing by content, they bought a gaming console with Blu-ray in it. BIG difference. Just imagine if that console had HD DVD instead!


RE: Near Identical
By MrTeal on 1/6/2008 3:27:27 PM , Rating: 2
No, having two formats confuses the market, and slows adoption of high def formats. Of those that do decide to take a chance, their numbers are split between the two camps. If the format war is decided, the increase in the number of units sold allows for greater economies of scale.

DVD players didn't really start getting cheap until ASICs started being produced that performed most of the processing onchip and that significantly simplified the board layout of the players and reduced component count. Once volume starts going up you'll start seeing the same with HD/BR players. Having two formats will delay that, not speed it up.


RE: Near Identical
By ShadowZERO on 1/7/2008 10:00:08 PM , Rating: 2
Yep. Having two formats will cause adoption to slow and therefore make it more expensive for the end user in the long run. Then, whether or not a "price war" is going on is a moot point.


RE: Near Identical
By kalak on 1/8/2008 8:22:09 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
No, having two formats confuses the market, and slows adoption of high def formats.


I do not agree... I don´t care if the format is A, B or Z, IF my player can play ALL of then. THAT´S the idea ! Today I can buy DVD movies, and whatever is the media, my player WILL play this. The "Highlander" idea is pure BST !


RE: Near Identical
By sxr7171 on 1/8/2008 6:08:20 AM , Rating: 2
Not really. A product like a movie is said to be in monopolistic competition. If you want movie title "X" then if I gave you a movie title "Y' you wouldn't be happy. Basically this additional layer of competition you speak of comes into play only if title "X" is offered on both formats simultaneously. If the studio is offering an HD version of a movie, they have no reason to price that movie any differently for one format over another. They will price it at whatever they think an HD version of that movie is worth no matter what the format. In other words an HD-DVD version of movie "X" is not in competition with the Blu-Ray version of movie "X." The extra layer of competition only comes into play on the hardware side. We will be much better off with the death of one format and eventually all studios backing that format.


RE: Near Identical
By DOSGuy on 1/6/2008 5:25:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There isn't a problem as long as all players support both, but they don't and never will. The format companies don't want two formats, so they won't make hybrid players if they don't have to.


Hybrid players already exist. The LG GGC-H20L Blu-Ray/HD DVD reader and DVD/CD writer is $299 at my local computer store. I don't have an HDTV yet, but another price drop and I'll probably start watching hi def movies on my PC. LG makes hybrid set top boxes, too, but they're still more expensive than two standalone players. That won't always be true. By the time hi def movies have significant market share, hybrid players will be affordable and no one will care that their are two formats.

quote:
Why not? What are you gaining by having two?


Other than the possibility of a price war, I'm not gaining or losing anything. As I said, I'm buying a hybrid player, so I really don't care that there are two formats.


RE: Near Identical
By jlanders646 on 1/7/2008 5:43:29 PM , Rating: 2
Having both = Price war = much better for the consumer.

They do make super/multi players, while still expensive they will come down. Lg & Samsung are the manufacturers.
CDrom
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
Players
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8504...
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8532...

And they're selling like gold at those prices. I'd prefer both formats to stay alive. Just causes more competition which would be great for us.


RE: Near Identical
By lukasbradley on 1/6/2008 2:37:30 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Hybrids are't the solution. HD-DVD is dead.


I can't tell you how many times I heard the same thing about BlueTooth in the early 2000s.


RE: Near Identical
By inighthawki on 1/6/2008 7:09:43 PM , Rating: 2
Can you please share where you get your statistics? Blu-ray sales may be leading, but i haven't seen a single person cast their vote about whether or not blu-ray should be the ONLY format. It's amazing how much of the population hasn't even entered the HD market yet as well. Just because more people pick format "A" doesn't mean they don't want format "B" at all, it just means that they are in a situation where they want to buy that format. PS3's make up a large portion of blu-ray sales, and a lot of people own them, so who would go and buy an hd-dvd player when a ps3 can play hd movies already?


RE: Near Identical
By reader1 on 1/6/2008 7:44:48 PM , Rating: 2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_high_de...

Those charts say 64/36 for 2007 sales. Now it's going to probably be at least 75-85% in Blu-ray's favor. It'll be pointless to keep two formats.


RE: Near Identical
By mindless1 on 1/7/2008 7:03:13 AM , Rating: 2
You're trying to ignore two key factors:

1) Blu-Ray in a gaming console, not really a consumer choice which format it used rather what was included.

2) Early adopters tend to accept, as they must, paying more than the average consumer eventually pays.

Early figures of Blu-Ray "winning" are not indicative of the market as a whole by any stretch of the imagination. That HD DVD already has 36% given it's slower start, it was becoming evident it was what the consumer shifted to preferring. The problem now is the politics of movie studio backing.

The cheapest players and later writable media possible is in everyone's interest. Once most early adopters have made their initial purchase, still the majority will be without a HD player yet. You'd be surprised how many people don't even have an HD TV yet I suppose? IMO they will think about buying one before the HD player, and if the cost didn't matter they might've already made that jump? They're waiting for their present TV to die or become obsolete because they're not interested in the politics or some "war", they'll just make the most economical choice because their lives don't revolve around an HD format.


RE: Near Identical
By Bioniccrackmonk on 1/7/2008 1:33:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
1) Blu-Ray in a gaming console, not really a consumer choice which format it used rather what was included.


Last time I checked, you could get the base model of the 360 w/ the HD-DVD addon for a little less then the base model PS3. That sounds like a consumer choice to me, just a matter of what the consumer's preference is.

Another thing, when MS released their 360, they decided to do it w/o the HD-DVD drive built in so they culd have their console to market first. Thermal issues aside, I think their gamble paid off for their system because it established a good lead ahead of the PS3 and they were able to move more units because the price was less, which most parents agree is better.

Sony gambled on their decision as well, slower adoption due to higher price, which didn't seem to go well in the beginning. Now, after some time that the PS3 has been out, obviously BR sales are more because there are more players on the market. All of a sudden, going all in on pocket deuces might not have been such a bad idea after all.

As far as the Wii goes, that is comparable to playing Little Mack on Mike Tyson's Punchout for the NES. Some people believed, some people didn't, others had to see it be done. Anyway you sliced it though, victory is theirs.


RE: Near Identical
By mindless1 on 1/8/2008 1:35:43 AM , Rating: 2
Getting something with an addon is not the default buying behavior of the typical consumer. They tend to buy the stock model with the assumption it'll do what it was meant to.


RE: Near Identical
By Bioniccrackmonk on 1/8/2008 9:26:15 AM , Rating: 2
Really, so when you buy your new consoles, they automatically come with 4 controllers and all the games you want? Get real, almost everything we buy today has several additional items to get with it as well. New high def tv, dont forget that expensive hdmi cable. New 5.1 DD receiver, don't forget your monster cables for the speakers. Hopefully you see the point now.


RE: Near Identical
By mindless1 on 1/10/2008 10:57:45 AM , Rating: 2
No I don't see the point at all, because most people will buy the console with the default drive, and monster cables for speakers? Really poor value, as is an expensive HDMI cable relative to a normal one. I guess there's a sucker born every minute? No most people consider the console complete but knew they'd buy games and possibly some add-ons like special controllers but not swapping the internals nor buying some deeeeeelux cabling.


RE: Near Identical
By Brockway on 1/8/2008 7:34:01 AM , Rating: 2
So thats twice now that a Sony console has sped acceptance of a movie format. PS2 was the cheapest DVD player when it came out, PS3 was the cheapest BD player. And those 7 odd million consoles just decided the HD war.


RE: Near Identical
By Bioniccrackmonk on 1/8/2008 9:28:10 AM , Rating: 2
Couldn't have said it better.


RE: Near Identical
By mindless1 on 1/7/2008 6:56:38 AM , Rating: 2
Who would is most people. Just like those that had a DVD player in a gaming console also own a standalone player.


RE: Near Identical
By inighthawki on 1/7/2008 3:07:48 PM , Rating: 2
We're talking about dvd tech, where you can buy the player for $20 at the local store. HD-DVD players and blu-ray players are several hundred dollars a piece, not making them the kind of thing you buy just to have one in every room. A lot of people i know have one hdtv in their house, and their next gen console is hooked up to it, which would also be a good reason not to go spend a lot of money to have a seperate machine to play hd movies.


RE: Near Identical
By mindless1 on 1/8/2008 1:33:41 AM , Rating: 2
We're talking about people who will typically own a standalone HD player not just the one in their gaming console.

We're also talking about WHY Blu-Ray needs to die, because as we knew all along HD DVD players will be cheaper to make. That the early adopters paid a pretty penny doesn't mean much, so it was also with early VCR, DVD, etc.


RE: Near Identical
By Brockway on 1/8/2008 7:46:40 AM , Rating: 2
If you are talking about those people, they apparently didn't matter in the format war. Its the people who bought the consoles that did.


RE: Near Identical
By wallijonn on 1/7/2008 2:03:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
who would go and buy an hd-dvd player when a ps3 can play hd movies already?


People who don't want to pay $400 for an HD player? Given a choice between a $200 HD-DVD player that looks and sounds identical to a $400 BD player which doesn't have as many features, the people will always pick price. What did in HD-DVD was Combo Discs with there exorbitant price and the lack of BOGOs. Given a choice between a $40 HD-DVD and a $15 BD, the choice is simple. It's always been about economics. If DVD sales are slowing when the price of DVDs have reached an all time low, what makes anyone think that HDM will supplant DVDs? I expect the quality of SD DVDs to be go down. But even then the masses may not buy since they are used to seeing $23 DVDs go on sale for $5 a year after release. Interested in the Extended LOTR movies? $9.99 at WalMart. Having already paid over $90 for the set when they first came out I will be hesitant to pay another $75 in HDM. Yes, it may look a lot better, but it may have played itself out, much like the Matrix movies. The Indiana Jones and Star Wars movies may be a different matter since their entertainment value is still strong.


RE: Near Identical
By inighthawki on 1/7/2008 3:05:12 PM , Rating: 2
My point was not so much, who would buy an hd-dvd player over a ps3, my point was, if a person ALREADY OWNED a ps3, why go an by an hd-dvd player if it can already support an hd format?


RE: Near Identical
By Brockway on 1/8/2008 7:56:17 AM , Rating: 2
Next gen console owners are also much more likely to already own an hd-tv to play the things on. Whats the point of people buying those cheap hd-dvd players if they don't even have the gear to watch them as they were meant to ble played? To paraphrase some Sony rep, "putting Bluray in the PS3 is the smartest thing we've ever done." And it looks like it was.


RE: Near Identical
By Oroka on 1/7/2008 3:20:09 PM , Rating: 2
Hybrids are no longer looking like the solution, but a week ago that is where the format war was going. Warner and New Line flip flopping has heavily tipped the studio support in BD's favour.

Toshiba will not give up, they just announced they will start selling Hybrid players, but that will not be enough. Once Paramount and Universal's exclusivity contracts expire, we will see those studios switch too.

Really, Paramount and Universal will be the big winners in this debaucle. They got big payments to be exclusive, sold all those HD-DVDs, and once HD-DVD is dead, they will sell alot of those same titles as BD-DVD to the same people who bought the HD-DVDs.

And what really won this format war? The SONY PS3. People will critize Sony for selling a stupidly expensive game console, admittly causing them to lose money, but when BD-DVD reigns, who will be laughing all the way to the bank? Not Toshiba (oops, there goes $300 000 000 down the drain!)


RE: Near Identical
By neilrieck on 1/6/2008 3:43:57 PM , Rating: 2
I think you've got it a little mixed up. The laser wavelengths for both technologies are identical at 405 nm (a.k.a. blue). The lens aperatures are different which means that a fixed lens pickup on technology "A" can't read the signal from technology "B". I always wondered why one of the vendors didn't install a variable aperature lens to get around this problem. They would have immediately stolen the whole player business. I've heard that the multi-format player from LG employs two fixed-lens pickups (one for each technology) but never understood why these LG players cost more than two players (one HD-DVD and one Blu-Ray) combined. I suspect LG was locked into some sort of restrictive licensing arrangement preventing them from dropping the price. (we are all being jerked around by these huge corporations who don't give a damn about anyone except themselves)


RE: Near Identical
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/6/2008 8:26:43 PM , Rating: 2
Ah right, sorry. Yes, a variable lense would make hybrid players a piece of cake, I too wonder why it isn't being done.


RE: Near Identical
By 16nm on 1/6/2008 4:33:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Your right in the tecnical aspect, short of the wavelength of the laser the two formats are exactly the same. The added capacity of blu-ray is merely the shorter wavelength laser being able to read/write smaller


Oh, so the only difference is the most expensive component of the player? :)

I wonder if LG is using two lasers in their players or are they able to control the wavelength of a single laser.


RE: Near Identical
By sxr7171 on 1/8/2008 5:57:11 AM , Rating: 2
No they use the same wavelength: 405nm. The numerical aperture of the lens and the optics of the disk are the difference. Today, movies are encoded to fit on an HD-DVD and used for both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. If Blu-Ray becomes dominant we can expect encoding higher bit rates for movies. Also while VC-1 is used, AVC is also used. VC-1 is not the only player in the codec market.


RE: Near Identical
By 16nm on 1/6/2008 4:44:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
HD-DVD is region-free, which is a plus for some people


Yep, this is why I like HD-DVD. The cost of the player is not really important. It's the cost of the movies that adds up. With regionless movies, I can buy the Chinese edition of the latest blockbuster while avoiding the nasty US/Canadian prices that studios demand.


RE: Near Identical
By Oroka on 1/7/2008 3:28:32 PM , Rating: 2
Thus you are essentially ripping off the studio that released the movie. That is part of the reason that Warner swapped to BD-DVD, so they could control where and when thier movies are released. Anyways, cant you get lead poisioning from buying Chinese HD-DVDs? (j/k)

Didnt China just ban the release of any new Western Movies in the country anyways?


RE: Near Identical
By rninneman on 1/6/2008 9:44:37 PM , Rating: 2
While both formats support MPEG2/MPEG4-AVC/VC-1 for video and DD/DD+/Dolby TrueHD/DTS/HTS HD-HR/DTS HD-MA/LPCM for audio, HD-DVD is already hitting the wall with storage. For example, Transformers includes no lossless audio because they would've had to sacrifice video quality even though it is VC-1. They were relegated to DD+ because they simply didn't have the storage space left for TrueHD or HD-MA. They opted for lower quality audio rather than lower quality video. That is unacceptable of a format that is less than 2 years old. That is one of the reasons why Bay was so pissed about no Blu-Ray version of Transformers.

So while technically both formats are capable of the same things, Blu-Ray's storage is already advantageous with current content.


RE: Near Identical
By mindless1 on 1/7/2008 7:06:28 AM , Rating: 2
So what you're basically saying is we're close enough to the wall that we should let this format war drag out until there is a successor which is not even remotely close to capacity limited? I mean, that's what I'd be saying, that if we're going to argue over a few dozen % capacity difference in a format we want to use looking forward many years, we've already picked the wrong two alternatives.


RE: Near Identical
By rninneman on 1/7/2008 5:56:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So what you're basically saying is we're close enough to the wall that we should let this format war drag out until there is a successor which is not even remotely close to capacity limited? I mean, that's what I'd be saying, that if we're going to argue over a few dozen % capacity difference in a format we want to use looking forward many years, we've already picked the wrong two alternatives.


I'm not quite sure what you're saying but I'll take a stab at it anyway. To clarify, the capacity alone is reason to end the format war in favor of Blu-Ray if studios are already sacrificing quality due to storage limitations. After all, the whole point of both formats is to provide an experience appreciably better than DVD. The Transformers HD-DVD soundtrack is a perfect example of no appreciable difference over the regular DVD. (The HD-DVD picture however is stunning.)

The few dozen percent you're referring to is actually 67%. Blu-Ray having 67% more storage is a substantial difference. And triple layer HD-DVD is not the answer. It would however be a great way to alienate early adopters since it is not backward compatible. HD-DVD fans love to point out Blu-Ray profiles. At least a profile 1.1 or 2.0 disc is still backward compatible with 1.0 players. Even the 4 layer prototype Blu-Ray demonstrations are supposedly compatible with all existing players with nothing more than a firmware update. Blu-Ray may not provide enough storage for every application, it does cover most applications today.

Your mention of picking the wrong "two" alternatives leads me to believe you are one of these pinheads that believe HVD or Tapestry Media is the future of HDM. Given that those technologies are still in their infancy, the cost is still astronomical, and that not a single consumer electronics company or movie studio is even remotely interested, they will not be competing with Blu-Ray any time soon.


RE: Near Identical
By mindless1 on 1/8/2008 1:50:41 AM , Rating: 2
To clarify, no if the minor real capacity difference is a problem then they're both insufficient capacity for long term adoption. You write that adding layers to HD DVD would alienate but that's exactly what you propose to do with trying to eliminate it with Blu-Ray, so your own argument alone falls apart.

Unfortunately which one wins seems to have nothing to do with consumers, only politics.


RE: Near Identical
By rninneman on 1/8/2008 5:06:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
To clarify, no if the minor real capacity difference is a problem then they're both insufficient capacity for long term adoption.


If Blu-Ray is sufficient to hold a 3 hour movie in beautiful 1080/24p VC-1 video and lossloss audio plus lots of extra features, how is that not enough for long term adoption? What are you waiting for that neither format offered in terms of capabilities?

quote:
You write that adding layers to HD DVD would alienate but that's exactly what you propose to do with trying to eliminate it with Blu-Ray, so your own argument alone falls apart.


Maybe you should go back and reread my post. Triple layer HD-DVD is NOT backward compatible; while there is no official 4 layer Blu-Ray, the prototypes did not require special hardware. The demonstrations were performed with off the shelf hardware with custom firmware. So in theory, existing players could be firmware upgradeable to 4 layer capability. Would that be enough capacity to satisfy you?

Just admit you don't like Bu-Ray for philosophical reasons. Whether it be your investment into HD-DVD or a dislike for Sony formats (which is stupid because last I checked, there were 18 board member companies of the BDA), just admit it rather than making asinine arguments against the format. My guess you own a CD player and have owned a 3.5" floppy drive in the past. Did you resist those too because Sony co-developed them?


RE: Near Identical
By mindless1 on 1/10/2008 10:54:15 AM , Rating: 2
Like I already wrote, you claim that backwards compatibility is a problem and yet you advocate a different tech that obviously isn't either.

Why are you suggesting we must be shunning Blu-Ray because of Sony's involvement? What is the dirt on Sony you are trying to hide or ignore? It almost seems as though you are deliberately ignoring whatever you prefer to.


RE: Near Identical
By rninneman on 1/10/2008 2:07:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Like I already wrote, you claim that backwards compatibility is a problem and yet you advocate a different tech that obviously isn't either.


Triple layer HD-DVD is NOT backward compatible. However, there has been nothing proposed by the BDA that would prevent the discs from being played on even the original Blu-Ray players. Thats right; even profile 1.1 and 2.0 discs will play back on a 1.0 player. (The 1.1 or 2.0 discs will still be playable on 1.0 players; just the extra features will not work.)

quote:
Why are you suggesting we must be shunning Blu-Ray because of Sony's involvement? What is the dirt on Sony you are trying to hide or ignore? It almost seems as though you are deliberately ignoring whatever you prefer to.


Are you even replying to the right post? I haven't used the word "Sony" in any of my posts. Where did I say anything about shunning anything? Since you brought it up, I don't hold any ill will towards Sony like so many others. I think they operate like any other large corporation. They happen to be an innovator of many things which means some things will succeed and some will fail.


RE: Near Identical
By wallijonn on 1/7/2008 2:27:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Transformers includes no lossless audio because they would've had to sacrifice video quality even though it is VC-1. They were relegated to DD+ because they simply didn't have the storage space left for TrueHD or HD-MA.


Or maybe the reason why they ran out of space was because of multiple commentaries, multiple languages, many subtitles, trailers, 'making of,' art, etc. Other than P-I-P they could have probably downloaded the extra content as the movie played or put most of it on a extra DVD.

Yes, it could be said that BD has the space for those extras but it couldn't do P-I-P at the time and it certainly could not download web content.

No, I am not a lover of 20 minutes worth of movie trailers (ala, Disney).


RE: Near Identical
By Chiggs on 1/7/2008 11:26:46 AM , Rating: 2
Awful post which shows a complete lack of understanding of the differences between the two formats, or an intentional FUD piece that makes it a point to leave out certain aspects that would show Blu-ray in a positive light.


RE: Near Identical
By SavagePotato on 1/8/2008 9:44:33 AM , Rating: 2
You dud backers have been repeating that same half truth fud over and over again, the fact is, no one bought it. They know that blu-ray not only has more space but has a higher overall bitrate as well.

If I had a dime for every rediculous fud post about the wonders of dud being exactly the same. Give it up already. People realise blu-ray is superior, Bay realises this, everyone that contributed to the anywhere from 2 to 1, to 10 to 1 advantage of blu-ray knows it is superior.

No one gives a rats ass about region coding save for the few blind enthusiasts that have a hard on for dud, no one gives a rats ass about pip or ethernet connectivity either, but guess what, blu ray has both of those. And the however million PS3's ALREADY in homes have access to all of those features.

The only single thing dud can claim an advantage in whatsoever is region coding, and even that is marginal at best. Since region coding is optional. Give up the fud dudsters, it's over and the people, nor the studios were fooled. They chose the better product.


RE: Near Identical
By inighthawki on 1/8/2008 3:35:38 PM , Rating: 2
No offense, but you and the person above you (Chiggs) sound a lot like blu-ray fanboys, and sound like you don't know much about what you're talking about.

For starters, there are a lot of people who care about region coding. Most studios DO include it, so you're idea about being optional isn't that good when it comes to a studio with a normal studio movie. Also, having a higher bitrate to play a movie that works on both formats perfectly is like trying to say that there is a huge advantage to having a 10k rpm rapter in sata II over a 7200rpm ide133 hard drive to play you're favorite mp3, and I'm not referring to browsing through the directories or if you were using hd intensive applications, since that will never happen while you play a movie.

"Give it up already. People realise blu-ray is superior" - This is not true in every sense. hd-dvd is much cheaper to manufacture, and even with the lower storage space could easily benefit home users to back up files on cheaper media, as well as distributing newer games on single or dual layer hd dvds which end up cheaper and provide you with more content.


RE: Near Identical
By SavagePotato on 1/9/2008 10:52:14 AM , Rating: 2
The bitrate determines how much data is able to make it to the screen at any given time. This fluctuates based on the complexity of the scene.

Tell me, why is it that hd formats look better than DVD in the first place? it's because they are pumping out anywhere from 10 to 45 mbps at any given time based on the complexity of the scene. Blu ray is capable of delivering not just a little bit, but a whopping 50% more overall. That means a bigger less compressed encode which is putting out more to the screen during those complex fast action scenes is possible.

It's simple logic, Blu ray is superior in every spec, and does all the advanced features that dud backers whine about like pip.

Pip I might add that some fud spreaders claimed there would NEVER be a disc in existance that used, on account of older players not having it. Releases are already available that do.

The one single arguing point that is even valid is region coding, which is meaningless to 99%, hell most people don't even know what region coding is.

So yeah, give it up, and spare me the bad apples to oranges analogies using other technologies like hard drives to clumsily try to compare and support a wrong conclusion.


RE: Near Identical
By inighthawki on 1/9/2008 12:10:28 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe before you post "blu-ray is superior omg give it up dud backer" again, you should go research anything about the formats and give me some statistics. Until then, your higher bitrate argument could be thrown in the garbage. The picture on both formats look identical due to the encoding they use.

"which is putting out more to the screen during those complex fast action scenes is possible"
Assuming same compression (MPEG-2), there is no "more or less" on the screen after decompression. It IS the video. If you want to use a different form of compression that doesn't use as much space to compress and uses lessr resources to decode, thats fine, but also pointless, as the end result is the same.


RE: Near Identical
By SavagePotato on 1/9/2008 2:32:01 PM , Rating: 1
For the love of god... can you not use reason.

No f-ing shit they will look the same if it is the same encode. If someone uses blu ray to its potential with a superior encode using superior bitrate it's going to look better.

This is the case with the pirates movies, they top out at 45mbps at times, and they look amazing. DUD would be inferior in those scenes period because all it can pull is 30mbps. You couldn't put the encode of any of the pirates movies on dud one because it wouldnt fit on the dinky disk, two because it can't even do that bitrate.

If Micheal Bay can see this why the hell is it you dud fools can't wrap your head around the idea.


RE: Near Identical
By inighthawki on 1/11/2008 3:04:44 PM , Rating: 2
ok i seer your point, i mistook what you were saying, i thought we were referring to video that was of a single quality, and i wholeheartedly agree with you that blu-ray could support a higher bitrate video.

However, first and foremost, I'm gonna ask you to simmer your attitude down, cause all you're doing is making yourself look like a hick fanboy. Also, back to my original point, do you have ANY other statistics to prove your point other than bitrate? Because so far I've given you several that you've just thrown away (ie, region coding, cheaper, easy for home consumers, etc) and you've given me a bitrate, and as history tends to show, its not always the most technologically superior product that wins. (betamax vs vhs)


Michael Bay?
By lopri on 1/5/2008 9:43:42 PM , Rating: 2
Although I've been leaning towards Blu-Ray due to the amazing piece of modern engineering that PS3 offers as well as the superior size of medium that'd prove useful in the future, I have absolutely no interested in Michael Bay's works.

There is absolutely none of his movies that I'd buy in Blu-Ray. Hell, I haven't and won't buy them in any format. This is the guy who directed movies like "Armageddon", "Pearl Harbor", "Transformers", etc. All of them being textbook examples of how NOT to make a movie.

I haven't seen the Transformers yet but I know it's not going to be worth my time or cash. It's amusing, however, to read his childish comments with regard to the format war.




RE: Michael Bay?
By Wagnbat on 1/5/2008 10:54:26 PM , Rating: 1
I'd have to agree... But not because they are bad movies, but because I'm not fond of buying low-def movies in hi-def formats.

Michael Bay does seem alot like Tom Cruise in that aspect; while his movies are good, his public attitude needs to be handled with a wrench to the face.


RE: Michael Bay?
By mars777 on 1/6/2008 4:09:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
while his movies are good, his public attitude needs to be handled with a wrench to the face


Because he is not afraid to express his opinion?
Are you a nazi?


RE: Michael Bay?
By DOSGuy on 1/6/2008 4:24:30 AM , Rating: 1
Throwing around the word "Nazi" really hurts any argument and makes you look like a jerk. The Nazis aren't even known for censorship. They're known for exterminating over 12 million people and initiating the bloodiest war in history. This is not a term to be throwing around. Frankly, it's insulting to an entire generation who either lost loved ones to Nazi persecution, or sent loved ones to fight and die to stop them.

Try using a word that is a closer approximation of the level of injustice you're trying to describe (and less emotionally charged), like "censor" or "critic" or "freedom of speech hater". All of those words match the offense and don't imply that the target of your criticism is a racist monster who exterminate millions of men, women and children.


RE: Michael Bay?
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/6/2008 1:48:11 PM , Rating: 1
The correct term would be "Are you Communist?"


RE: Michael Bay?
By crazyblackman on 1/6/2008 9:29:40 PM , Rating: 1
What an EXCELLENT response. MAN, that was impressive. Now THATS why I hang around here. YOU stay away from my women.


RE: Michael Bay?
By mindless1 on 1/7/2008 7:52:03 AM , Rating: 1
The only thing more annoying than people who throw around generic stereotypes are those who try to [I]educate[/I] as if they know better.

There is nothing wrong with using emotionally charged words. Life would be bland without them. If you have not yet come to an intellectual resolve of a war won long ago that is your fault not someone who uses a word, even if that use is not correct.

It is not an insult to an entire generation who fought and/or died, as it does not diminish their contribution in any way! Do try to become sane about this, if anyone is throwing around emotional BS it is you equally.

Should the term Nazi have been used? No because it wasn't appropriate. It doesn't justify your argument.

The pathetic part is you aren't even being politically correct, which would would have meant defending against verbal attacks upon the victims, not the instigators.

In short, you're as wrong as mars777, you just used a lot more words to reach that same end. Lighten up already, your idea of correcting others to suit your ideals is in fact the mentality that starts quite a few battles, instead of just letting people be.


RE: Michael Bay?
By Wagnbat on 1/6/2008 6:56:03 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Because he is not afraid to express his opinion?
Are you a Nazi?


No. I'm not even the right color... Regardless, I am not referring to this opinion, but rather the one of his flip-flop nature on the issue. As the author wrote, DVD outsold HD-DVD by 40x. Blu-ray sales wise isn't doing much better overall. Combine that with HD-DVD players going for under $100 this xmas season, and you'll see a lot more strength on the DVD camp.

But MB wants to go off the deep end about Paramount going HD-DVD only. Then he apologizes. Then he goes bi-polar and rants off about Blu-ray again after self proclaiming that he had already 'drank the blu ray kool-aid'.

Flip flopping John Kerry style should earn a wrench to the face, quite fairly, imho. But maybe I'm too conservative.


RE: Michael Bay?
By crazyblackman on 1/6/08, Rating: 0
RE: Michael Bay?
By crazyblackman on 1/6/08, Rating: 0
RE: Michael Bay?
By Wagnbat on 1/6/2008 10:10:59 PM , Rating: 2
No worries. I didn't vote for either of them, because I'm not a supporter of Bush and I would have supported any other candidate better than he. Unfortunately the 'flip-flopping' was the demise of Kerry because even though he wasn't Bush, you couldn't trust him.

That is my point regarding Michael Bay. Sometimes he's on the Blu-ray bandwagon, sometimes he's not claiming he drank the Kool-aid, then he's back on again. All I'm saying he that he discredits himself by doing so, and thus will not make a significant impact with his rants. Much like Tom Cruise.


RE: Michael Bay?
By 91TTZ on 1/6/2008 12:37:42 PM , Rating: 2
-10,000 points for trying to use the "Nazi" card. You suck.


RE: Michael Bay?
By mindless1 on 1/7/2008 7:54:28 AM , Rating: 1
-10,000 points for using the "suck" word? How funny it is when someone tries to correct and acts as pathetic as the one they're trying to correct.


RE: Michael Bay?
By Pythias on 1/7/2008 11:08:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
How funny it is when someone tries to correct and acts as pathetic as the one they're trying to correct.


Are you laughing at yourself? You're correcting someone who corrected someone.


RE: Michael Bay?
By mindless1 on 1/8/2008 1:56:35 AM , Rating: 2
I started laughing and kept on.


RE: Michael Bay?
By robinthakur on 1/8/2008 5:37:56 AM , Rating: 1
As far as I know, the Nazi's were heavily into their censorship. Its CLEARLY shown in Indiana Jones 3 when they are burning all the books and they get Hitler's autograph.(j/k) This is modelled on what went on during the early 1930's as the Nazi's tried to stamp out organised religion. (In my view this was one of their best things they did, if only some enlightened despot would seek to ban all religion we'd all be much happier-albeit without the burning of books) Furthermore in real life Hitler and his supporters assasinated many outspoken political opponents in Germany, so I think he is quite valid in calling him a Nazi or at least a fascist/communist as neither ideology respect freedom of speech.

at the least, some thought has gone into his language, instead of just saying "you suck" which is the definition of pig-ignorant...


RE: Michael Bay?
By 16nm on 1/7/2008 10:47:09 AM , Rating: 2
You are absolutely right. His movies truly do suck big time. I had forgotten that Armageddon was his, but yeah, it fits in perfectly with the rest of his works.


Michael Bay prefers Blu-Ray
By EglsFly on 1/5/2008 8:02:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why Bay is so concerned about who wins when regular DVDs account for the bulk of the sales anyway remains a mystery to me


Of course regular DVDs account for the bulk of the sales! Where have you been for the past 10 years? High Definition Discs are new and will obviously NOT be the bulk of the sales. <smacks head!>

He states as a Director, he feels that Blu-Ray is the superior format and wants his viewers to see his movies in the best format possible.




RE: Michael Bay prefers Blu-Ray
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 1/5/2008 8:50:45 PM , Rating: 3
The point is, HD DVDs and Blu-ray movies look pretty damned similar. The only difference in my experience is the underlying foundation between the two.

If we're talking about what the user will "experience," they'd likely be fine with either format.

I just don't see the fuss bickering about both, when he's got a pretty strong DVD base to fall back on. Michael Bay's rantings aren't going to sway the industry -- let the studios fight it out, then work with whatever wins.


RE: Michael Bay prefers Blu-Ray
By DOSGuy on 1/6/2008 4:12:10 AM , Rating: 3
I agree. The differences between the two formats really are quite superficial. So, Michael Bay threatening to not do Transformers 2 is reason enough for me to support HD-DVD.


RE: Michael Bay prefers Blu-Ray
By Wagnbat on 1/5/2008 10:51:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Michael Bay prefers Blu-ray


Yeah and apparently he prefers Wal-Mart too. Sad that the high definition format war could be decided by the modern day budget warehouse.


RE: Michael Bay prefers Blu-Ray
By sweetsauce on 1/6/2008 4:30:28 PM , Rating: 2
Funny thing is walmart has chosen. They chose hd-dvd because hd-dvd was willing to go cheap for the consumer. Those that think walmart didn't approach sony to make a similar blu player are either stupid or in denial.


oh well
By crazyblackman on 1/5/08, Rating: 0
RE: oh well
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/5/2008 9:59:50 PM , Rating: 2
The hatred towards Sony has little to do with Blu Ray and more to do with the Sony executives and PR during the PS3 launch timeframe (Leading up to and post launch). Sony as a company between the executives, exploding batteries, rootkit, and DRM aren't winning any real friends. The fact that they are the primary backer of Blu-Ray simply means the hatred towards Sony pours over onto that format. I will bet you that if Sony was not in the Blu-Ray camp, many people from the HD DVD camp would be all about Blu-Ray. The hatred is mostly for Sony and Sony's track record is terrible in recent memory.


RE: oh well
By crazyblackman on 1/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: oh well
By DOSGuy on 1/6/2008 4:32:53 AM , Rating: 2
You're right, Microsoft produced a console with an unacceptably high failure rate. I see plenty of Microsoft bashing, too. Like that lovely "M$" symbol that people use to imply that Microsoft only cares about money. Still, I guess Microsoft just hasn't pissed off as many people as Sony has yet. Plus, more people associate HD-DVD with Toshiba than with Microsoft. If it really was a Microsoft format versus a Sony format, people wouldn't know which one to hate more.


RE: oh well
By crazyblackman on 1/6/08, Rating: 0
RE: oh well
By reader1 on 1/6/2008 4:51:25 AM , Rating: 1
That doesn't mean Toshiba is better. I made the mistake of buying a Toshiba DVD player. It was a piece of junk. How in the world does a DVD player have audio syncing problems in 2007?

You just seem to be on some sort of self-serving, anti-Sony crusade, trying to defend the little people. The reality is all CEOs say arrogant things. It's just corporate trash talking, like all competitors do. As for exploding batteries and rootkits, you act like they did that intentionally to hurt people. As for DRM, that's designed to help consumers. As a software engineer, I can tell you Microsoft does absolutely nothing to prevent software piracy (except for themselves of course). You can get absolutely any piece of software for free these days. To all the cyber-hippies, this is great, but the fact is, it's keeping software quality down and prices high.


RE: oh well
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/6/2008 12:10:52 PM , Rating: 3
Doing it intentionally has nothing to do with the issue. If your company is screwing up by the numbers regardless of reason, you are going to draw the ire of consumers. Microsoft catches hell on a regular basis, Sony does as well. Even Nintendo was catching some flames when people were throwing their Wii motes into TV screens or having straps break.

I'm not on a crusade to defend the little people, I downright can't stand Sony and haven't bought a Sony product in a decade. My choice as a consumer. Frankly I find Sony products overpriced and of no better quality than most of it's competitors. Generally my dollar goes to Samsung. Which is coincidentally why my Hybrid/BR player will come from Samsung eventually.


RE: oh well
By sweetsauce on 1/6/2008 4:28:05 PM , Rating: 2
I'll spin this around and ask you this, why don't you hate sony as much as i and others do? As a consumer, i wish sony would just die already. People love to comment on the rrod problem, but i've had plenty of unresolved problems with sony products. I remember having to play my ps1 upside down because sony wouldn't fix my system without charging me half the cost of a new one. My ps2 broke 2 times, but luckily i was smart enought to buy a 3 year warranty and had them replaced for new.
Blu people claim that 2 formats is bad? Short of a 100 blu player, i won't be getting one. If sony has its way, that should be 2 years down the road (no they won't lower the price, history proves this, they will milk it for all they can) so my choice is either a dirt cheap hd-dvd, or good ol' dvds upscaled.


RE: oh well
By crazyblackman on 1/6/08, Rating: -1
Paid per word?
By cochy on 1/6/2008 5:57:46 PM , Rating: 2
Do people get paid per word around here? Cause the first 3/4 of this article was (for the umpteenth time) recapping previous DT articles. I know these Michael Bay quotes by heart already!




RE: Paid per word?
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 1/6/2008 8:32:04 PM , Rating: 2
No, were just summarizing for people that haven't seen the others.


RE: Paid per word?
By cochy on 1/7/2008 10:06:35 AM , Rating: 1
That's one hell of a summary lol


By roadrun777 on 1/7/2008 2:09:25 AM , Rating: 1
Ok, ok... so it seems some accountant couldn't connect the dots with a few of me posts and assumes I must be jumping giddily like some deranged child that received a toy from ACME log company (a log is a great gift! weee), and automatically assumed that my posts where too opinionated to be real (I mean after all who can really have an opinion that strong? WELL I CAN! HA!).
Anyway, regarding the war on HD, I feel that as this war escalates, you will see casualties in electronic boutiques and shopping malls all across America. It is possible to see exploding discs taking out large swaths of innocent potential customers as crazed suicidal fanatic fans strap their favorite flavor of HD format disc onto their bodies and run screaming into large groups of customers buying opposing formats. This could be called the true war of the corporation.
Brain washing young EMO teens who's dire economic situations have forced them to borrow money from their parents, to pay for the admittance fees of modern day doomsday cults of High Definition Format worshipers. Sprawled along the floor you can see teens engaging in what can only be describe as "rolling their naked bodies on piles of their chosen HD format, while making sounds of moaning and ecstasy". These horrendous acts of hedonistic behavior culminate in fits of anger and hatred toward lovers of "other" high definition formats. That is where these cults become dangerous. These HD cults take advantage of the guilty feelings these teens feel after having rolled naked with their favorite movie classics scattered on the floor which, shockingly, included some Disney classics. These cults then help direct their rage at shoppers of "other" high definition formats, even offering them swords, and chainsaws, to exact their revenge.

Please... If you are going to by a high definition movie, try to not stand in groups, and be aware of your surroundings.




By ShadowZERO on 1/7/2008 9:46:44 PM , Rating: 2
After I read your post, these things happened in the following order:

1. I thought, "I want some of what he's on"
2. Then I thought, "Nevermind, maybe that's not such a good idea"
3. I laughed pretty good for a bit.

All in all, not a bad post.


By roadrun777 on 1/8/2008 4:23:58 AM , Rating: 2
Laugh until you pee yourself, but afterward stop and understand. If someone you know gets inducted into one of the doomsday high definition cults, you will not be laughing then.
You will feel in this order:
1. You will feel hungry and possibly have a craving for doughnuts
2. You then drive to a local doughnut maker and demand freshly made doughnuts. Yes you will want several varieties.
3. You will then purchase a large assortment of small arms and missile launchers from your local doughnut maker, as everyone knows they have a wide selection of black market armaments.
4. You will find the cult responsible for the brainwashing (which are generally located in a secret back room at your local best buy and electronics stores,) and use the threat of mutually assured destruction to claim your friend/loved one back.
5. You will then drive to a beach, strip off all your clothes, yelling "WOOO! WOOO! WOOO!" repeatedly in front of a group of local church retreat that has come to the beach to pray and reflect.
6. You will then hastily run back to your car screaming "OW! OW! OW!" as the hot pavement and stray rocks burn your feet.
8. You will then write a book called "The war of HD and me" which chronicles the struggles of your life and how affected you and then split the money with the doughnut maker, since you owe him for all the firepower.
9. At this point I have to stop since it goes on and on I will just say "Fin"


I just want to watch movies...
By beckster02 on 1/6/2008 9:29:15 PM , Rating: 2
The average consumer doesn't care about format; they don't care about wavelength, storage capacity, etc. They want a DVD player that will play whatever movie they want to watch, and so long as studios go exclusively with one format, the only option the consumer has is to wait out the fight or buy a hybrid player. Otherwise, stuck buying only movies that come from particular studios.

The two formats are just plain confusing--I've seen people buy HD-DVDs because they think that they'll look better on HD TVs. They don't even realize that they won't play in a normal DVD player. And which format wins is pretty much moot since the technology will change again in the next decade. The difference in movie-watching experience for the average Joe is negligible.

To show my bias though, Sony running off and developing its own format is par for the course--every time there's a new format for something, Sony always seems to throw a wrench into the market by making its own proprietary one.




RE: I just want to watch movies...
By crazyblackman on 1/6/08, Rating: 0
By beckster02 on 1/7/2008 12:55:13 AM , Rating: 2
1) I didn't say the average Joe was negligible. I said the difference in movie watching experience for the average Joe was negligible, as in unless there's a huge difference in quality between Blu-Ray and HD-DVD that even my grandmother would notice, format isn't even an issue.

2) We aren't talking about betamax/VHS and laser disc--we're talking about two technologies that differ marginally from one another in hardware needs and resulting movie watching experience. This is like going with the nickel plated or gold plated USB cables; the millisecond difference in transfer rate doesn't really matter...

3) I wasn't blaming Sony for anything, just making an observation about their sterotypical behavior. Someone's gotta choose the lesser of two evils though: go HD and give your money to Microsoft, or go Blu-Ray and give it to Sony. Are these really my only options?


Lawyers take note (re: Michael Bay Comment)
By neilrieck on 1/7/2008 6:57:34 AM , Rating: 2
Lawyers take note:

Quote: "HD better start giving out those $120 million dollars checks to stay alive. Maybe they can give me some so I can give it to my Make-A-Wish charity, just to shut me up."

With this quote, Michael Bay seems to be inferring that equipment manufacturing consortiums are bribing studio executives with payola. This is illegal and could result in an Enron-sized scandal. If Sony is involved, this could trigger anti-competition investigations by the government since Sony owns a large amount of artistic content (much of it music) as well as being a technology manufacturer (this is known as vertical integration).

Many citizens were encouraged to purchase HD-DVD players over the Christmas season. If any execs received payola but delayed the announcement to drop HD-DVD in order to not hurt sales of their own media, this action could be likened to something as sinister as “insider trading”. If anyone received payola, they might be as deeply involved as the companies who paid it and could be dragged into a compensation scheme.

After the Rootkit fiasco, Sony proactively offered consumer compensation in order to avoid a public scandal. How could a Blu-ray payola scandal be put to rest? Supposedly there are 2 million Blu-ray players out there compared to 1 million HD-DVD machines. On average, Blu-ray players were sold for $100 more than HD-DVD machines even though they contain identical blue-laser diodes (405 nm) although the fixed-lens apertures are different. If this additional money was used to bribe studio execs, then all that money should be seized by the government then transferred to consumers in the form of vouchers so they can swap their HD-DVD players for Blu-ray players. Think it can’t be done? One million times $300 equals $300 million which is in the neighborhood of the inferred bribes.




By ShadowZERO on 1/7/2008 9:36:05 PM , Rating: 2
Sony is based in Japan, so would this type of activity your referring to be still be illegal there? I'm far from any expert on legalities or business, but I clearly remember something about Japan having totally different business ethics and law than in the US, especially in regards to stuff like insider trading. Correct me if I'm wrong.

On another note, the only reason I had kinda been rooting for the HD-DVD camp is because of the rootkit fiasco you mentioned. Even though they legally "passed the buck" so to speak, I'm sure as hell not going to trust a disc technology from the company that basically enforced DRM to the point of installing malware on end-user's systems. I hate the idea DRM too so no surprise there.


True Story
By darkpuppet on 1/7/2008 6:08:14 PM , Rating: 2
True Story:

I gave a list of movies to my mom that I wanted for Christmas. Wherever possible, I specified BLURAY (case will be made of blue plastic) beside the movies.

Well, she got to the store, saw the movies I asked for, the HD DVD version, the Bluray version, and the DVD version.

Which version did you think I ended up with?

The DVD version.... even with a list in the hand, the selection proved daunting at the counter.

And that's why DVD is going to continue to sell well, while the next-gen continues to languish regardless of a winner.




RE: True Story
By Chiggs on 1/7/2008 6:34:28 PM , Rating: 2
So because you posted some anecdote, HDM will "languish?"

Good Christ...this comments on this site are absurd.


By ShadowZERO on 1/7/2008 10:13:09 PM , Rating: 2
“Time will tell and you will see the truth.”

"Have faith people Transformers will come out in Blu-ray one day!"

Is it just me, or does Bay sound kinda like a self-proclaimed prophet? Or perhaps, to those who do not believe his "visions", a raving lunatic?

"What you don't understand is corporate politics..."

Perhaps I could paraphrase. "What you don't understand is that I know more than you, and only in time will you see your own ignorance."

Preach on man, preach on.




By ShadowZERO on 1/7/2008 10:15:50 PM , Rating: 2
Heh, I just noticed that the last quote I gave from Bay reminds me of a Tom Cruise moment or two. No surprise there obviously.


"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot

















botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki