backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 86 comment(s) - last by Jedi2155.. on Dec 28 at 5:46 AM
269,000 Xbox 360 HD DVD drives sold to date in North America

Buried in November’s NPD video game sales data is an interesting bit regarding the make-up of HD DVD hardware owners. According to the tracking firm, the Xbox 360 HD DVD add-on drive accessory has sold a collective 269,000 units in the U.S., making for a 3.4 percent attach rate with the console.

Microsoft does not openly share its sales figures on its accessories, though a company representative did say in June that it had reached 155,000 units sold – showing a slow but steady adoption rate of the HD DVD add-on.

The HD DVD Promotional Group announced in November that it had sold more than 750,000 HD DVD players, including the Xbox 360 accessory, in North America.

The updated numbers from NPD, if accurate, show that Xbox 360 owners with the HD DVD drive account for more than one-third of all hardware owners of the high-definition format.

On the other hand, while standalone players are the majority of HD DVD hardware, it is the gaming console that is leading the way for Blu-ray Disc players. According to data released earlier this month, around 74 percent of all Blu-ray Disc players in North America are PlayStation 3 consoles.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Whats this mean?
By Maximilian on 12/16/2007 3:25:56 AM , Rating: 2
Is this good or bad for hd dvd?




RE: Whats this mean?
By Manch on 12/16/2007 3:44:40 AM , Rating: 2
I think it is. It's one of the cheaper ways to get into HD movies. Plus it means if people are buying them it's because they want an HD-DvD player.

Sony has effectively pushed the bluray player into the market with their PS3 and it's working for them. It's starting to pay out for them too.

I'm waiting still. I only have a 720p projector so there is no need for me to get an HD player. My DVD player upconverts and I think it looks great as it is.


RE: Whats this mean?
By Jedi2155 on 12/16/07, Rating: -1
RE: Whats this mean?
By soydios on 12/16/2007 4:11:48 AM , Rating: 4
1080i doesn't cut it for you?


RE: Whats this mean?
By Jedi2155 on 12/28/2007 5:46:18 AM , Rating: 2
Nope....I actually sit about 6 feet from my 50" plasma....I also use to use a 15" LCD laptop with 1600x1200 resolution. I love my resolution.


RE: Whats this mean?
By daftrok on 12/16/07, Rating: -1
RE: Whats this mean?
By TMV192 on 12/16/2007 12:04:34 PM , Rating: 1
what are you talking about?
"technically" 720P and 1080i are two different things, you're probably just confused because most 720P TVs can display 1080i


RE: Whats this mean?
By daftrok on 12/16/2007 12:16:01 PM , Rating: 2
Its 720p AND 1080i omg. The reason why he didn't want HD DVD PLAYERS (NOT the add-on) is because its 720p but its ALSO 1080i meaning if you plug it into a 1080p television with 1080i to 1080p conversion capabilities, you can have a close to true (and some times right on true) 1080p picture.


RE: Whats this mean?
By Pandamonium on 12/17/2007 3:37:18 AM , Rating: 4
720p displays (at least LCD based ones) can't display native 1080i video.

It's always been my understanding that 720p is 1280x720 resolution images for each frame, 1080i is 1920x1080 resolution images that update odd lines and even lines on every other frame, and 1080p is 1920x1080 resolution images that update each frame. Have I been mistaken or am I misunderstanding what you guys are talking about?


RE: Whats this mean?
By timmiser on 12/17/2007 4:53:12 AM , Rating: 2
You can have a 720p/1080i player that processes a 1080i signal but a 720p TV can't display 1080i or 1080p because of the native resolution of the TV.

Any TV that lists it's spec as 720p/1080i is actually incorrect. This was common early on but most TV manufactuers have corrected the specifications to reflect 720p only.

1080i/p is 1920x1080 and a 720p TV cannot output 1920x1080.


RE: Whats this mean?
By omnicronx on 12/17/2007 10:04:04 AM , Rating: 3
PLEASE.. lets stop arguing this. Counltess other articles have had the same debates. Almost any 720p tv is compatible with 1080i input, it just has to convert to 720p before it is displayed. As for the whole 1080i business, we already know its essentially the same as 1080p on current sets. Right now unless you spent tons of money on a TV that can handle 24hz, 1080i and p are practically identical.

Moral of the story is, if you like Sony buy BD, if you like toshiba, buy HD-DVD, but don't be giving others bad advice saying one is by far inferior than the other.


RE: Whats this mean?
By theapparition on 12/17/2007 12:27:46 PM , Rating: 3
Amen.

1080i/60 is the exact same thing as 1080p/30. Exact. Not close, no artififacts, but exact. 1080p/24 is something different, and is worthless unless you have a TV that supports 1080p/24 input (rare).
Most HDTV's are fixed resolution displays, meaning that some have 720 vertical pixels, and some have 1080 pixels. Obviously, sets with 720p have to interpolate the results to display 1080i/p resolution down to 720p. 1080 doesn't have to do this (but has to upconvert 720, so there is some loss if the origial picture is 720).
As for the technology, DLP/LCD/Plasma/LCOS all are progressive displays. They display pixels at once, and do not "scan". Because of this, all interlaced media is automatically converted to progressive. If the input source of interlace material is 60Hz, then the resultant picture will be displayed at progressive 30Hz. So for all those who think 1080i isn't "true HD", well, then go believe what you want. BTW, I have a bridge to sell in Brooklyn, but this is the "true" bridge title, not like those fakes out there.


RE: Whats this mean?
By afkrotch on 12/17/2007 1:04:12 PM , Rating: 1
720? 1080? Who cares? It all looks good. Just not as good as 2560x1600. :p


RE: Whats this mean?
By omnicronx on 12/17/2007 1:35:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
720? 1080? Who cares? It all looks good. Just not as good as 2560x1600. :p
sure it does, as only pc monitors have resolutions that high, and there are no too many of these over 30 inches I would have to say 720 would look almost exactly the same when watching movies on a 27 inch TV.

Just thought I'd give a stupid answer to a stupid question/statement.. just seemed fitting


RE: Whats this mean?
By timmiser on 12/18/2007 6:07:42 PM , Rating: 2
What device can capture digital video at that resolution?


RE: Whats this mean?
By Fallen Kell on 12/17/2007 4:33:20 PM , Rating: 2
Not as "rare" as you think. Sharp and Samsung both have several models which are 120Hz refresh sets which is the coup de grace of video output devices. Almost all major name brands have proper inverse telecine support (Panasonic, Philips, Sony, Sharp, Samsung) and have had them in sets for the last few years.


RE: Whats this mean?
By jconan on 12/16/2007 10:22:49 PM , Rating: 1
maybe you should consider getting a hybrid drive. they're out and you're not limited to hd-dvd or blu-ray. http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/lgs-hybrid-blu-...
and i think you do a search on pricegrabber for competitive pricing... for the price of the hybrid drive it's like getting 2 players for one and the quality depends on your software player and graphics card as well as your cpu


RE: Whats this mean?
By jconan on 12/16/2007 10:31:06 PM , Rating: 1
my mistake on that model, it's like 600 to 1k. However for the less expensive version LG Electronics GGCH20L it's around 300 to 390. http://www.tweaktown.com/news/8641/index.html


RE: Whats this mean?
By retrospooty on 12/17/2007 12:28:32 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Whats this mean?
By afkrotch on 12/17/2007 1:07:38 PM , Rating: 2
Damn, that's hella cheap. Screw the external 360 HD-DVD drive.


RE: Whats this mean?
By pomaikai on 12/17/2007 10:07:50 AM , Rating: 2
If its that important make sure you check the back of the blu ray discs. I noticed pirates of the carribean is only 1080i. Wonder how many other Blu Ray or HD DVD movies are only 1080i?


RE: Whats this mean?
By adiposity on 12/17/2007 11:23:43 AM , Rating: 2
1080i is basically unheard of in HDDVD or Blu-ray. This was a packaging misprint:

---------------------------
http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=723
---------------------------

Pirates Packaging Misprint

Posted December 4, 2007 by Josh

Walt Disney Pictures Those of you who are picking up 'Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End' today on Blu-ray may notice that something isn't quite right on the specifications. If you look at the video encode for the main feature, the packaging says it is presented in 1080i. You shouldn't worry, though, as this is simply a misprint - the title is encoded at full 1080p24.


RE: Whats this mean?
By omnicronx on 12/17/2007 11:58:23 AM , Rating: 2
I heard about this too, knew it was not right... As you said I really doubt any movie will be released in 1080i anymore. The only thing i can foresee is TV series being released in 1080i, as it is the maximum resolution supported by the FCC for Television HD transfers. Then again those same shows could potentially be stored at a higher resolution, and just transmitted in 1080i leaving the doors open for 1080p disc releases.


RE: Whats this mean?
By afkrotch on 12/17/2007 1:14:03 PM , Rating: 2
I never understand the 1080i vs 1080p debate. Seen it both ways, can't tell a difference. If I get lasiks, will I see a difference then? Maybe special 1080p glasses.


RE: Whats this mean?
By omnicronx on 12/17/2007 1:29:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Seen it both ways, can't tell a difference
Short and sweet, because there really isn't one when you talk about 1080i vs 1080p players(at 60hz). Almost all movies are encoded at 1080p, so its all in the process of how your TV handles the signal.

Talking about real 1080i movies like the OP, you would be hard pressed to find a movie released in 1080i and 1080p, so i really doubt you have ever seen the difference between the two.(I have never seen a comparison myself)


RE: Whats this mean?
By themadmilkman on 12/16/2007 5:47:16 AM , Rating: 5
I think it doesn't matter.

People who purchase the HD-DVD drive for the 360 are, without a doubt, purchasing it for HD movies since it is a peripheral.

People who purchase a PS3 have purchased a bluray drive, but aren't necessarily going to use it, although it would seem that most do.

That's the only difference I can see.


RE: Whats this mean?
By rqle on 12/16/2007 8:09:18 AM , Rating: 2
good point


RE: Whats this mean?
By chick0n on 12/16/07, Rating: -1
RE: Whats this mean?
By monitorjbl on 12/16/2007 10:25:34 AM , Rating: 5
Somewhere, an English teacher is crying.


RE: Whats this mean?
By retrospooty on 12/16/2007 10:52:19 AM , Rating: 5
Your complete ignorance makes a really good argument for the opposite side that you are trying to advocate(since you seem quite thick, I am saying that your inacuruate underinformed post in favor of Blue Ray does more to help HD-DVD than it does Blue ray).

Thanks for the hard work, keep it up.

Happy Holidays from the HD-DVD cheapasses.


RE: Whats this mean?
By themadmilkman on 12/16/2007 11:58:56 AM , Rating: 5
So what you're saying is that 360 owners who buy the HD-DVD addon, that exists solely for the purpose of allowing you to play HD-DVDs, don't own HDTVs? And don't buy movies? Please, for the love of all things DailyTech, did you find information to support that opinion? Do share.

Do some 360 owners not own an HDTV? Sure. I'm one of them. I'm sure there are plenty of PS3 owners in the same situation. But, on the other hand, I haven't purchased an addon that, for me, would be worthless at the moment.


RE: Whats this mean?
By feraltoad on 12/16/2007 10:03:46 PM , Rating: 2
The add on will be worthless forever until they have the Ultimate Bryan Adams Collection Anthology (Bonus Edition with Authorized Bryan Adams Hairpiece) on HDDVD. That ALONE sold me on Blu Ray, and thus PS3, as long as they have that exclusive, HDDVD is living in the Summer of '69. (Which would be awesome if they didn't have a format war to win.)


RE: Whats this mean?
By omnicronx on 12/17/2007 12:59:40 PM , Rating: 2
I really hope you are joking.. if not you join the exclusive club of probably being the only person that bought a ps3 exclusively because of the Bryan Adams disc set.

P.S Bryan Adams got spat in the face right in front of me when I was 5, (I'm from his hometown of Kingston, Ontario) just have not been able to take him seriously since. If your home town hates you, you have some problems haha!


RE: Whats this mean?
By stburke on 12/16/07, Rating: 0
RE: Whats this mean?
By m0mentary on 12/16/2007 12:58:50 PM , Rating: 2
don't worry, hes got a history of flamebait-ish comments.

http://www.dailytech.com/CommentUser.aspx?user=227...

I'd have to agree though that reasoning doesn't make much sense. "Cheapasses" who hate spending, are going to spend money on an HD-DVD add one, that they can't even use because they don't have an HDTV? That sounds more like wasting money to me, not characteristic of a cheap spender if you ask me.


RE: Whats this mean?
By KentState on 12/16/2007 6:00:13 PM , Rating: 1
You are right, I am a cheapass. I got the player when it came out because I wasn't going to blow a bunch of money of something that I wasn't sure would last. I've already purchased a dozen movies and will continue to. I'm not sure however why you would think that someone would get a drive without owning an HDTV? If anything, it shows that at least 3% of the 360 owners to have an HDTV. I've also purchased a PS3 because I wasn't going to spend $1000 in the beginning to have a Blu-Ray player that might not last more than a year also. At least I will have a decent collection of HD movies on both sides and two consoles that will last 6+ years.


RE: Whats this mean?
By timmiser on 12/17/07, Rating: -1
RE: Whats this mean?
By omnicronx on 12/17/2007 10:09:58 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
PS3, on the other hand, people who can afford it, usually can afford the movies AND games. and it can do what ALL Hd-dvd players out there do plus more.
So essentially what you are saying is PS3 is still too expensive, so people are going with HD-DVD.. Which side are you on again?
quote:
do what ALL Hd-dvd players out there do plus more.
I really can't think of a feature BD has that HD-DVD does not have. On the other hand non 1.1 spec BD players (essentially all BD players released before november) can not do everything HD-DVD players can do. (PIP etc..)


RE: Whats this mean?
By pomaikai on 12/17/2007 10:12:49 AM , Rating: 1
What a genius. People who buy a $500-600 PS3 can afford an HDTV and people who spend $500-600 for a xbox360 and an HD-DVD add-on cant afford one.


RE: Whats this mean?
By Chaser on 12/16/07, Rating: -1
RE: Whats this mean?
By daftrok on 12/16/2007 11:59:30 AM , Rating: 5
I think you meant its great for all 269,000 of them.


RE: Whats this mean?
By Keeir on 12/16/2007 3:46:31 PM , Rating: 3
As much as I hate to say it... its bad news

According to the links in the article, Sony has sold more than 700,000 (26% of 2.7 million) stand alone set-top players for Blu-Ray. And thats with the very attractive alternative of a PS3 as a player. HD-DVD has sold around 490,000 stand alone set-top players. Thats with being cheaper, earlier to market, and better features (for movie watching). (Important to note, this is NA only)

If we include HD-DVD add on, I think its only fair to include 4% of PS3 owners (same percentage as HD-DVD add on to X360) as HD movie watchers... we end up with 780,000 Blu-Ray to 750,000 HD-DVD.

Compounding this is Blu-Rays advantage in the computer market (larger storage space, more writable drives on the market) and its continual sales advantage in actually moving movie discs... Right now, its not a good picture for HD-DVD. Maybe if they can sell players for 50 dollars.... but they already have offered 100 dollar players... In addition, HD-DVD has only captured 4% of a target group (early adopter gamers with HDTVs and exclusives such as Transformers and Matrix) when offering 129 and 199 players.

This can all change, but if I had to offer advise this Christmas for a HD movie purchase, it would probably be the 400 dollar PS3 or 300 dollar Blu-Ray player, because with closing on 10 million (PS3+set top+computer parts) Blu-Ray devices world-wide and the expectation of 50+ million, it looks like Blu-Ray is here for the long haul.


RE: Whats this mean?
By masher2 (blog) on 12/17/2007 2:09:01 AM , Rating: 4
> "According to the links in the article, Sony has sold more than 700,000...stand alone set-top players "

There's no way Sony has sold even close to that. Videobusiness calculated that by taking Sony's claim of "2.7 million total BD players" and subtracting their best guess of 2 million PS3s". Unfortunately, VB didn't count November sales of PS3s which, since the price drop, likely reduce that figure to 400K or less.


RE: Whats this mean?
By wallijonn on 12/17/2007 10:41:39 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Compounding this is Blu-Rays advantage in the computer market (larger storage space, more writable drives on the market) and its continual sales advantage in actually moving movie discs...


The computing advantage has yet to materialise. Very few can afford to spend $25 per disc to backup data. It is much easier to backup to another HD.

As for "its continual sales advantage," BOGOs may skew the data. There seems to be a BOGO sale every single week. If each side has 350 movies available, figure that each customer will buy about 35 discs, or 10%. Very few people will be able to buy every single movie released for each format.


RE: Whats this mean?
By omnicronx on 12/17/2007 11:10:36 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The computing advantage has yet to materialise. Very few can afford to spend $25 per disc to backup data. It is much easier to backup to another HD.
I agree, not only do you have to spend $25 a disc, but it is still a piece of media that can potentially be scratched or broken. With 50gigs of critical data on one disc you would have to imagine that you would have to make multiple backup copies, as you could have everything located on one disc.

I remember back in the tapedrive days, the company I worked for made backups of backups of backups of backups! And this was just for non critical user data storage.

It would be nice to have your entire music collection on 3-4 discs though ;)


RE: Whats this mean?
By afkrotch on 12/17/2007 1:24:55 PM , Rating: 2
Remember back in the tapedrive days. Last I checked, enterprises still backed up to tape drives.


RE: Whats this mean?
By MADAOO7 on 12/16/2007 10:40:33 PM , Rating: 2
O how I love the mastery of the English language on these boards.

Soviet:
quote:
Is this good or bad for hd dvd?


Manch:
quote:
I think it is


It's like if you asked somebody what time is it and they answer "Wednesday".....lol.


RE: Whats this mean?
By nofumble62 on 12/17/2007 8:39:57 AM , Rating: 2
I am not buying until the movie is <$20 and console price is <$100. Careless who won. Competition is great.


RE: Whats this mean?
By pomaikai on 12/17/2007 10:15:29 AM , Rating: 2
Keep dreaming for a <$100 console. PS2 is till $129 after all these years.


RE: Whats this mean?
By omnicronx on 12/17/2007 10:37:53 AM , Rating: 1
Well then, you are not going to see that until 'me shit turns purple and smells like rainbow sherbet.'

Just so this is not just a post making fun of you.. The original playstation ran on a 33mhz core and I think it maybe touched 100$ by the very end of its lifecycle.(i.e those wanting to get rid of them)

With todays multiprocessor consoles, you would have better luck finding a platypus that can fly, than finding a console for $100.


Stop the Presses!
By BMFPitt on 12/16/2007 10:00:17 AM , Rating: 2
So the most affordable player out there (excluding short-lived special sales) is the most popular? Who'd have thought?




RE: Stop the Presses!
By BansheeX on 12/16/2007 1:11:28 PM , Rating: 1
Depends on how you define "player." If you count the PS3 as a player, it has outsold this by about 6 million and probably 16 million by next xmas. Both formats are still perceived as a niche format over DVD at any price, so its default inclusion in the PS3 can get it into the homes of millions as a "bonus." That is going to be the difference in this war. Those 16 million people don’t have to purchase anything. They just have to realize they have it.


RE: Stop the Presses!
By Zoomer on 12/16/2007 3:38:08 PM , Rating: 2
Sony probably has a plan for that. TV / Media blitz, store placards/displays, sending registered PS3 owners emails/snail mail, etc. They are probably waiting for more PS3 adoption before driving this final nail into HD-DVD's coffin. *

*If they persuade Warner into being Blu-Ray exclusive, the war is pretty much over.


RE: Stop the Presses!
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 12/16/2007 5:50:36 PM , Rating: 2
That goes both ways, if Warner goes HD DVD exclusive, they could destroy Blu-Ray.


RE: Stop the Presses!
By SavagePotato on 12/16/2007 9:37:50 PM , Rating: 3
More likely drag things on indefinately till the only hope is dual format players, ensuring everyone would be stuck with both formats forever. Since sony and It's conglomerate of studios isn't going to stop supporting it anytime soon.

Blu-ray winning out is the fastest path to some form of hd adoption.


RE: Stop the Presses!
By omnicronx on 12/17/2007 12:12:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Blu-ray winning out is the fastest path to some form of hd adoption.
The ps3 can not drive BD sales forever, most people in the united states have a DVD player, the same can not be said about a gaming console. The real battle will be played on the standalone market, when are people going to realize this.

In my mind neither format is winning because neither format has been able to achieve considerable sales in the standalone market. DVD's still outsell both highdef content movies combined by what atleast 100:1?

On a different note you mention that Sony studios isn't going to stop supporting it anytime soon. I see this as a reason to why other movies studios will not make the move to BD. Why support a format that your direct competitor owns the rights too, and at the same time probably pays no licensing fees. In the long run its going to be cheaper for Sony studios to produce and sell BD movies than it will for any other movie studio.

Meanwhile HD-DVD's are cheaper to produce, cheaper to convert current DVD fabs to HD-DVD fabs, and probably has lower license fees too (one of the main reasons the porno industry has mainly chosen HD-DVD)

Once again, the battle is far from over, I just wanted to point out that we could be in this for the long haul, as it does not seem to me that any movie studio is going to budge... for now..


RE: Stop the Presses!
By afkrotch on 12/17/2007 1:45:32 PM , Rating: 2
Why do ppl always point towards porn? You know the porn industry is a non-factor in the HD format wars. It was a big influence back in the vhs/betamax days because it was the first time you could get affordable video porn in the privacy of your own home (minus 8mm film).

Nowadays, more and more ppl are going to the internet for porn or going pay-per-view. It's cheaper and it's easier to hide/destroy. Porn makes produce dvds in the thousands. Big movie companies produce dvds in the millions. Porn industry is just a non-factor.


RE: Stop the Presses!
By wempa on 12/19/2007 5:19:28 PM , Rating: 2
I believe porn was only 1 of SEVERAL reasons he pointed out. The other ones are totally valid.


RE: Stop the Presses!
By sweetsauce on 12/16/2007 9:44:55 PM , Rating: 2
Sony will not have over 16 million sold by end of next year, not sure where you pulled that estimate from. If anything, they might pass 12 million.


RE: Stop the Presses!
By Legionosh on 12/17/2007 9:54:00 AM , Rating: 2
I agree 1000%.

So this person thinks Sony will sell another 10 Million this year?

The almighty Wii hasn't even accomplished this (of course had supplies not been so "limited" the Wii probably would have)...I'm not sure where he gets this estimate from, but it's extremely high by any measurable standard.

12 million should be doable. I don't see another 6 million+ being an issue if the promised high profile games make it out this year, but another 10 million+ seems way too high a number..

..unless Sony opts to release yet ANOTHER SKU and ANOTHER price drop. Price dictates sales 99% of the time (but I hope they don't release ANOTHER SKU. They've already had 4 distinct ones in their first year alone. I'm ALL for lower prices but as much as Sony complained about Microsoft's SKUs being confusing for the customer, this is the pot calling the kettle black).

Kevin

legionosh@msn.com


RE: Stop the Presses!
By Murst on 12/17/2007 10:12:40 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
So this person thinks Sony will sell another 10 Million this year?

I believe he was talking about 2008. Considering that the PS3 adoption is equal or slightly better than the 360s (when launch dates are stacked), it would not be unreasonable to esimate total PS3 sales of 16m by end of next year (it appears the XBox 360 will hit somewhere around 15m by the end of this year).

quote:
The almighty Wii hasn't even accomplished this
The wii is over 16m already.


RE: Stop the Presses!
By omnicronx on 12/17/2007 11:03:17 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Considering that the PS3 adoption is equal or slightly better than the 360s
10 million seems like a bit of a stretch. Theres no reason to believe that the ps3 adoption rate is going to be almost 50% more than the 360, especially with the higher pricetag. After 2 years the 360 has sold 14.5 million, the ps3 has only surpassed 360 sales a few times, so I think it unreasonable to think the ps3 will sell any more than the 360.

I would also like to add that this is the ps3's second christmas season, with their sales being a bit below 6 million after october, essentially 1 year after release(i.e this christmas should be included in the yearly sales but next years should not). Including this holiday season and excluding the next, I guess sales will be around 7-7.5 million.

I for one will be buying a ps3 this Christmas as in Canada we do not have your fancy HD-DVD player deals, and i am not going to pay 300$ for an HD-A3 player when I can get a ps3 for 399.


RE: Stop the Presses!
By Murst on 12/17/2007 11:28:47 AM , Rating: 2
The numbers I used were simply a comparison to the Xbox 360 sales.

Basically, last year, the Xbox 360 sold around 7 million consoles at this point in the year (just before its 2nd xmas). The PS3 is slightly ahead of that right now (also its 2nd holidays).

The only assumption I'm making is that the PS3 will continue to exhibit similar sales trends to the 360 (it has virtually mirrored it for the first 13 months of release). If the assumption is correct, and sales will continue to mirror the 360 sales, the PS3 can expect to sell around 15-16 million consoles by the end of 2008.


RE: Stop the Presses!
By BansheeX on 12/17/2007 12:28:17 PM , Rating: 1
I'll remember you said that sweetsauce. If Sony can sell 6 million in its first year at a $600 launch price and few games, imagine what will happen next year when we finally get the media-designated "killer-app" MGS, as well all the other cross-platform titles like Soul Calibur IV, RE5, Silent Hill. These are traditional Playstation franchises and the Playstation faithful will respond. You have people out there who have always wanted to buy a PS3, but have simply been waiting for the price cuts and releases of popular franchises. With HD movie playback, free netplay, wifi, and a much quieter drive while gaming, the PS3 has always been the more desirable product. It's simply that the PRICE has been beyond the threshold of consideration for so long. PS3 nearly matched worldwide sales of the 360 in November at a higher price. Expect a cut to $349 in the Spring of 08 when the RSX goes 65nm, and expect the PS3 to do VERY well in its second year.


RE: Stop the Presses!
By afkrotch on 12/17/2007 2:35:41 PM , Rating: 2
A good number of that post feels like wishful thinking. I do feel that the PS3 will do better next year, as more exclusive titles hit the market.

I just want my damn Mainichi Issyo Toro Station to work. It reminds me of the Azumanga Daioh's Osaka sim game. Well, not like you could do much in the game. Osaka would just randomly walk around the room, play with stuff. Every so often, she'd leave and come back. Much like Toro Station Mainichi. Toro does just that. Just you get real life news updates through the Toro Station. I can't get the non-game game to work.


By GeorgeOrwell on 12/16/2007 5:53:35 AM , Rating: 1
If game players represent such sizable fractions of high-def media players sold, it means high-def media is not mainstream.

It also means that we may end up something similar to what happened with SACD and DVD-AUDIO, i.e. two formats that battled each other until they destroyed themselves as well as the entire evolutionary path of the CD.

Maybe this result, mutual destruction, is Microsoft's goal. High-def audio has moved to direct download. Certainly Microsoft would like a similar future for high-def media. As long as media is delivered on a DRM-armored disk, there is little Microsoft can do to add value.




By Targon on 12/16/2007 7:33:50 AM , Rating: 2
The data from the sale of HD-DVD players during the holiday season probably will not show up until February. Considering all the $99 Toshiba A2s that have been sold so far, the numbers for HD-DVD should go way up.

A big thing to keep in mind is that most people will not be buying either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray until they get a flat panel display. Now, the question is how long will it take until a 32 inch panel is down into the $400 range, since that is when the majority of people will feel they can afford it(where there isn't a price premium for a panel). I myself still can't justify paying $800+ to replace a TV since I have other bills and expenses.


By FITCamaro on 12/16/2007 11:29:03 AM , Rating: 2
"A big thing to keep in mind is that most people will not be buying either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray until they get a" HD display.

Not all HDTVs are flat panels. I prefer DLP over either flat panel technology. Maybe when OLED TVs become mainstream I might change my mind, but until then DLP is cheaper than LCD or plasma for the same screen size and provides just as good a picture.


By EglsFly on 12/16/2007 4:42:49 PM , Rating: 2
I agree 100% with your first comment, but the second comment, I do not. Plasma and LCD panels have much better viewing angle and brighter picture.


By FITCamaro on 12/17/2007 8:16:25 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know about you, but I don't watch my TV from a 179 degree angle. So I really could care less if my TV is capable of being viewed at that angle. I can watch my TV from every angle I'm able to with the living room setup I have.

As far as brightness, how bright does it need to be? My DLP is set at 50-60% brightness and is plenty bright.


By GeorgeOrwell on 12/16/2007 11:42:54 AM , Rating: 1
Some good points.

Although I'd add that the 'big TV purchase' is also going to be waiting on the time when HDTV is essentially a commodity and there is no price premium for the HD channels and recorders available from DirecTV, Dish, cable, etc.

There is also the situation today, because the war between SACD and DVD-Audio, that tons of cheap players exist for both formats, but the media catalog is very sparse.

Personally, I am not a fan of either format. They are both heavy on the DRM and light on the consumer benefit. I'd rather DVDs get cheaper vs. higher definition. 95%+ of the content available in the USA is Hollywood trash anyway.


What about XBOX 360 non-owners?
By miahallen on 12/16/2007 8:36:00 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
The updated numbers from NPD, if accurate, show that Xbox 360 owners with the HD DVD drive account for more than one-third of all hardware owners of the high-definition format.


Interesting that they assume everyone who has purchase the HD-DVD add on drive are XBOX 360 owners. I bought one for use on my computer (and no, I do not own a console...any console).




RE: What about XBOX 360 non-owners?
By FITCamaro on 12/16/2007 11:32:49 AM , Rating: 2
True. But they're still using it for HD movies.

A random thought actually popped into my head. As much as I don't like Blu-ray due to its extra layer of DRM, a smart move for Sony might be to look into adding support for Microsoft's HD-DVD addon drive. Then their console could play both HD formats. It's just a USB device so I don't see why they couldn't write a driver and add it to the firmware along with the necessary software that could be an extra download.


RE: What about XBOX 360 non-owners?
By daftrok on 12/16/2007 12:03:31 PM , Rating: 2
If the company that made the PS3 WASN'T Sony then your logic would make sense. But Blu-ray is not only supported by Sony, it was in part created by it. That's like saying the 360 should be made easy to run Windows Vista and Mac OSX. Actually come to think of it the 360 SHOULD be able to run Windows...hmmm....that would be pretty cool. The full functionality of a PC and a console all in one device.


RE: What about XBOX 360 non-owners?
By BansheeX on 12/16/2007 1:22:48 PM , Rating: 1
If they did, I still wouldn't buy one. I'd rather have the simplicity of one format, preferably the one which can back up most films on a 25gb single layer recordable instead of two 15gb single-layers or an expensive, less durable 30gb multi-layer.


What happened to the $129 price?
By sxr7171 on 12/17/2007 1:34:02 AM , Rating: 2
I have a Blu-Ray, but I noticed some movies I want that are only on HD-DVD. I was ready to buy the $129 XBox drive, but it's back up to $179. I'll just wait. That drive should be $99 honestly what with entire players at the $200 mark.




RE: What happened to the $129 price?
By GeorgeOrwell on 12/17/2007 2:17:52 AM , Rating: 1
There is no valid, cost-of-materials/cost-of-production based reason why a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player should be more than $99.

The people who buy the early players at a premium, who buy the early media at a premium, are just paying more than they would otherwise have to. It is the usual technology adoption price/time curve.

Unless you have some compelling high-def media to watch, it is more cost effective to sit back and wait. Let the early adopters take the arrows and pay the premiums. Even if you got your player for "free" in a game machine, the media titles cost more now than they will in the near future.

And if DVD has taught us anything it is that the best versions of content titles do not come out when a new format is first available. There are a few exceptions, but most high-def titles will be replaced with newer versions that will be encoded better, be remastered for better picture/sound, etc. It has also taught us that the early versions of media players always have bugs.

So overall it is wise to wait, both for price and for quality.


RE: What happened to the $129 price?
By Targon on 12/17/2007 7:34:09 AM , Rating: 2
The reason why "new" devices cost more is that companies want to get back some of the R&D money that went into designing the product. The way technology works is that newer and better versions of the technology are released at the higher price, and the older products are marked down and then sold at the lower prices you are looking for.

Most people have no idea how much money it costs in terms of R&D, so you figure that in addition to the cost to manufacture, companies will also want to get that R&D money back. Since HD-DVD and Blu-Ray are still very new, the high costs really are just the companies trying to get some of that R&D money back before the new technologies become so common that they can't charge as much. Companies like Sony that have been big backers of Blu-Ray have additional money invested in the standard, so they really want to maximize sales in the short term while the prices are high.


i use mine on pc
By Samus on 12/16/2007 10:34:02 AM , Rating: 2
so much for their 3.4% 'attach' rate. i dont know anyone that uses the drive on their xbox360, mostly because everyone who owns the drive doesn't own a 360, and everyone who owns a 360 could care less about hddvd playback; they accept it is a gaming machine.

if anyone wants a hddvd player (even if they own a 360 already) will probably dig a Toshiba HD-A2 or HD-A3 in the $100-$200 range.




RE: i use mine on pc
By Oroka on 12/16/2007 10:41:08 PM , Rating: 2
And that is the biggest diffrence between the 360 and the PS3. The 360 is a gaming console, but the PS3 is more of a mulitmedia gaming console. I bought a PS3 more as a Blu-ray player than game system. Why shell out $400 for a stand alone player when you can now get a PS3 for that price?

Big question is how many PS3 owners use thier systems to play blu-ray? I would guess every one that has a HDTV. The same would apply to the 360. Most of the people I know with a 360 dont have a HDTV.

This will be a good thing for the 360 IMO. Younger tech savy people are usually first to buy stuff like this, and those are the same people who ran out and got a 360. This is another cheap solution to a HD-DVD player, more ammo in the foramt war for the red team.


xbox hd-dvd player on PC
By xxsk8er101xx on 12/16/2007 1:53:41 PM , Rating: 2
You can't plug a Toshiba hd-dvd player on your computer. You can't plug in a blu-ray player on your computer.

You can, however; plug in your microsoft hd-dvd player onto your PC. Microsoft has the drivers for it. You do need HDCP compatibility through out your system. From video card to monitor.

But if you got it, have a nice 20" monitor, you can easily enjoy 720P on your computer for 150 bucks. Would you do it? maybe maybe not ... nice added bonus from Microsoft though.




RE: xbox hd-dvd player on PC
By Yawgm0th on 12/16/2007 6:08:33 PM , Rating: 2
You can get a BD-R/RE drive designed for your PC for $400 - $500 and a BD-ROM drive for under $200. What's this nonsense about plugging players into your computer?


Hi Def DVD and gaming
By pomaikai on 12/17/2007 10:04:58 AM , Rating: 2
This shows how important a Hi Def DVD player is to a gaming console sale. Only 3.4% buy a HD-DVD add-on. Makes you wonder how many PS3's they would have sold if they removed the BluRay and sold it for a lower price.




By VoodooChicken on 12/17/2007 11:30:14 AM , Rating: 2
I have an Xbox360 add-on, but no Xbox; I use the drive in an HTPC along with an LG Blu-Ray burner. My HD DVD collection is about twice as big as my Blu-Ray, mostly because of a six month headstart. I got my drives too early and missed getting all the free movies, so except King Kong, I've bought all my movies individually without bundles.
My TV is a 32" Westinghouse 720p, so all this arguing about 720p/1080i is moot to me. 18 months 0% interest on a $500 TV is okay by me. Anyway, as far as picture quality goes, both formats are about even. It has far more to do with the individual movie and the stock/age of that film than the format. The only movies I have done direct comparisons between SD and HD are Pirates of the Caribbean 1, Breach, Children of Men, Unleashed, and Blazing Saddles. Whether it's sharper picture or more vivid colors, the HD's are better than the SD's to varying degrees, which is not to say that SD's are low quality, just lower than HD in general. However, I'm noticing that a lot of extra features in SD movies are truncated or left out of the HD versions. Chief offender in my personal collection is The Host on HD DVD.
I'm curious to see how the new BDi standard will be implemented on new movies or even if my drive will work with them (with or w/o firmware updates). So far I haven't figured out how to connect the Xbox drive over the web through the PC, so my Transformers experience hasn't been maximized to its fullest potential yet. But so far, HD DVD is more refined than Blu-Ray as far as disc authoring and special features. I can very well change my mind during 2008, but as of right this minute, I'm happier with my HD DVDs than my Blu-Rays.




By spepper on 12/22/2007 6:56:22 AM , Rating: 2
i will consider buying an Xbox 360, when (if?) they ever get around to offering the console with the HD DVD drive internally-- I've got too much "external" crap as it is!




"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki