: BluRay > HDDVD



gothicaleigh
01-05-08, 12:12 PM
HD DVD has fallen. Long live the BluRay!

Warner backs Blu-ray exclusively

Citing consumer confusion, studio will stop marketing HD DVD in May
By Susanne Ault -- Video Business, 1/4/2008
JAN. 4 | UPDATE:

Warner Bros. Entertainment this year will begin releasing high-definition titles exclusively in Blu-ray Disc, dealing a severe blow to the HD DVD format.

The studio hopes its decision will help end the format war, and boost the chances of high-definition quickly becoming a vital business. Retailers have long complained that consumers are too confused by two formats to adopt either Blu-ray or HD DVD.

“Not only did neigher format really take off as expected in the fourth quarter, but standard-def was softer than expected given the release slate,” said Warner Home Video president Ron Sanders told VB in explaining the studio’s decision. “We’re seeing research now that shows that consumers are starting to delay purchases because of the format war, not just on high-def, but on standard-def purchases as well. That’s alarming.”

“It’s hard for us to speculate about the impact this will have on the format war,” Sanders said. “All we can do really is make the best decision for our business.”

With Warner now in the BD camp, only Universal Studios Home Entertainment and Paramount Home Entertaiment/DreamWorks will produce and market titles in the HD DVD format.

Warner will be joining other BD-exclusive suppliers Sony Pictures Home Entertainment, Walt Disney Home Entertainment, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment and Lionsgate. Time Warner divisions New Line Home Entertainment and HBO Video are also included in the move to Blu-ray.

Warner’s shift to Blu-ray becomes effective later this year. All new releases are expected to street in BD and HD DVD through May 2008. However, during those upcoming months, there will be a short lag between the Blu-ray/standard DVD release and the HD DVD release.

“Warner Bros.’ move to exclusivity release in the Blu-ray Disc format is a strategic decision focused on the long term and the most direct way to give consumers what they want,” said Warner chair and CEO Barry Meyer. “The window of opportunity for high-definition DVD could be missed if format confusion continues to linger. We believe that exclusively distributing in Blu-ray will further the potential for mass market success and ultimately benefit retailers, producers and, most importantly, consumers.”

Through last year, Warner had been touting its dual format strategy as a way to maximize high-definition revenue.

But Warner management decided switching to Blu-ray exclusivity was necessary to match increasing consumer demand toward the format over HD DVD. BD does enjoy a far larger hardware installation base, due mostly to the millions of BD-equipped PlayStation 3 consoles sold. At last count, following the hot Black Friday shopping weekend, 750,000 HD DVD set-tops and Xbox 360 HD DVD drives had sold in the U.S. since the format’s launch last year. Including PS3s and set-tops, 2.7 million BD players have sold since launch through that same frame.

"One of the things you see in the NPD data for this fourth quarter was that even with a $100 premium, BD set-tops outsold HD set-tops in December," said Sanders. "Even with Toshiba having the lower-cost player in the marekt, software sales remained 2-to-1 in favor of Blu-ray. Our titles were running roughly 60/40 Blu-ray and that didn't change in the fourth quarter even with the price advantage HD had on the hardware side."

"You also can't underestimate the impact of PS3 as a playback device," Sanders said. "The attachment rate may not be very high, and in fact it isn't, but in the aggregate that still adds up to a lot of software sales."

Other Warner executives also emphasized the company's desire to respond to what it sees as greater consumer demand for Blu-ray than for HD DVD.

“A two-format landscape has led to consumer confusion and indifference toward high-definition, which has kept the technology from reaching mass adoption and becoming the important revenue stream that it can be for the industry,” said Kevin Tsujihara, president of Warner Bros. Home Entertainment Group. “Consumers have clearly chosen Blu-ray, and we believe that recognizing this preference is the right step in making this great home entertainment experience accessible to the widest possible audience. Warner Bros. has worked very closely with the Toshiba Corp. in promoting high-definition media, and we have enormous respect for their efforts. We look forward to working with them in the future.”

Jeff Bewkes, president and CEO at Warner Bros. parent Time Warner, added, “Warner Bros. has produced in both high-definition formats in an effort to provide consumer choice, foster mainstream adoption and drive down hardware prices. Today’s decision by Warner Bros. to distribute in a single format comes at the right time and is the best decision both for consumers and Time Warner.”

One retailer opined that the HD DVD camp has been severely wounded by losing market leader Warner’s support. But he was hesitant to declare the format war over.

“It’s not going to end the format war because Paramount is still HD DVD exclusive and Universal is still exclusive,” said Newbury Comics buyer Ian Leshin. “But this is a huge blow to HD DVD. Warner releases so many titles. There is going to be a limited choice for HD DVD titles, and its going to make it that much more difficult to sell [HD DVD hardware]”


Leshin said he understands Warner’s sole embrace of Blu-ray, as Newbury has been consistently selling twice as many BD titles as HD DVD http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6517192.html?nid=2705

gothicaleigh
01-05-08, 12:17 PM
On the computer and electronics end of things:



BluRay to be supported at MacWorld
(and a very interesting graph)


Warner Brothers announced today that they would be moving their titles from HD-DVD to the Blu-Ray format. Many have suggested that this marks the end of the next generation DVD battle, though two major studios continue to have exclusive HD-DVD distribution deals in place.

Warner Brother's defection, however, places the majority of movie releases on Blu-Ray:

http://images.macrumors.com/article/2008/01/05/warner_300.png

2007 Marketshare graph modified by trevelyn

Even before this new marketshare advantage, however, the New York Times reports that Blu-ray titles had outsold HD-DVD offerings as much as 2 to 1, and had even been chosen for exclusive distribution by Blockbuster.

Apple has been a member of the Blu-ray consortium's board of directors since 2005, but has not publicly announced their Blu-ray plans. Some expect Apple to officially launch Blu-ray support at Macworld San Francisco. http://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/04/hd-dvd-vs-blu-ray-battle-over-warner-switches-to-blu-ray/



Engadget sums it up:

HD DVD group cancels CES press conference in wake of Warner announcement: daaamn
http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/04/hd-dvd-group-cancels-ces-press-conference-in-wake-of-warner-anno/

Cadillacboy
01-05-08, 01:07 PM
Yep,I already talked about this .Only drawback is that you need a BlueRay compatible device to play your blueray disks

ewill3rd
01-05-08, 10:18 PM
It will have to drop in price, whichever way it goes, before I am going to play.

As far as I know the only difference is media storage space.
The images are still 1080.
Calling it HD-DVD is a scam if you ask me, nobody realizes that the HD is actuall related to high density, not high defenition.
Maybe someone needs to properly educate me, along with the rest of the world.

Why should I pay more money for a movie with the same resolution on a more empty disc?
Oh and pay more for a player to play it?

lawfive
01-05-08, 10:38 PM
Color me confused, ewill. The operative difference for movie watchers between existing DVD and these two new formats is definition. Max def for DVD is 480p; the two new formats can handle 720p/1080i, as well as true high definition: 1080p.

Native high def resolution is the only feature I care about, and they both have it. Yay, whichever.

nikon
01-06-08, 01:09 AM
great....now I gotta go buy a blu-ray player too...ugh, sucks because personally I prefer the quality of HD-DVD...blu-ray can be too grainy.

Jesda
01-06-08, 05:33 AM
There's too many 9GB DVDs out there for me to bother switching formats. When HD/BR players are $35 at Wal Mart, I'll upgrade.

ewill3rd
01-06-08, 11:45 AM
I see, well I guess that means I was lied to before and not this time. LOL
At least I misunderstood.
At any rate, current DVD resolution is still plenty good for me.
It already bugs me when I can see little things that I couldn't see on VHS.

I suppose I'll break down and spend some money in the future, but as I said... prices will have dropped considerably before I hop in.

Sinister Angel
01-06-08, 03:04 PM
I've never quite got the difference between 1080i and 1080p

nikon
01-06-08, 03:30 PM
^^ 1080i is analog (interlace) 1080p is digital (progressive) you basically need really good eyes to notice the difference.

lawfive
01-06-08, 04:15 PM
I've never quite got the difference between 1080i and 1080p

I don't know what you know, so excuse me if I sound like I'm talking down. I'm no real expert, but I do know some stuff.

Start out with the native resolution of your monitor or TV. The maximum resolution you can display from any source is limited by the native resolution of your monitor. Let's assume you have a newer widescreen. It may be a big (say, 42 inches or bigger) plasma or LCD or DLP that is 1,920 pixels wide by 1,080 pixels high; if so, these days the manufacturer would call it a '1080p' monitor because its native resolution is capable of displaying all the pixels from a 1080p source. Or it may be smaller (or just as big, but cheaper) and have fewer pixels (e.g. 1,280 x 720, 1,366 x 768, 1,024 x 768). Monitors with these native resolutions are lumped into the '720p' category, because that's max they can handle.

In the good old days of CRT, the screen was divided up into horizontal lines of virtual dot targets that a really fast electron beam would hit like a tommy gun, spraying left to right, then skipping down two lines and spraying left to right again, then skipping down two lines and spraying left to right again, etc. until every other line on the screen from top to bottom was illuminated. Then the beam would jump back up to the top of the screen and start shooting again left to right, left to right, hitting all the lines that it skipped the first time. When every virtual dot target that needed to be hit HAD been hit on the entire screen (e.g. two passes of the electron beam from the top of the screen to the bottom of the screen), the screen displayed one complete still image in a film or video sequence. (That's not 100% accurate when talking about film, but that's a different discussion.) This process of displaying video by hitting every other line of pixels is called 'interlacing.' Good old 480i NTSC analog broadcasts received on an analog CRT monitor is how us old farts watched our Bugs Bunny cartoons when we were kids.

Skip ahead to today. Let's assume that you have a non-CRT monitor, meaning a plasma or LCD panel, a DLP set (or some other type of rear projection set), or a DLP projector. These are all digital display technologies. Unlike the analog CRT, they cannot display interlaced video signals. In fact two things about digital displays are all you really need to remember (at least in this area of discussion):

They can ONLY display images in the monitor's native resolution
The can ONLY display progressive video signals#1 means that if you've got a 1366 x 768 pixel monitor, and you're watching an incoming 1080p signal from your BlueRay DVD (e.g. 1920 x 1080 pixels to display), then your monitor doesn't have enough pixels in its native resolution to display it and the signal has to be 'scaled' (in this case, downconverted) to match your monitor's native resolution. Similarly, if you're watching a non-HD digital cable channel on your 1920 x 1080 monitor, the signal has to be upconverted to display on your monitor.

#2 means that if you're watching an interlaced video signal (say, the 1080i signal from NBC Sunday Night Football HD), it first has to be "deinterlaced" before it can be displayed on your digital monitor. Although 1080i uses just as many pixels as 1080p, it paints every other 'line' of pixels instead of painting them 'progressively,' which is what your progressive digital monitor needs to display.

Let's say that you have a 50" Panasonic plasma like mine, with a native 1,920 x 1,080 resolution, which is "true HD" 1080p resolution. The very best case is if you're feeding it with a 1080p signal, meaning at the monitor's native resolution and progressively scanned, so zero conversion is required. Unfortunately, ALMOST every signal out there from broadcast, satellite, cable, DVDs, VCRs, etc. is lower resolution and requires scaling and possibly deinterlacing before it hits your screen.

It's possible that your cable box, your video switching audio receiver, or something else is doing some or all of the scaling and deinterlacing for you; it's also possible that your monitor is doing some or all if the conversion. I like to know that my monitor is capable of doing it all, so I won't buy one until I'm sure that it scales and deinterlaces without serious artifacts that I can see. (There's a lot of other stuff to look for but once again that's a different discussion.)

lawfive
01-06-08, 04:22 PM
^^ 1080i is analog (interlace) 1080p is digital (progressive) you basically need really good eyes to notice the difference.
True, Nikon, but not ALWAYS true. If you've ever watched a monitor that doesn't handle deinterlacing well, it's unsettling.

And... Even though most newer 720p/1080i monitors will display a downconverted 1080p image (wasn't always so), they'll do so on a lower res screen. I've seen people argue themselves out of spending the money extra money for a 1080p monitor because there aren't many 1080p sources out there and it'll be some time before you see 1080p broadcasts or cable (which is true). But then those same people get home and bitch about the pixelation on their lower res monitors.

Sinister Angel
01-06-08, 04:33 PM
Alright, makes sense now. So theoretically a 1080i display with a 1080i source would be the same as a 1080p display with a 1080p source?

lawfive
01-06-08, 04:58 PM
Theoretically. Except that there is no such thing as a 1080i display. All digital monitors display only progressive images. So a 1080i image would be downconverted to (typically) 720p.

dkozloski
01-06-08, 05:32 PM
Inumerable times 480I and 1080P displays of good quality have been set up side by side and the average bear is unable to tell the difference from a normal viewing distance. This has been a hard sell from the word go and has contributed to the long delays in adopting new standards. On top of that the movie industry is terrified that they're going to lose control of media distribution just like happened with CDs and music. I have had a 480P plasma TV for years and it meets all my needs. Until somebody shows me a huge improvement in the content of the material being shown on network TV, I'll keep what I've got. The whole HD-DVD and HDTV deal is much ado about very little and they're having a hard time getting this albatross off the ground.

dkozloski
01-06-08, 06:08 PM
Compounding the problem is the fact that over the air broadcasters in small markets are unable to generate enough revenue to pay for any kind of upgrade. Locally we have no over the air broadcasters that have even upgraded to stereo sound from monaural. At the present time we have five local stations including PBS and two are low power. My guess is that the day the FCC says that the broadcasts must be digital and/or HD there will be at most two local stations on the air including PBS. The local cable is a mix of analog and digital and only the digital channels include enhanced sound of any kind. My guess is that the local situation is pretty much what you'll find in small market areas nationwide.

lawfive
01-06-08, 08:57 PM
You're on the money, Koz, except that the thing about the content providers not wanting to lose control of digital content is kind of non sequitur to this discussion. :hmm:

In SoCal I have a 42" plasma and a 50" 1080i DLP that I'm happy with. Mostly, we watch 480i cable, the occasional 1080i HD cable, and DVDs (e.g. 480i) that the monitors upconvert. The difference between standard definition and extended definition is HUGE. The difference between extended definition and high definition... not so much.

Before I bought the 1080p monitor in San Francisco I did a lot of eyes-on comparison shopping. The reason I went 1080p was the lack of pixelation... future proofing was way down the list.

lawfive
01-06-08, 09:01 PM
Addendum: there are guys out there who, if you sit them in front of a 1080p monitor, can tell you whether the incoming signal is 720p (upconverted with interpolation) or 1080p EVERY time. I don't know how they do it. Sometimes I THINK I can tell the difference...

I have a similar problem when trying to appreciate Louis XIII cognac, 500 dollar wine, etc.

dkozloski
01-06-08, 09:18 PM
I'm watching 1080P HD cable converted down to 480P on my enhanced definition 42" plasma at the moment and it looks fairly good to me. The largest share of the so-called HD content has been converted from 480I to 1080P before it was broadcast. A lot of it is even being stretched to fit the wide screen format like "The First 48" that's on now. The only true 1080P content being broadcast on a daily basis is sporting events like the football playoffs today.

lawfive
01-06-08, 09:54 PM
Wow, we don't get that in 1080p here. Sporting events (at least over Time Warner and Comcast cable) come 1080i. Same diff, as long as the chipset that does the deinterlacing does it well.

dkozloski
01-06-08, 10:50 PM
Wow, we don't get that in 1080p here. Sporting events (at least over Time Warner and Comcast cable) come 1080i. Same diff, as long as the chipset that does the deinterlacing does it well.
My mistake, 1080I here. It's all upconverted and stretched from 480 for widescreen except for sporting events. The broadcasters and media people are terrified of their stuff being pirated.

lawfive
01-06-08, 11:11 PM
LOL, yes they are. And I'm sure that HDCP will work just exactly as well as all other DRM has so far. :lol:

ewill3rd
01-07-08, 08:26 AM
I have a 1080p capable TV with an HDMI input, I have an HDMI player but because all this BS is so clunky right now... no REAL industry standards in players and sets... when I use the HDMI input the TV shrinks it and the player shrinks it some more since it isn't 16X9 set. I am left with a picture that is clearer than you could believe but about 1/3 the height of the screen. I plan on holding out longer this time, I spent a lot of money on my current setup and it is a real let down. Once they work out the kinks, and lower the prices I'll spring.

Thanks for the explanations, it is helpful.
Component video gives me 720p right?

lawfive
01-07-08, 01:22 PM
Component video is analog, so your digital set top box or DVD player must convert the signal from digital to analog to get it onto the component cables, then your monitor must convert the signal back to digital. In theory, component cables can carry any video resolution up to and including 1080p. Your monitor may not be built to allow a resolution that high on component cables, though.

lawfive
01-07-08, 01:38 PM
Ewill, if your 4x3 set is newer, there may be menu settings for dealing with the incoming signal's aspect ratio. But nothing is going to really fix the problem until you get a widescreen monitor.

I have a Panasonic 1080p plasma, an Oppo 1080p upconverting DVD, and a Motorola cable box, and I'm doing all HDMI through a Yamaha receiver. It all works like a champ; no HDCP HDMI repeater problems. I can give you model numbers if you want. Although at this point, you may want to hold off on a DVD player. It's looking like the BlueRay / HD-DVD wars are almost over, based on what's coming out of CES.

NOT ON MY WATCH
01-07-08, 02:31 PM
HD-DVD has definitely not lost.

Internationally, HD-DVD is more popular. Also, many of the movies that are BluRay-exclusive domestically are available in HD-DVD internationally. Why does that matter? Because HD-DVD players are region-free, meaning they can play a domestic or imported HD-DVD. BluRay is not region-free, and you are locked into what Sony offers to the US market.

Domestically speaking, this will likely continue to be a long, drawn-out war, with neither side being able to throw a knock out punch.

Within a year or so, there will likely be sub-$200 players that will present both formats beautifully (the ones out now are kind of jack-of-all-trades, masters-of-none). So even if you spent $150 - $350 on an HD-DVD player within the last year, your collection of HD-DVDs will not be obsolete. Same thing goes for BluRay - if BluRay dies, there will be inexpensive dual-format players that will keep the media alive for a long time.

Anyone who buys either of these formats doesn't really have much to worry about, unless they are concerned with having to spend sub-$200 in 2 years for a better player than the one they bought.

Also, dedicated set-top boxes (using internet connection) will soon deliver *on demand* **ANY** movie, regardless of studio origin, in 1080p format to your HDTV. The concept of buying a physical format for your music and movie purchases has been dying for awhile now anyway, and many people with Cable already get HD movies on demand. These new set-top boxes will put more nails into the physical format concept's coffin.

Everyone should be aware that HD-DVD and BluRay are transitory formats anyway. Anyone who has done any research on the subject should know that. I'm not excusing the fact that all the manufacturers and studios don't make that fact well known to the public, but they are in business to make money, not educate the public.

Note that I make these statements being an owner of both formats. I have a Toshiba HD-2 (HD-DVD in family room with 56" HDTV) and PS3 (BluRay in game room with 40" HDTV) - and I have about 50 titles in each format.

lawfive
01-07-08, 05:26 PM
I'm format neutral... don't know anything about either one except that BlueRay is supposed to be able to hold more content per disc. Was waiting for the war to be over so as not to buy a BetaMax; now I guess I'll have to look into it deeper.

Thanks for the info.

dkozloski
01-07-08, 05:43 PM
The big sticker is that Blue Ray/HD discs or not it's going to be 480 upconverted content; the same as current DVD. It'll look a little sharper but there is no way in hell the studios are going to be releasing honest to god current 1080I movies on discs until they have a rock solid way to protect the content from pirating. It ain't gonna happen. They learned the hard way from napster. The studios had dreams of releasing all movie content as HD satellite downloads to the theaters but they even got scared off of that idea.

P-Funk
01-07-08, 05:54 PM
I don't see the need to spend twice as much for an HD/BR disc when my normal DVD and up-converting DVD player works well enough. There are very few movies where I would think a "better" picture would make the viewing any more enjoyable anyway. Disc price as much as player price is a draw back for me.

NOT ON MY WATCH
01-07-08, 06:10 PM
The big sticker is that Blue Ray/HD discs or not it's going to be 480 upconverted content; the same as current DVD. It'll look a little sharper but there is no way in hell the studios are going to be releasing honest to god current 1080I movies on discs until they have a rock solid way to protect the content from pirating.

Regarding the resolution: you're wrong about that. One of thousands of articles on the web (this one from Wikipedia): "All HD-DVD movies are encoded in 1080p, with most supplements in 480i or 480p." BluRay is going to be similar.

Some older high def DVD players only support up to 1080i (like mine - but my 3 year old Samsung DLP HDTV is only 720p/1080i, so it didn't matter to me), and some support up to 1080p. As long as you use HDMI for the connection, and 1080i or 1080p is supported on both ends of that (the player and the TV), you will see that signal/resolution.

It is not 480i or 480p upconverted!

dkozloski
01-07-08, 06:30 PM
The content on HD-DVD is MPEG2 which is the same as old DVD. It is encoded at 1080I but at a reduced resolution from the MPEG compression processing of true raw video. There is no way that the studios are going to release true HD resolution movies until they can protect them from piracy.

lawfive
01-07-08, 07:28 PM
Koz, MPEG2 is just a compression and container standard. It can handle various resolutions up to and including 1080p. Whether the content stream that's being compressed onto the disc and then decompressed for your viewing pleasure is highish or lowish density depends on the content provider.

But most important here is the fact that a 68 year old guy is on the forum discussing such standards. When my dad was your age there's no way he and I could have had such a conversation about the tech at that time.

:highfive:

dwight.j.carter
01-07-08, 08:41 PM
I also like HD better. But I guess this gives me a reason to buy a playstation 3.

dwight.j.carter
01-07-08, 08:42 PM
The content on HD-DVD is MPEG2 which is the same as old DVD. It is encoded at 1080I but at a reduced resolution from the MPEG compression processing of true raw video. There is no way that the studios are going to release true HD resolution movies until they can protect them from piracy.

They will never be able to protect any of it.

lawfive
01-07-08, 09:12 PM
Sure they will... for a month or two. DRM usually takes at least that long for the crackers to break.

dkozloski
01-07-08, 09:14 PM
Koz, MPEG2 is just a compression and container standard. It can handle various resolutions up to and including 1080p. Whether the content stream that's being compressed onto the disc and then decompressed for your viewing pleasure is highish or lowish density depends on the content provider.

But most important here is the fact that a 68 year old guy is on the forum discussing such standards. When my dad was your age there's no way he and I could have had such a conversation about the tech at that time.

:highfive:
I was off and on in military and industrial electronics for almost 50 years. The point I am trying to make is that what you see on HD-DVD is degraded enough that pirates can't reconstruct the video well enough to provide video suitable for theater use. It looks better than DVD but it's not what they would like you to think it is. With HD-DVD/Blue Ray you can provide a fantastically accurate reproduction of a degraded video signal. Like you said, it all depends on the source video and what the content provider supplies.

I cut my teeth on FR-600, FR-900, FR-1400 Ampex. Bell&Howell, Mincom, and 3M. We had an RCA RADAR video recorder that had 4 foot diameter tape reels.

ewill3rd
01-07-08, 09:38 PM
I guess my point is, what I have is good enough.
I am not spending any money to "keep up with the Jones' "
Especially $300 on a player and another 20% for the discs (or whatever it comes out to).
I would say I'll wait until this settles down, but by the time that happens they will probably come out with something else.

hueterm
01-07-08, 09:48 PM
I guess my point is, what I have is good enough.
I am not spending any money to "keep up with the Jones' "
Especially $300 on a player and another 20% for the discs (or whatever it comes out to).
I would say I'll wait until this settles down, but by the time that happens they will probably come out with something else.


Here here! I'd rather have 7.1 sound than either of the HD formats.

lawfive
01-07-08, 09:52 PM
Here here! I'd rather have 7.1 sound than either of the HD formats.
:hmm: Umm... you can. Or you can have 7.1 AND an HD format. Not mutually exclusive.

nikon
01-09-08, 01:21 AM
I guess my point is, what I have is good enough.
I am not spending any money to "keep up with the Jones' "
Especially $300 on a player and another 20% for the discs (or whatever it comes out to).
I would say I'll wait until this settles down, but by the time that happens they will probably come out with something else.

I already had an xbox 360, so the hd upgrade was only 100$ on e-bay...and all my hd-dvd's come through blockbuster online....so really it only cost me 100$ to upgrade to hd-dvd...I own a few hd-dvd movies and honestly they're about the same price as a regular dvd......and if you sat down and watch the dvd and the hd-dvd you'd be doing everything you could to warrant your purchase....just more enjoyable.

railven
01-11-08, 01:59 AM
HD-DVD has definitely not lost.

Internationally, HD-DVD is more popular. Also, many of the movies that are BluRay-exclusive domestically are available in HD-DVD internationally. Why does that matter? Because HD-DVD players are region-free, meaning they can play a domestic or imported HD-DVD. BluRay is not region-free, and you are locked into what Sony offers to the US market.

Domestically speaking, this will likely continue to be a long, drawn-out war, with neither side being able to throw a knock out punch.

Within a year or so, there will likely be sub-$200 players that will present both formats beautifully (the ones out now are kind of jack-of-all-trades, masters-of-none). So even if you spent $150 - $350 on an HD-DVD player within the last year, your collection of HD-DVDs will not be obsolete. Same thing goes for BluRay - if BluRay dies, there will be inexpensive dual-format players that will keep the media alive for a long time.

Anyone who buys either of these formats doesn't really have much to worry about, unless they are concerned with having to spend sub-$200 in 2 years for a better player than the one they bought.

Also, dedicated set-top boxes (using internet connection) will soon deliver *on demand* **ANY** movie, regardless of studio origin, in 1080p format to your HDTV. The concept of buying a physical format for your music and movie purchases has been dying for awhile now anyway, and many people with Cable already get HD movies on demand. These new set-top boxes will put more nails into the physical format concept's coffin.

Everyone should be aware that HD-DVD and BluRay are transitory formats anyway. Anyone who has done any research on the subject should know that. I'm not excusing the fact that all the manufacturers and studios don't make that fact well known to the public, but they are in business to make money, not educate the public.

Note that I make these statements being an owner of both formats. I have a Toshiba HD-2 (HD-DVD in family room with 56" HDTV) and PS3 (BluRay in game room with 40" HDTV) - and I have about 50 titles in each format.

There is only one wrong statement here:
HD DVD Is not more popular globally than Blu-Ray. Look at the sales ratios, the only market HD DVD had an close fight with Blu-Ray was the USA (2:1, favor of Blu-Ray.)
European Marlet: 5:1, favor of Blu-Ray
Japanese Market: 10:1, favor of Blu-Ray
Australian Market: 9:1, favor of Blu-Ray (note that HD DVD wasn't even available in Australia till Sept/Oct 2007 locally, it all had to be imported.)

And as for as region coding, yes true Blu-Ray does have region coding, but not all international movies are region locked. You can important US HD DVD exclusives on Blu-Ray format from countries in Europe and Japan, of which most of aren't locked.

I own a Toshiba HD-A20 and a PS3.

97DevilleBeige
02-26-08, 02:29 AM
Oh Baby! After I heard that Toshiba is dropping the HD DVD format, I went to work and cleaned up. I sell these at work, so I purchased Toshiba's HDA30 for $60 (demonstration model). I guess having discretion over price can be a good thing every once in a while.

Now, I've got a fantastic hd upconversion dvd player for my tv and can take advantage of unbelievable deals. I'm a thrifty guy, and probably one of the few that went out to buy one of these abandoned format players after they went discontinued.

Discovery channel's web site had the complete Planet Earth HD-DVD box set for $29.95 shipped no tax! I caught it literally 10 minutes before the sale was expiring, I have no idea if they extended it though. Hollywood video is sellling off all of their "previously viewed" hd dvd's for $15, or 2 for $20, depending on the location. This format is so unpopular, that the discs that I got had never been rented out! I'm gonig out and bargain hunting again tomorrow to see if I can come across any in store specials.

Blackout
02-26-08, 02:16 PM
Your info says your from Levittown. Would that be Levittown, PA? But as for the HD DVD's it sucks that it lost the war but oh well. Now I gotta eventually go out and get a dual format player. I'm really surprised that HD DVD didn't win due to two things
1. The name from DVD to HD DVD I thought would make for an easy transition over DVD to Blu-Ray
2. HD DVD had dual format videos while Blu-Ray couldn't do this.

Oh well, I guess it's about time Sony won something

97DevilleBeige
02-26-08, 07:40 PM
Not PA, I'm from Levittown, NY. Yeah, hd-dvd had a few good things going for it. Oh well. I just picked up a ton of movies today. I sort of figured out that bluray was going to win early because Sony had learned from their mistakes with betamax. They own their own studios which gives them a great library for exclusive use. They also allowed other brands to source their plans which they were very protective about with betamax while JVC whored their stuff out.

DennisWingo
09-05-08, 04:11 PM
I was off and on in military and industrial electronics for almost 50 years. The point I am trying to make is that what you see on HD-DVD is degraded enough that pirates can't reconstruct the video well enough to provide video suitable for theater use. It looks better than DVD but it's not what they would like you to think it is. With HD-DVD/Blue Ray you can provide a fantastically accurate reproduction of a degraded video signal. Like you said, it all depends on the source video and what the content provider supplies.

I cut my teeth on FR-600, FR-900, FR-1400 Ampex. Bell&Howell, Mincom, and 3M. We had an RCA RADAR video recorder that had 4 foot diameter tape reels.

Don

I don't mean to intrude here but I was doing an internet search on Ampex FR-900's and was led to this post. Well I have four of them sitting within ten feet of me right now. I am doing a project at NASA Ames to resurrect two of them to digitize NASA's original master tapes from the lunar orbiter missions to the Moon.

If you remember anything or know any possible information where we can find any information about them (we have some data but not enough), would you please contact me?

Thanks

Dennis Wingo
NASA Research Park, Building 596
Moffett Field, CA 94035

my phone is 310-403-1346

Anything you might remember or know or any data that you might have would be of incredible value.

Thanks

Dennis

dirt_cheap_fleetwood
09-05-08, 04:34 PM
*cough* 6-month old thread *cough*

Playdrv4me
09-05-08, 10:14 PM
*cough* 6-month old thread *cough*

Yea but in this case it's pretty cool. Crazy how some people end up at this forum!

Dennis, I will alert Dkoz of this post.

gothicaleigh
09-06-08, 12:49 PM
...and to close the book on our BluRay versus HD-DVD arguments here, I just saw an advertisement for Transformers on BluRay.

CIWS
09-06-08, 04:51 PM
...and to close the book on our BluRay versus HD-DVD arguments here, I just saw an advertisement for Transformers on BluRay.


Kill Bill(s) come out this month on B.R. and the Matrix(s) will be out in Oct :D

lawfive
09-07-08, 05:33 PM
Funny, not fair, but funny in retrospect that when NotOnMyWatch was saying that HD-DVD had not yet lost, poor old HD-DVD had already taken a round right through the heart.

ewill3rd
09-07-08, 06:05 PM
I am still not going to pay $300 for a player, or buy a game console for almost the same price, then pay $35 per disc and a new TV just to get this.
When prices drop a bit I'll think about it.
Get them down to the prices of current DVD stuff and we'll do some talking.
I am really enjoying the price drop on regular DVD's though!

lawfive
09-07-08, 09:46 PM
Yeah, I'm with you. I'm not on the Blu-train.

ewill3rd
09-08-08, 07:55 AM
I have considered spending like $150 on a PC mounted drive, but what would be the point?
The discs are still too expensive and I don't really want to watch TV on my computer.

Mark0101
09-08-08, 09:55 PM
I agree the blu ray disc's are still way to expensive. Some have dropped in the price but most are still $30. BTW I have PS3 with a compatiable TV but I still don't want to shell out 30 bucks for a disc. The only one I would really want in blu ray is "Gone in sixty seconds"

Blackout
09-09-08, 05:52 PM
I bought up a ton of HD DVD movies for like $5 each. I'm waiting for the dual format players to get better and to drop in price by a decent amount because I ain't tossing out my 36 HD DVD movies!

lawfive
09-09-08, 07:09 PM
I'm waiting for the dual format players to get better and to drop in price by a decent amount
LOL... don't hold your breath, man. Think of all the poor souls who died holding their breath while waiting for the greater availability of dual format VHS/BetaMax machines.

Patrick7997
09-10-08, 02:24 AM
Yeah, don't hold your breath waiting for "dual format" players....

If it makes you feel better, the HD DVD Players were, IMHO, much better at "upscaling" your existing DVD collection, than Blu-Ray players.... So your HD DVD player may have a purpose for some time....

There's supposedly a price cut coming on Blu-Ray Players...

gary88
09-10-08, 02:47 AM
I sold my xbox 360 HD-DVD add-on and 6 HD-DVDs on ebay for $80.

:Harumph:

ewill3rd
09-10-08, 07:24 AM
You could always keep them for a few years and sell them to a museum?

Mark0101
09-10-08, 11:37 AM
what price range would you say is good to buy Blu ray players? I saw two for $278 in a store called "Brandsmart" in Miami. I would say thats a pretty good price to buy them at. Then again you can get the PS3 for $300 and it does alot more stuff then just the Blu ray player.

Blackout
09-10-08, 02:38 PM
LOL... don't hold your breath, man. Think of all the poor souls who died holding their breath while waiting for the greater availability of dual format VHS/BetaMax machines.

There's a huge difference between a HD-DVD/Blu-Ray player vs. VHS/BetaMax. The discs are the same size, the only real difference is the laser that reads the disc. VHS and BetaMax were two totally different formats all together.

dwight.j.carter
09-10-08, 02:41 PM
I moved my hddvd add on to my 360 in my room. I bought a playstation 3 for the living room and have alot of blu rays already.

ewill3rd
09-11-08, 08:55 AM
Less than $300 might be a bargain right now, my point was this technology will have to be a lot cheaper if they want me to participate.
When they hit $100-$150 I'll think more about doing it, until then... meh.... what I have works just fine.

CIWS
09-11-08, 06:28 PM
I bought a playstation 3 and have blu rays already.


:yeah:

Blackout
09-11-08, 08:36 PM
:yeah:

Either way I highly doubt people are going to be keeping their PS3 as their long term Blu Ray player

CIWS
09-11-08, 08:57 PM
Either way I highly doubt people are going to be keeping their PS3 as their long term Blu Ray player

Any player I own is kept as long as it lasts or until some nifty new thing comes out and I replace it with it.
Right now the advantage of the PS3 is you get the gaming console, media player, web surfing device, and a blu-ray player for not much more than a player costs by itself and you get to play The Force Unleashed. :D

Mark0101
09-12-08, 01:30 AM
Either way I highly doubt people are going to be keeping their PS3 as their long term Blu Ray player
Actually I plan on keeping my PS3 as long term. (unless they do actually come down to 100 bucks) Come to think about it, we haven't sold anything electronic that we have. We bought a 27" sharp Tv in 1996 and we still have it. 2 VCRs and four DVD players including the PS2 but not the PS3.

SRCeaze8
09-15-08, 03:54 PM
I love the quality of blu-ray's, I can't watch DVD's anymore ...it's like watching a vhs tape!

Blackout
09-16-08, 06:08 PM
I love the quality of blu-ray's, I can't watch DVD's anymore ...it's like watching a vhs tape!

I don't mind watching DVD's now. I just got a new xbox 360 with the HDMI port. I picked up a HDMI cable and now the xbox upconverts the DVD to near HD quality

lawfive
09-17-08, 09:37 PM
There's a huge difference between a HD-DVD/Blu-Ray player vs. VHS/BetaMax. The discs are the same size, the only real difference is the laser that reads the disc. VHS and BetaMax were two totally different formats all together.

As with the VHS/BetaMax wars, content providers have made their choice. I don't expect HD-DVD to survive as a format. Hence, no profit for drive makers to make new dual format drives. Hence, no new dual format players.