http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=795458

theres some thoughts on the combo pricing and strategy in this thread.

HD DVD and Blu-ray Owner Polls--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

polls closed analysis soon

These are public multiple choice surveys

Don't vote unless you actually own a player or have one on order.

I am trying for accurate results.


HD DVD owners (including Xbox HD DVD bundles)
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=768075

Blu-ray owners (including PS3 movie watchers)
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=768087

I think the premium pricing of previous combo discs was a limited volume market test.

I think if Universl is going to make this their HD standard they will price this as the market allows, and it will fall to under the $19.99 street price, which is a magic consumer sales volume number.

But, that is arguing combo pricing will drop to HD DVD-only levels, not DVD.

I can't deny that elimination of a premium might occur. In fact, it would be suicidal for Universal to do it any other way since they would be forcing many to repurchase a DVD otherwise.

We shall see what transpires.

Gary

Sony exposes the PS/3's scaler hardware to developers:

Ripping off the veil: The mysterious PS3 hardware scaler exposed (http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/ps3scaler/)

Gary

HMV finally got in a bunch of titles of both formats.

Priced obscenely at 40-60 USD. Samsung player went on sale at the premier electronics store. No sign of add-on yet or the PS3.

Btw, the samsung player could use a NR circuit. It looked friggin awful on PoC.

Yet another issue upon which you've completely missed the facts.

It's not an "arcane rule". Paidgeek clearly explained in the Insider Thread the rules regarding region coding. Any discs pressed twelve months after the initial region-coded release must remove region-coding. Further, many of the studios aren't supporting region coding at all.
I notice you conveniently left out their built-in loophole: If anything is changed on the disc, they can re-issue it with region coding (even after the 12-month period has expired) since it's not the same release.

Is it not conceivable that a studio could add or remove a doc here or a trailer there in order to ensure that their releases are always region-coded?

Apparently they think the replication cost differential to move for HD DVDs to combos HD DVD/DVDs is small enough that they can make more profit by selling them to a expanded market of non current HD DVD users.

That is (figures out of the air, using round numbers) assume it it costs 50 cents more per disc to make it a combo instead of a HD DVD 30GB one.

If they can charge at least 50 cents more per disc retail wholesale and consumers see a benefit then they lose nothing and might as well make combos. Or if they can charge 50 cent more wholesale and the retailers eat the increase

If can only charge the same but say make $5 profit on every disc , then if they can increase sales only 10% by selling them to (1) risk averse people or (2) what the heck I might get an HD DVD player someday or (3) I want a DVD side with my HD DVD disc so I can use it in the other players I own, they don't lose anything.
That would cover only the costs of replication, which I fully agree are of minimal diffrence between combo and HD DVD (and indeed DVD). The real cost is the value of the HD + the value of the SD content. If you contend that they're gonna drop combo prices in line with standard HD DVD pricing they will effectively be assigning a zero value to the SD content on the disc. That seems an unlikely proposition for a movie studio to undertake.

OTOH assuming these discs are then sold in lieu of DVDs that will create issues in their far more lucrative market, where consumers will be repelled by the high prices (compared to competitor's DVDs). There will be, as you say, some consumers who buy for insurance value, assuming they consider a format which might well lose to be a worthwhile insurance policy. Though those numbers of sales are almost certain to be swamped by those who hold off due to higher cost. Particularly when many DVDs are already available for such low prices in the bargain bin.

It's DVD which is the money spinner here, not either of the HighDef formats. Universal would be damaging their core business short term in search of some long term gain. I've gotta wonder what that gain could possibly be.

Btw, the samsung player could use a NR circuit. It looked friggin awful on PoC.

Is this the 'New' Samsung player which is supposed to be out in March '07?

Sony exposes the PS/3's scaler hardware to developers:

Ripping off the veil: The mysterious PS3 hardware scaler exposed (http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/ps3scaler/)

Gary

Horizontal only access for developers ... why all the secrecy? They've been touting the power of Cell and RSX along with the innovation of Sixaxis ... but they won't talk about the scalers in any detail. And if it was always there, why make it available for use only in the latest SDK? Unless they're using SPE's to do it?

I have a question.

How much do you think gamers care about movies, anyway? I'm speaking particularly of those 30 and under. I'm 40 and I work with a lot of guys in their mid-twenties. They all game, and dump a lot in their systems.

However, they don't seem all that interested in more than a handful of movies, they are used to "trading" music, and the compromised audio of the IPOD. A lot are already talking more about down-loading movies, and never mention the compression issues. It also seems like $25-$30 is a price they wouldn't pay for long. I just can't see them ever owning more than 20-30 store-bought movies at a given time.

Those numbers could cause a surge in sales, but level-off in a flash. The sales-slump bell-curve on Hi-Def seems more inevitable to me than it did on DVD.

If that's true. I have about 100 store-bought disks to every one my gamer buddies so, do I get to count as a 100 buyers statistically? ;)

Since you have a doubt in your last sentence, let me throw in this little thought.
It is my opinion that BD50's with AVC will produce better results than HD-DVD30 using VC-1.. That is the main reason why Microsoft is pushing for HD-DVD51. If they weren't worried about it, you wouldn't see them scrambling as they are to get it out as quickly as they can and have Amir keep talking about it on these forums. The second reason is so they can tout they have the greater capacity again which they did for awhile until BD50 showed up..

Well, time will tell which one of us is correct. In the mean time are you buying BD-25s? If so, why? Considering that you feel that the storage and bandwidth of BD is critical.

As I've said from the announcement, I believe TL-51 is about marketing position. Marketing position does have value, as we can see in every Blu-Ray presentation the BDA delivers. Their sales pitch is centered around BD-50 despite the fact that the majority of available titles continue to be pressed on BD-25. To look at the marketing pitch you'd be hard pressed to figure out that there are any movies being delivered on BD-25.

HD DVD and Blu-ray Owner Census, last chance before poll closes

HD DVD owners (including Xbox HD DVD bundles)
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...75&page=1&pp=60



Link doesn't work ...

Their sales pitch is centered around BD-50 despite the fact that the majority of available titles continue to be pressed on BD-25.

More than half of 2007 titles are BD50. It is available when desired.

The legacy of BD25 because they have to be' is being left behind. In a couple of years it will be long forgotten.

More than half of 2007 titles are BD50. It is available when desired.


Is it utilized when available? Are the results obvious when it is?

The second part of the question would seem impossible to answer unless you had a BD25 and a BD50 of the same original.

On an unrelated note, this site is wonderfully easy an smooth to use, my compliments.

I notice you conveniently left out their built-in loophole: If anything is changed on the disc, they can re-issue it with region coding (even after the 12-month period has expired) since it's not the same release.

Is it not conceivable that a studio could add or remove a doc here or a trailer there in order to ensure that their releases are always region-coded?Sure. But this ignores the fact that, in most cases, there's no reason for a studio to go to extra effort to region code a catalog title. At format launch they may want to control which titles are available, and for new movies they may want to control this (in case it hasn't had theatrical release in a given region). For catalog titles there are few reasons it would make sense for a studio to go to the extra effort of re-authoring a title in order to maintain region control.

It's kind of like everything to do with BR. You never know what you actually get until you buy it. That, is a serious problem for BR, IMHO. And the main reason sales are so slow for standalone players.

......No offense but if it did how exactly would you know? Seriously how do you know that a movie like Chicago didn't look better on Blu-ray than it would have had on HD DVD? It just seems to me that a lot of HD DVD supporters are incredibly pessimistic about Blu-ray and I don't see why. Many of them are optimistic enough about things like internet extras, more studio support, cheap Chinese HD DVD players, and TL51 with HD DVD but the second you mention Blu-ray they get pessimistic. From what I have seen the same people calling Blu-ray supporters optimistic are often the same people that are the most optimistic about HD DVD.

No offense taken. Thank you for allerting me to Chicago. When I noted that it was BD-50 for my list, I did not notice that this is also an AVC encoded title.

Chicago (2002) 113 minutes BD-50/AVC 4 out 5 for picture quality

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/chicago.html

'Chicago' is presented in 1.85:1 widescreen and 1080p/AVC MPEG-4 video on a BD-50 dual-layer disc, and despite some issues with the film's photography, it still delivers the razzle dazzle on Blu-ray.

Much of 'Chicago' was shot on very dark sets, with the props and sets "in limbo" on black stages. As such, the lighting is often high key, with the film processing "pushed" to bump up detail in low-contrast areas. This increases film grain considerably, leaving the transfer somewhat inconsistent. One shot will look sharp and smooth, the next a bit softer and grainier. Still, detail is easily superior to previous standard-def releases. This is most noticeable in brightly lit shots, with tiny details on costumes clearly visible and a truly wonderful, three-dimensional sense of depth to backgrounds. Colors, too, exceed any previous video version. Even the deepest reds and purples sizzle, with no noise or bleeding. Fleshtones radiate a healthy glow, too, with all of the actors looking gorgeous. The source print (which appears to have been recently-remastered for a 2005 two-disc DVD release) is also in excellent shape, with rich blacks and no dropouts or speckles. Yes, 'Chicago' is a bit of a rollercoaster transfer in terms of grain and contrast, but when it shines, watch out -- you won't see a better-looking presentation on Blu-ray.

Call me crazy, but I don't think Chicago would have scored lower on HD-DVD-30 with VC1. Whether it would scored better, we have no way of knowing.

I continue to be pessimitic about BD because I continue to see big promisses that fall short on the actual delivery. I continue to be optimistic about HD-DVD because the prodcuts they deliver to their customers continue to be strong.

More than half of 2007 titles are BD50. It is available when desired.

The legacy of BD25 because they have to be' is being left behind. In a couple of years it will be long forgotten. Its also possible if there is a cost differential studios may have an incentive to continue using BD25. Or a replication bottleneck.

The legacy of BD25 because they have to be' is being left behind. In a couple of years it will be long forgotten.
I'm looking at a BD-ROM whitepaper that says 25 GB can carry a 4 hr HD movie in AVC, 3 languages and 105 Min of SD bonus or a MPEG2 135min hd movie/3 lang/2 hr SD bonus. Seems useful to me

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=795458

theres some thoughts on the combo pricing and strategy in this thread.

Some thoughts on the idea of combos period...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=3641

329 "Ney"
33 "Aye"

b2b

March 2006?! You figure an isolated comment made to shareholders and analysts before either format launched has bearing on the current situation?

Go back another year from there and you can "prove" Warner and Paramount are HD DVD exclusive. :)

Time flows. Things change.

Gary
What's really funny is how many of you attacked me when I pointed out that LG was clearly working on a Hybrid player.

How many of you today will agree that Samsung will probably release their hybrid player within the first half of 2007?

How many of you agree that Disney will probably start releasing HD DVDs within 2007?

How? The one title I've seen in VC-1 from them (Flight Plan) wouldn't work on HD DVD as it is now because of bitrate issues. I know rdjam was telling people that using VC-1 meant that they would have an HD DVD compliant encode (which wasn't and isn't true), but why are you claiming that using VC-1 is hedging their bets?

--Darin
Actually - to correct your inaccurate "quote" - I stated that Disney was rumoured to be switching to VC1 - which turned out to be CORRECT :)

I further stated that if they converted to VC1 encoding, it would be easier for them to support HD DVD VC1 releases also, should they choose to. This statement meets the basic requirements of being very obviously correct without any further tests being required.

I also stated that Disney using VC1 increases the chances that they will also start releasing on HD DVD - just because they haven't YET, to date, doesn't mean they "won't", or that this statement was incorrect...

I hope you can see the difference ;)

Some thoughts on the idea of combos period...

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/poll...lts&pollid=3641

329 "Ney"
33 "Aye"

b2b


This is a completely misleading (intentionally?) post. The poll specifically asks if people prefer combos "priced about $12 more than typical HD DVD discs."

That is absolutely not the same thing as asking people if they "approve of combos period" as you suggest.

If pricing were identical that poll would have shown a far different result. It's the price people object to, not the idea of combo discs period.

Unbelievable,

How else would you describe giving high-end laptops to bloggers who comment on Microsoft technology?
Bummer - I didn't get anything, not even so much as a movie. Don't you think if this was some sort of policy that I, of all people, would have gotten something?

The laptop gig is pretty standard to the industry, loads of "review" gear is "lent" to writers each year and quite a bit of it never is returned.

Sony exposes the PS/3's scaler hardware to developers:

Ripping off the veil: The mysterious PS3 hardware scaler exposed

Gary

Unfortunately, this is irrelevant to the PS3's lack of native 720p output for Blu Ray movies.

On the subject of Combos and the benefits to the studios, does anyone know which typically costs more... the blank DVD media or the packaging which contains it (including the molded plastic case, the printed artwork, the security seals, sensors, and shrink-wrap?)

Combos will allow studios to ship one product for both SD and HD DVD markets, and they will be saleable or rentable to two separate markets from one shelf space.

As the HD market grows, it will likely be of great benefit to studios to produce single SKU combo titles.

Costs will fall in-line with current SD DVD pricing (weekly new release prices.. not the $5.99 or $9.99 bargain bin prices being carelessly tossed about in here as being representative of standard DVD pricing) and when that happens the market will follow.

This is a completely misleading (intentionally?) post. The poll specifically asks if people prefer combos "priced about $12 more than typical HD DVD discs."

That is absolutely not the same thing as asking people if they "approve of combos period" as you suggest.

If pricing were identical that poll would have shown a far different result. It's the price people object to, not the idea of combo discs period.

Unbelievable,

How about this one then.. ;)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=4352

b2b

What's really funny is how many of you attacked me when I pointed out that LG was clearly working on a Hybrid player.

How many of you today will agree that Samsung will probably release their hybrid player within the first half of 2007?

How many of you agree that Disney will probably start releasing HD DVDs within 2007?

I'm thinking H2 07 for both of those. ;) Then again I was caught by surprise when LG announced that they were bringing a universal player to CES this year. I thought that there would be talk about universal players in development. I didn't expect someone to show up with one.

Sony exposes the PS/3's scaler hardware to developers:

Ripping off the veil: The mysterious PS3 hardware scaler exposed (http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/ps3scaler/)

Gary
I've read the article and I call "BU*****T".

Sony has given developers a software call in the new SDK that allows them to "upscale" horizontally only, not vertically - and on the basis of that, the writer PROCLAIMS that the PS3 has a hardware upscaler??

Balls.

I think that that will prove to have been sheer wishful thinking. If the PS3 really had a hardware upscaler, then (1) they would have had it working at launch, since it would have been a cinch and (2) they wouldn't have been working so furiously to get software scaling working.

This is SHEER nonsense, in my view, just to get some positive PR on the back of Microsoft's releases concerning their ANA scaler - and the new H-ANA in the next Xbox due at the end of the year...

How about this one then.. ;)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=4352

b2b

This poll is kind of small still, but it shows us the following information.

10.77% don't want to buy combos
30.77% are ok with combos as long as there is no price premium
58.46% of people are willing to pay a premium for combo discs (varying percentages based on extra cost)

If combos were the same cost as single format discs about 9 out of 10 people surveyed would buy them.

This poll is kind of small still, but it shows us the following information.

10.77% don't want to buy combos
30.77% are ok with combos as long as there is no price premium
58.46% of people are willing to pay a premium for combo discs (varying percentages based on extra cost)

If combos were the same cost as single format discs about 9 out of 10 people surveyed would buy them.

Or you can read it that under current pricing conditions 41.54% aren't buying combo discs.

b2b

Is this the 'New' Samsung player which is supposed to be out in March '07?
Nope, the old one, presumably with f/w updates etc. installed.

To be fair, it was a trailer for PoC, which may have been badly encoded..

I notice you conveniently left out their built-in loophole: If anything is changed on the disc, they can re-issue it with region coding (even after the 12-month period has expired) since it's not the same release.

Is it not conceivable that a studio could add or remove a doc here or a trailer there in order to ensure that their releases are always region-coded?

Speaking unofficially, I can assure you that your scenario would never happen, unless absolutely necessary.

Speaking unofficially, I can assure you that your scenario would never happen, unless absolutely necessary.
I'm sorry - I was not aware of your insider status. Do you work for Sony?

The fact that the loophole was created in the first place suggests Sony foresaw times when it would be necessary. Could you offer us a scenario where it would be "absolutely necessary" to reissue a title with slightly altered specs?

They are betting that combos will get so cheap other studios and content providers will use them.Maybe, but until Universal starts selling combo HD DVD discs for the same price as DVDs I am not so sure that consumers will like them. After all not only are they more expensive at the moment but you don't even have disc art on them.


I'm not sure that pessimistic is the right word. Antagonistic is probably more on point. And I'm not sure that Blu-ray technology is the main source of the problem. I would bet a fair amount of money that antagonism towards BD supporters (and I will leave out any colorful adjectives) is the biggest source of the problem.I agree with you that it isn't about Blu-ray technology that many of them have a problem, but I am not so sure it is about Blu-ray supporters either. After all some of them started posting here already against Blu-ray and some are against Blu-ray because they think the companies behind it are "greedy" since they won't sell their players for the same price as Toshiba. In fact some of them I believe see this format war almost as a war between heroes and villains and they see all the actions of this format war in that way. For instance can you honestly say to me that rdjam's website, hdnowonline, takes a fair look at the two HD formats? So while I agree with you that the people who are against Blu-ray are not usually against it because of the technology I do not believe it has much to do with Blu-ray supporters either.


How else would you describe giving high-end laptops to bloggers who comment on Microsoft technology?The laptop gig is pretty standard to the industry, loads of "review" gear is "lent" to writers each year and quite a bit of it never is returned.Just my personal opinion but saying that bribery is okay because it is common to an industry doesn't make it justified. You can't justify an immoral act simply by saying that others do it.


...
no reason an ms insider should be held to a higher standard...Well besides the small fact that he already told us his employer this has nothing at all to do with what I was asking.


I stated that Disney was rumoured to be switching to VC1 - which turned out to be CORRECTDisney encoded a single disc using VC-1 and many discs, including recent ones, are in MPEG-4 AVC. As such I think it is a bit soon to start saying that Disney is switching to VC-1 since there has yet to be any evidence for that.


Speaking unofficially, I can assure you that your scenario would never happen, unless absolutely necessary.Just curious but how would you know that?

I'm sorry - I was not aware of your insider status. Do you work for Sony?

The fact that the loophole was created in the first place suggests Sony foresaw times when it would be necessary. Could you offer us a scenario where it would be "absolutely necessary" to reissue a title with slightly altered specs?

Definitely not an insider, that's why it was unofficial. Let me give you an example where it would be absolutely necessary. Suppose Sony could make more money by re-releasing with region coding. Seems like a pretty good reason to me. :)

This poll is kind of small still, but it shows us the following information.

10.77% don't want to buy combos
30.77% are ok with combos as long as there is no price premium
58.46% of people are willing to pay a premium for combo discs (varying percentages based on extra cost)

If combos were the same cost as single format discs about 9 out of 10 people surveyed would buy them.

More data... 74.62% of people don't want combos if they have a price premium.
31.34% don't want them at all..

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=4354

b2b

Or you can read it that under current pricing conditions 41.54% aren't buying combo discs.

b2b

It depends on the title. Animal House is a title I plan to order and on Amazon it's $23.95. The average HD-DVD price on Amazon is $22.40 according to eproductwars.com.

More data... 74.62% of people don't want combos if they have a price premium.
31.34% don't want them at all..

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=4354

b2b

I suppose we could start a dozen different polls on AVS and you can use your favorite poll and I can use my favorite poll. ;)

I believe the price premium is temporary. It ultimately saves the studios and retailers money if they can reduce production, distribution and display costs with combos. If HD-DVD grows into decent volume sales, the cost premium will go away.

I suppose we could start a dozen different polls on AVS and you can use your favorite poll and I can use my favorite poll. ;)

I believe the price premium is temporary. It ultimately saves the studios and retailers money if they can reduce production, distribution and display costs with combos. If HD-DVD grows into decent volume sales, the cost premium will go away.

Well if you don't like the results of the last poll I quoted, then you will have to take up your objections with Amir. He's the one who started it... ;)

b2b

Well if you don't like the results of the last poll I quoted, then you will have to take up your objections with Amir. He's the one who started it... ;)

b2b
Open can, worms everywhere.. :D

Disney encoded a single disc using VC-1 and many discs, including recent ones, are in MPEG-4 AVC. As such I think it is a bit soon to start saying that Disney is switching to VC-1 since there has yet to be any evidence for that.
Hmm - U left out the rest of my answer, so I'll refer back again to my post on what I said ;)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9604108&&#post9604108

BTW - now you're DENYING that Disney has switched to VC1?? :rolleyes:

Well if you don't like the results of the last poll I quoted, then you will have to take up your objections with Amir. He's the one who started it... ;)

b2b

Does it really matter who started the poll?

Let's look at both polls again:

I see that on the first poll 9.21% don't want combos.

On the second poll 16.28% don't want combos.

Those are the current stats. Do you have another ten polls we should be tracking as well? ;)

More data... 74.62% of people don't want combos if they have a price premium.
31.34% don't want them at all..

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/poll...lts&pollid=4354

b2b




On that poll, the 16 voters making up the "I don't want combo discs period" group include such notable Blu Ray loyalists as Beatboy77, Sisko 197 (who has dubbed combo discs "flippers") a guy named SilverEagle233 with zero total posts (signed up just for that poll I guess?) and a few other voters who own a Blu Ray player and a PS3 and are generally not interested in HD DVD at all based on their posts.

One might think such people were voting more along the lines of "I don't want HD DVD period" not "I don't want combos period."

The only reason a Blu Ray supporter would care enough to vote against HD DVD combo discs (when they would not be buying HD DVD anyway) is because they are afraid of the advantage HD DVD combo discs hold over Blu Ray in the marketplace.

Or you can read it that under current pricing conditions 41.54% aren't buying combo discs.

b2b


Thank you for making my point even more clear. People not wanting to buy combo discs under current pricing conditions does not equate to "people not wanting combo discs period" as you originally suggested.

On that poll, the 16 voters making up the "I don't want combo discs period" group include such notable Blu Ray loyalists as Beatboy77, Sisko 197 (who has dubbed combo discs "flippers") a guy named SilverEagle233 with zero total posts (signed up just for that poll I guess?) and a few other voters who own a Blu Ray player and a PS3 and are generally not interested in HD DVD at all based on their posts.

One might think such people were voting more along the lines of "I don't want HD DVD period" not "I don't want combos period."

The only reason a Blu Ray supporter would care enough to vote against HD DVD combo discs (when they would not be buying HD DVD anyway) is because they are afraid of the advantage HD DVD combo discs hold over Blu Ray in the marketplace.

Thank you for making my point even more clear. People not wanting to buy combo discs under current pricing conditions does not equate to "people not wanting combo discs period" as you originally suggested.

Could it be that when Blu-Ray supporters saw Amir open a poll, they flocked to it so their opinions could be heard?

Well I for one applaud them for their renewed interest in HD-DVD. Perhaps it's the realization that they're getting bigger discs on the typical HD-DVD title than on the typical BD title. ;)

Definitely not an insider, that's why it was unofficial.
If you're not an insider, how could you possibly "assure {me} that {my} scenario would never happen, unless absolutely necessary?" You can assume it won't happen often, but you really have no idea, right? So basically we're back to square one - they have the loophole in place and it remains to be seen if they choose to exploit it or not.

Let me give you an example where it would be absolutely necessary. Suppose Sony could make more money by re-releasing with region coding. Seems like a pretty good reason to me. :)
That's really not very reassuring to potential BD customers. It's not like Sony has a reputation for putting the customer first in situations like this.

"seems to be much more" in comparision with Universal. Universla is using a technology that is applicable ot HD DVD. Disney is using a technology , or trying it out, that can be used if it migrates to HD DVD and 30BG discs and VC-1.

I don't know if that specific encode and DD+ can fit on a 30 GB disc. I just think its significant they were trying VC-1. Why take batting practice if you are never going to step up to the plate?

Seems to me that saying " Disney using VC-1 seems to be much more hedging its bets." is hedging enough for my statement. It's only in comparison to Universal making a bet with a HD DVD only format for its 2007 releases.Okay, I understand. But that, "Why take batting pratice if you are never going to step up to the plate?" is a very strange question. It is almost like you think VC-1 is an HD DVD technology. Both formats support it. This is like claiming somebody is going to play for the Yankees because they took batting practice with the Angels. Disney didn't just take batting pratice, they stepped up to the plate and used VC-1 for Blu-ray, just like it is included in the Blu-ray specs. And after checking it out I can assure you that the encode would not work on HD DVD with its current bandwidth limitations.

--Darin

Actually - to correct your inaccurate "quote" - I stated that Disney was rumoured to be switching to VC1 - which turned out to be CORRECT :)

I further stated that if they converted to VC1 encoding, it would be easier for them to support HD DVD VC1 releases also, should they choose to. This statement meets the basic requirements of being very obviously correct without any further tests being required.

I also stated that Disney using VC1 increases the chances that they will also start releasing on HD DVD - just because they haven't YET, to date, doesn't mean they "won't", or that this statement was incorrect...

I hope you can see the difference ;)What I said is correct. Are you really going to try to make people believe that you didn't say that using VC-1 meant having an HD DVD compliant encode? Heck, your brother sent out an email related to your petition site saying that and we went round and round about it with you backing it up for a while. After a while you seemed to finally comprehend that using VC-1 for Blu-ray doesn't mean having an encode that will work on HD DVD. It is pretty disengenuious to now state the statements that you switched to after we went round and round about it, as if you hadn't earlier said that doing an VC-1 encode for Blu-ray meant having something that would work on HD DVD.

This looks like the kind of game where somebody says that 2+2 it 5, a different person corrects them, person one agrees that 2+2 is 4 and then later when it is pointed out that they had claimed that 2+2 is 5, they say that what they said is that 2+2 is 4 and they hope people can see the difference.

--Darin

Okay, I understand. But that, "Why take batting pratice if you are never going to step up to the plate?" is a very strange question. It is almost like you think VC-1 is an HD DVD technology. Both formats support it. This is like claiming somebody is going to play for the Yankees because they took batting practice with the Angels. Disney didn't just take batting pratice, they stepped up to the plate and used VC-1 for Blu-ray, just like it is included in the Blu-ray specs. And after checking it out I can assure you that the encode would not work on HD DVD with its current bandwidth limitations.

--Darin

Not questioning your statement, but I am curious. What bit rate did they encode at?

Not questioning your statement, but I am curious. What bit rate did they encode at?I don't remember the average bitrate (or really what would have been my estimate for the average from watching the bitrate move around for a while). It was pretty high. But the peaks definitely went above what they could do for HD DVD right now.

--Darin

I don't remember the average bitrate (or really what would have been my estimate for the average from watching the bitrate move around for a while). It was pretty high. But the peaks definitely went above what they could do for HD DVD right now.


I don't know how accurate this is, but I read a post on this forum stating that Flightplan's VC1 encode averaged 26-28Mbps. As far as peaks, I have no idea.

I don't know why the VC1 average is so high either, unless Disney just put the machines on autopilot and no one really optimized the encode?

Unfortunately, this is irrelevant to the PS3's lack of native 720p output for Blu Ray movies.Why? If there is indeed a hardware scaler and the firmware or SDK has been updated to make use of it, the Blu-ray playback software can most likely use it as well. It might be that only partial hardware support is required to free up enough cycles to allow Cell to do the rest...

Bummer - I didn't get anything, not even so much as a movie. Don't you think if this was some sort of policy that I, of all people, would have gotten something?

No, no, they only bribed influential bloggers... :D

This is a completely misleading (intentionally?) post. The poll specifically asks if people prefer combos "priced about $12 more than typical HD DVD discs."

That is absolutely not the same thing as asking people if they "approve of combos period" as you suggest.

If pricing were identical that poll would have shown a far different result. It's the price people object to, not the idea of combo discs period.

Unbelievable, typical spin from the master.

Try this current AVS poll http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=795800

currently

14 % "Will buy reluctantly if they are the same price as regular HD DVDs"

and another

48 % "Will buy happily if they are the same price as HD DVDs""

and another

21% will pay a over premium over HD DVD cost


so over 85% of AVS poll responders would buy them if the cost was close to HD DVD cost.


only 16% 'don't want combos period" including several non- HD DVD owner notables (I like public polls)

No, no, they only bribed influential So you think there were bribs?bloggers... :DSo, Eternal, which should I purchase, the flawed Philips, Panny, Sony or Pioneer? Which one did you buy? And Why? Please answer which one you bought. I'm guessing none, cause they suck...

Okay, I understand. But that, "Why take batting pratice if you are never going to step up to the plate?" is a very strange question. It is almost like you think VC-1 is an HD DVD technology. Both formats support it. This is like claiming somebody is going to play for the Yankees because they took batting practice with the Angels. Disney didn't just take batting pratice, they stepped up to the plate and used VC-1 for Blu-ray, just like it is included in the Blu-ray specs. And after checking it out I can assure you that the encode would not work on HD DVD with its current bandwidth limitations.

--Darin Fair enough. I just think that Disney is getting ready to two time Blu-ray, or at least is preparing for the possibility at the while Universal has just renewed its wedding vows to HD DVD. Disney is removing a barrier to go neutral while Universal is erecting one.

typical spin from the master.

Try this current AVS poll http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=795800

...

so over 85% of AVS poll responders would buy them if the cost was close to HD DVD cost.

only 16% 'don't want combos period" including several non- HD DVD owner notables (I like public polls)

Those that would reluctanty and happily buy if they are the SAME (not "close") price as plain HD DVD is 62%. Those against combo entirely is 17%.

So, those against the current reality of combos and pricing is 79%.

Unless Universal is going to release combos at the exact same pricing as plain HD DVD, how can you claim this poll shows anything encouraging?

Gary

Speaking unofficially, I can assure you that your scenario would never happen, unless absolutely necessary.
I always enjoy seeing "never" followed by "unless." :rolleyes:

Unless Universal is going to release combos at the exact same pricing as plain HD DVD, how can you claim this poll shows anything encouraging? Because I don;t think that Universal is going to keep the high price premium on combos. If they switch that to be their new standard, they must keep prices competitive and in line with their previous HD DVD pricing .

Because I don;t think that Universal is going to keep the high price premium on combos. If they switch that to be their new standard, they must keep prices competitive and in line with their previous HD DVD pricing .

Agreed. It becomes mostly a non-issue at the same pricing.

Although there are still a significant number that will hate the form factor, and probably the lack of HD extras.

And then there is the possibility of cannibalizing DVD sales as those who already have the DVD give it away/sell it on eBay.

Gary

Was this posted yet?

Microsoft Slashes Xbox 360 Sales Estimates (http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_Slashes_Xbox_360_Sales_Estimates/1169838634)

Microsoft Chief Financial Officer Chris Liddell stated he's cutting unit sales projections for Xbox 360 game consoles for the first calendar quarter of 2007, by as much as three million units.


Market share projections, Liddell said, will be unchanged - meaning, Xbox 360 isn't expected to lose customers to either Sony's PlayStation 3 or Nintendo's Wii. Instead, he appeared to be giving signals that possibly rising inventory levels could be indicators of demand declining at higher than seasonal levels.


That would be 60K fewer HD DVD add-on purchasers, using the 2% attach rate.

Gary

With the release of HD and BD titles here, I have now confirmed that only Universal titles carry the HD logos of LaSoP and BiPSaI.

None of the neutral studios do. I think they are trying to be as generic as possible while releasing their content while Universal obv. has been going the whole way.

With the release of HD and BD titles here, I have now confirmed that only Universal titles carry the HD logos of LaSoP and BiPSaI.


What's LaSoP and BiPSaI?

Gary

What's LaSoP and BiPSaI?

Gary
Look and Sound of Perfect; Best in Picture, Sound and Interactivity.

Not one neutral title with these logos. I brought up this point earlier but was not fully sure cos I only had a small sample to check. Now, I have no doubt thats the way things are.

Look and Sound of Perfect; Best in Picture, Sound and Interactivity.

Not one neutral title with these logos. I brought up this point earlier but was not fully sure cos I only had a small sample to check. Now, I have no doubt thats the way things are.
Universal also include HD DVD only promo spots and movie trailers on the discs also.

Seems to be betting large on HD DVD .

Look and Sound of Perfect; Best in Picture, Sound and Interactivity.

Not one neutral title with these logos. I brought up this point earlier but was not fully sure cos I only had a small sample to check. Now, I have no doubt thats the way things are.

Ah! :o

Each BD studio has its own promo. Nothing specifically from the BDA.

Gary

What I said is correct. Are you really going to try to make people believe that you didn't say that using VC-1 meant having an HD DVD compliant encode? Heck, your brother sent out an email related to your petition site saying that and we went round and round about it with you backing it up for a while. After a while you seemed to finally comprehend that using VC-1 for Blu-ray doesn't mean having an encode that will work on HD DVD. It is pretty disengenuious to now state the statements that you switched to after we went round and round about it, as if you hadn't earlier said that doing an VC-1 encode for Blu-ray meant having something that would work on HD DVD.

This looks like the kind of game where somebody says that 2+2 it 5, a different person corrects them, person one agrees that 2+2 is 4 and then later when it is pointed out that they had claimed that 2+2 is 5, they say that what they said is that 2+2 is 4 and they hope people can see the difference.

--Darin
Eh? That's one of the most rambling posts I've seen lately.

My position is clear, so I'll link my last statement on it again - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9604108&&#post9604108

You seem to disagree with the statement that Disney's switching to VC1 increases the odds that they may also support HD DVD - that's fine, until you start to try to state your opinion as fact. None of us know what their ultimate moves will be, but their using VC1 is clearly a positive for HD DVD.

You also seem to state for a fact that this Disney VC1 encode would never be able to play on HD DVD. Do you have information that the video exceeds 30 mbps?

Furthermore, even if this were so, how do you know that Disney just didn't want to take any chances with quality (after their experience with Mpeg2 on Dinosaur). Once they become more comfortable with the tools, I'm pretty certain they would start to drop their encode rates lower - after all, many other studios have no problems even down at 12 mbps.

As you know, VC1 doesn't require 30 mbps to give a class-beating picture, and 30 mbps is about 10 mbps beyond the point of no additional returns from what we've heard from professional encoders here.

Still curious to know what you seem to be talking about on the specs here.

You seem to disagree with the statement that Disney's switching to VC1 increases the odds that they may also support HD DVD

I would say "switching" is possibly a statement to disagree with. Have they released a second title in VC-1?

The one they did had a bit-rate that exceeded HD DVD spec.

Are you saying that Weinstein Co. using AVC is a sign of imminent neutrality for them?

Gary

Universal has just renewed its wedding vows to HD DVD. Disney is removing a barrier to go neutral while Universal is erecting one.

I don't see how anyone can argue with this, and agree that any combo pricing premium will be minimized. It's becoming apparent that Universal is a highly motivated ally in this "war", and I for one, and beginning to wonder if the cost of victory in a previous conflict, is finally coming home to roost, for Sony.

I don't remember the average bitrate (or really what would have been my estimate for the average from watching the bitrate move around for a while). It was pretty high. But the peaks definitely went above what they could do for HD DVD right now.

--Darin
I'm sorry - did I hear correctly? You're basing this whole discussion on your "belief" that "you can't really remember but it looked pretty high to me"??

First off, the bit rate meters in most players are notoriously innaccurate - heck, there are movies where the HD DVD bit rate meters *regularly* show rates way beyond the theoretical maximums for the format. Using such data as evidence is already highly suspect, but made far worse when you forget what the rates supposedly were anyway...

Even IF the rate on this particular title *was* higher than HD DVD (which I am now seriously doubting) it still doesn't mean that Disney couldn't bring it to a harmonious level at the drop of a hat for other releases if they chose to.

typical spin from the master.

Try this current AVS poll http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=795800

currently

14 % "Will buy reluctantly if they are the same price as regular HD DVDs"

and another

48 % "Will buy happily if they are the same price as HD DVDs""

and another

21% will pay a over premium over HD DVD cost


so over 85% of AVS poll responders would buy them if the cost was close to HD DVD cost.


only 16% 'don't want combos period" including several non- HD DVD owner notables (I like public polls)

Is that comment a declaration of intent ?? ;) It must be. To take opinion and apply it to a reality that does not exist..

The reality is that all of the combo discs cost more than a single-sided HD-DVD disc and only 20.56% of customers are expressing that they see any real value in combos enough to pay a $1 more for them.

So if you want to claim that mythical 85% of customer satisfaction, then reality will have to change to where combos cost no more than a 30GB dual layer disc... :)

b2b

.......combos cost no more than a 30GB single layer disc.

Any just how do you expect Universal to price these "mythical" 30GB single layer discs. ;)

typical spin from the master.

Try this current AVS poll http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=795800

currently

14 % "Will buy reluctantly if they are the same price as regular HD DVDs"

and another

48 % "Will buy happily if they are the same price as HD DVDs""

and another

21% will pay a over premium over HD DVD cost


so over 85% of AVS poll responders would buy them if the cost was close to HD DVD cost.


only 16% 'don't want combos period" including several non- HD DVD owner notables (I like public polls)Even better - those SD DVD users who have not converted to Hi Def yet are ALSO very interested in hybrid discs. See my old poll here - http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=660189

Sony and the BDA know this - that's why it's rumoured that they are trying to get hybrid discs working again and paidgeek is indicating an announcement next week.

So I find it humorous that some people say hybrid discs are the devil, while the BD side works furiously on getting them ready. I wonder how fast they'll change their tune? And I also wonder if Sony or the BDA will also be subsidising production of hybrid discs in order to try to keep the cost down?

I always enjoy seeing "never" followed by "unless." :rolleyes:
:p ! Ain't that the truth! :p

Any just how do you expect Universal to price these "mythical" 30GB single layer discs. ;)

Oops, 15GB single layer, 30GB dual layer, 15GB/9GB combos, 30GB/9GB combos, 45GB TL, 51GB TL..... they got so many "discs" with HD-DVD I let a typo slip through..

30GB dual layer... all fixed now... ;)

b2b

The second part of the question would seem impossible to answer unless you had a BD25 and a BD50 of the same original.

that is not true. The opposite would be (why did they go 25 instead of 50) but the minut a 50GB disk comes out and the content is >25GB you don't need to be a genius to realize that to go to <25GB something must change or be cut

Even better - those SD DVD users who have not converted to Hi Def yet are ALSO very interested in hybrid discs. See my old poll here - http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=660189

Sony and the BDA know this - that's why it's rumoured that they are trying to get hybrid discs working again and paidgeek is indicating an announcement next week.

So I find it humorous that some people say hybrid discs are the devil, while the BD side works furiously on getting them ready. I wonder how fast they'll change their tune? And I also wonder if Sony or the BDA will also be subsidising production of hybrid discs in order to try to keep the cost down?

I beg your pardon, but I do not have any "announcement" to make on hybrid discs next week and I am not aware of any BD studio that is actively pursuing them. I just said I would make some inquiries about whether or not development has continued at JVC and will try to find out if any more recent demo discs have been made that's all.

Even better - those SD DVD users who have not converted to Hi Def yet are ALSO very interested in hybrid discs. See my old poll here - http://archive2.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=660189

Sony and the BDA know this - that's why it's rumoured that they are trying to get hybrid discs working again and paidgeek is indicating an announcement next week.

So I find it humorous that some people say hybrid discs are the devil, while the BD side works furiously on getting them ready. I wonder how fast they'll change their tune? And I also wonder if Sony or the BDA will also be subsidising production of hybrid discs in order to try to keep the cost down?

I don't think they will have to. If Warner and their replication partners get Total HD working, it should be a simple matter of subsituting a DVD side for the HD-DVD half of a Total HD disc. That would be the easy thing to do. I think Sony DADC will just continue optimizing the pressing process for standard 25GB & 50GB Blu-Ray discs. They got a lot of BD disc orders to fill with millions of PS3s in consumer homes don't forget.. ;)

b2b

Because I don;t think that Universal is going to keep the high price premium on combos. If they switch that to be their new standard, they must keep prices competitive and in line with their previous HD DVD pricing

a 5$ premium is not the same as a 1$ premium is not the same as "same price"

the poll was not precise enough, but all you can say is that it looks like 79% don't want combos if it implies they need to pay more. And 69% don't care if it is a combo if thre is no premium.

the poll had precise wording "the same price" not a close enough. And someone that is reluctant means I don't want them but if it is a must have movie I will buy it anyways even though I hate combos.

Hmm... I'm starting to see even more "madness" to their method.. :)

Universal replaces their DVD production with hybrid HD-DVD combo discs (and sells them for the same price as DVD) the stores and rental shops fill with the new discs and Microsoft gets cheapo HD-DVD players coming from China @ $199.00 dollars or less.... Hmmm..

Now I like that. If Hollywood wants to replace DVD with combos (at the same price) and I can get a HD-DVD player for $50 dollars more than a upconverting DVD player, then HD-DVD has got a winner on their hands... :)

b2b

I beg your pardon, but I do not have any "announcement" to make on hybrid discs next week and I am not aware of any BD studio that is actively pursuing them. I just said I would make some inquiries about whether or not development has continued at JVC and will try to find out if any more recent demo discs have been made that's all.
Ahh - you're wording on the insider thread certainly left me with the impression that there was progress you'd be telling us about next week.

Sorry if I took the sentence too literally and over-interpreted. I'll take your message here as an indication that there is no hybrid programme being worked on anymore in the BD camp?

Cheers.

I don't think they will have to. If Warner and their replication partners get Total HD working, it should be a simple matter of subsituting a DVD side for the HD-DVD half of a Total HD disc.

b2b
Then it wouldn't be "Total HD", would it? ;)

I saw you imply this last week, also, but it's a non-starter, IMO.

Then it wouldn't be "Total HD", would it? ;)

I saw you imply this last week, also, but it's a non-starter, IMO.

Didn't say it was..

It would be a Blu-Ray combo just like a HD-DVD combo, only better with a 50GB Blu-Ray side and 48mbps bandwidth.. :)

b2b

Haven't we been repeatedly told that BD combos aren't possible. Someone should tell Warner Brothers double quick before they put out a press release and embarrass themselves. Oops...

How about this one then.. ;)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=4352

b2b

Seems up to 84% are willing to deal with combos, depending on their price differential. That lends credibility to the other poster's argument that the issue with combo's isn't the combo ... it's what their shelf price is relative to a non-combo release. *shrug*

I've read the article and I call "BU*****T".

Sony has given developers a software call in the new SDK that allows them to "upscale" horizontally only, not vertically - and on the basis of that, the writer PROCLAIMS that the PS3 has a hardware upscaler??

Balls.

I think that that will prove to have been sheer wishful thinking. If the PS3 really had a hardware upscaler, then (1) they would have had it working at launch, since it would have been a cinch and (2) they wouldn't have been working so furiously to get software scaling working.

This is SHEER nonsense, in my view, just to get some positive PR on the back of Microsoft's releases concerning their ANA scaler - and the new H-ANA in the next Xbox due at the end of the year...

I know this is a little conspiracy-theory-ist ... but ... would it be possible to start shipping the new PS3's with Hardware Scalers as the same unit? Just kinda ... slip it in to channel? Weren't there like 3-4 different HW Versions of the PS2? Pre-Slimline?

They could just start rolling it out figuring 'most' people now are unaffected and say it was there all along, no?

It would be a Blu-Ray combo just like a HD-DVD combo, only better with a 50GB Blu-Ray side and 48mbps bandwidth.. :)

b2b
And mine would be a pink elephant - only better, because it could fly. :p

Haven't we been repeatedly told that BD combos aren't possible. Someone should tell Warner Brothers double quick before they put out a press release and embarrass themselves. Oops...Nope, I've only said it was reported that the disc makers (JVC I think) gave up on the effort after many tries, and Sony later said it seemed too expensive.

Anything's possible - pigs and elephants in the air kinda thing ;)

Or you can read it that under current pricing conditions 41.54% aren't buying combo discs.

b2b

Maybe the HD-DVD Promo group should subsidize the pricing then -- the way Sony is apparently doing so. Though, they probably don't see it as necessary considering the avg cost of an HD-DVD title is right around the same cost of a BR title ... if not a little less depending on when you refresh the charts at product wars. ;)

And mine would be a pink elephant - only better, because it could fly. :p

Nope, I've only said it was reported that the disc makers (JVC I think) gave up on the effort after many tries, and Sony later said it seemed too expensive.

Anything's possible - pigs and elephants in the air kinda thing ;)

See, you are all confused again. The JVC solution is like the HD-DVD single sided disc with a DVD layer (forgot the name) that was never made. JVC even passed out samples at CES 2006. Warner Total HD is a double sided flipper with a HD-DVD side glued to a BD side. If you can glue a HD-DVD side to a BD side, it should be a simple matter to glue a DVD side just as easy (more easy it would seem).

b2b

Was this posted yet?

Microsoft Slashes Xbox 360 Sales Estimates (http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_Slashes_Xbox_360_Sales_Estimates/1169838634)



That would be 60K fewer HD DVD add-on purchasers, using the 2% attach rate.

Gary

I saw that and found it quite interesting myself ... I'm wondering if this is in any way tied to the new Hardware rumor. If the new hardware is indeed on the way, perhaps they're trying to dry out the channel and flush the old hardware SKU's. If they went ahead and released a new Hardware SKU, those on the fence would likely wait for that to be released leaving a good deal of consoles in channel. The only way to move those would then be via a price cut -- like what happened to the Samsung BR player. Maybe this gives them the opportunity to cut back production on the current lines while they upgrade to the new HW and allow retailers to sell through inventories without a price-cut. Then, they annouce the new hardware along with Halo-3 or something for a Fall Release and dump millions of units into the Channel for Holiday 2007.

Just a theory I guess ... ;)

Is that comment a declaration of intent ?? ;) It must be. To take opinion and apply it to a reality that does not exist..

The reality is that all of the combo discs cost more than a single-sided HD-DVD disc and only 20.56% of customers are expressing that they see any real value in combos enough to pay a $1 more for them.

So if you want to claim that mythical 85% of customer satisfaction, then reality will have to change to where combos cost no more than a 30GB dual layer disc... :)

b2b

I picked up all the combo discs I own for less than $23 ... tax and shipping included. Isn't that right around what the normal HD30's cost?

I picked up all the combo discs I own for less than $23 ... tax and shipping included. Isn't that right around what the normal HD30's cost?
Also sounds alot cheaper than a BD25 movie :p

See, you are all confused again. The JVC solution is like the HD-DVD single sided disc with a DVD layer (forgot the name) that was never made. JVC even passed out samples at CES 2006. Warner Total HD is a double sided flipper with a HD-DVD side glued to a BD side. If you can glue a HD-DVD side to a BD side, it should be a simple matter to glue a DVD side just as easy (more easy it would seem).

b2b
So the HD DVD hybrid would be single-sided, but you don't mind the bluray hybrid being a flipper flap-jack :)

... but their using VC1 is clearly a positive for HD DVD.

...

LOL.

I saw that and found it quite interesting myself ... I'm wondering if this is in any way tied to the new Hardware rumor. If the new hardware is indeed on the way, perhaps they're trying to dry out the channel and flush the old hardware SKU's. If they went ahead and released a new Hardware SKU, those on the fence would likely wait for that to be released leaving a good deal of consoles in channel. The only way to move those would then be via a price cut -- like what happened to the Samsung BR player. Maybe this gives them the opportunity to cut back production on the current lines while they upgrade to the new HW and allow retailers to sell through inventories without a price-cut. Then, they annouce the new hardware along with Halo-3 or something for a Fall Release and dump millions of units into the Channel for Holiday 2007.

Just a theory I guess ... ;)

"Dry out the channel"? Did you read the article? Try this one ...

http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197000753

"...

"We are just being cautious about the second half. It was always going to be a slow half. We've done very well in the first half. There is a reasonable amount of inventory in the channel," Liddell said in an interview with Reuters.

..."

Based on anecdotal evidence, there is a "reasonable" (I interpret that to mean "huge") amount of inventory sitting on shelves. Hardly "drying out the channel" as you put it -- more like "stuffing" it.

I'm still waiting for that HDMI/HD-DVD optical drive/HDD SKU ... so I really hope that inventory clears out soon :)

Nope, I've only said it was reported that the disc makers (JVC I think) gave up on the effort after many tries, and Sony later said it seemed too expensive.



Blu-ray supports hybrid DVD/BD combo discs that can be read from one side. The DVD layer is read through the BD layers. These discs have been demonstrated, but SPE is currently not planning to use them as we currently think the majority of consumers are looking for one format or the other, not both.


As far as the former, isn't he still checking on that? :confused:

So the HD DVD hybrid would be single-sided, but you don't mind the bluray hybrid being a flipper flap-jack :)

Bzzzt... System failure.... I think you need to go back reload your "persistant storage" ;)

b2b

Ahh, b, a failure to answer? ;)

Ahh, b, a failure to answer? ;)

Ahh... I found it.. "Twin Format" approved, but never used
Multi-sided and multi-layer discs also offer the possibility of offering dual-format or "twin format" discs, hybrid formats that combine both current standard-definition DVD and high-def DVD formats on the same disc. "Having this disc means studios can release movies on one format," says Knox, "that can hold both SD and HD content. The disc can be read by all of today's DVD players, so they can sell the discs to many consumers even if the installed base of HD DVD players is relatively modest. This also means consumers can use the disc on the big system in the living room as HD, or in the bedroom, on a laptop PC or in a car DVD player with the standard side."

Two such formats have been announced for HD DVD. The first is a single-sided, dual-layer hybrid ROM disc with one layer of each format. Announced in December 2004 by Memory-Tech and Toshiba, the disc contains both an upper DVD 5 layer (4.7 GB) and a lower HD DVD 15 layer (15 GB) . "This has been approved by the DVD Forum," says Knox, "but since most of today's DVDs are DVD 9, the studios were not so excited about it."

The second hybrid disc is a double-sided, dual-layer hybrid ROM disc, with one side containing dual-layer HD DVD 30 (30 GB), bonded to the second DVD 9 side (8.5 GB). It was announced by Toshiba in May 2005 at Media-Tech, and the draft specification was approved by the DVD Forum in June.

b2b

"Dry out the channel"? Did you read the article? Try this one ...

http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197000753

"...

"We are just being cautious about the second half. It was always going to be a slow half. We've done very well in the first half. There is a reasonable amount of inventory in the channel," Liddell said in an interview with Reuters.

..."

Based on anecdotal evidence, there is a "reasonable" (I interpret that to mean "huge") amount of inventory sitting on shelves. Hardly "drying out the channel" as you put it -- more like "stuffing" it.

I'm still waiting for that HDMI/HD-DVD optical drive/HDD SKU ... so I really hope that inventory clears out soon :)

That's my point ... what would you expect them to say? "We're lowering shipping estimates to allow room for the new hardware SKU." ? That'll just get less people out there buying what's in channel.

This way they can allow the retailers to flush the channel as they see fit ... and they can do so without having to discount the hardware -- yet.

I don't think there will be an HD-DVD SKU though ... I think there might be a bundle with the Add-On though. I suspect if the rumors are true, what we'll see is the Core being phased, replaced with the Premium at the current Core Pricepoint. The new SKU will fill in the current Premium Price Point and include the HDMI input and the larger HDD. And all of it ready for a Holiday 2007 "Re-launch" (meaning a one-time large shipment allocation).

Ahh... I found it.. "Twin Format" approved, but never used


b2b
Yes, b, most of us already know that it is in the Bluray specs.

The discussion you opened was about WHY they never actually were able to start production...

OMG - I'm right again.

Some of you will remember I opened a thread asking why Bluray can't handle native 1080p30 and 1080p25 HD video on disc - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=752275

There was a lot of debate, but now paidgeek has confirmed this on the insider thread and is asking a studio to convert their 1080p25 native material into 1080i50 in order to put it on Bluray.

Yikes! - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9609134&&#post9609134

As you know, this is very different to having 1080p on disc, converting to 1080i on playback and then reassembling into 1080p. They are talking about converting from 1080p to 1080i before the encoding, then putting encoded 1080i on disc, the playing back as 1080i and reassembling to 1080p which included additional artifacts from encoding at 1080i.

Yech!

(OK - standing by for Bluray folks to tell us why native 1080i is better than native 1080p now :p )

Yes, b, most of us already know that it is in the Bluray specs.

The discussion you opened was about WHY they never actually were able to start production...

Good lord you are confused... :confused: That quote was about HD-DVD, not Blu-Ray... :)

Bzzzt.. System down... Unable to reload "persistant storage" due to HW failure... ;)

b2b

I would say "switching" is possibly a statement to disagree with. Have they released a second title in VC-1?

The one they did had a bit-rate that exceeded HD DVD spec.

Are you saying that Weinstein Co. using AVC is a sign of imminent neutrality for them?

Gary

Thinking because Disney encoded one disc in VC-1 is an indicator that they are going to switch is the biggest self-delusion I've witnessed on this board.

Like other studios, disney is experimenting with different ways of encoding discs. Everyone is in an experimental phase with interactivity, bit-rates, audio-formats, disc sizes, etc. Disney is even more experimental and a lot of BD work is being done in their R&D department. Trying out different codecs as they are supported by BD is definitely something any logical person would do when trying to figure out the best way to support the format fully.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Fox release a VC-1 sometime, or even Sony. VC-1 is part of the BD spec, its not automatically a secret plot to switch to HD-DVD.

Should we assume that Weinstein is going to switch to BD because they encoded in AVC?

Let's just admit that Disney isn't switching soon to HD-DVD, and Universal is not switching soon to BD.

Sometimes No means No.

Good lord you are confused... :confused: That quote was about HD-DVD, not Blu-Ray... :)

Bzzzt.. System down... Unable to reload "persistant storage" due to HW failure... ;)

b2b
You keep saying that, yet many of you recent posts have said "can't remember" :p

Now *you* were the one who opened this line of discussion about the hybrid discs.

Each statement I've made is correct, but your response is "you're so confused" but without addressing any of the points at all? Is this a new debating style? :p

What's next? Hands on ears "I can't hear you"? :)

Thinking because Disney encoded one disc in VC-1 is an indicator that they are going to switch is the biggest self-delusion I've witnessed on this board. ...in your opinion :)

Let's just admit that Disney isn't switching soon to HD-DVD, and Universal is not switching soon to BD. Let's not but say we did... :D

Thinking that this is the only Disney title that will be VC1 has got to be the biggest self-delusion I've witn... err, that sounds rather familiar. Hang on...

I wouldn't be surprised to see Fox release a VC-1 sometime, or even Sony. VC-1 is part of the BD spec, its not automatically a secret plot to switch to HD-DVD.

.

Sony do VC-1? a Microsoft codec?

You keep saying that, yet many of you recent posts have said "can't remember" :p

Now *you* were the one who opened this line of discussion about the hybrid discs.

Each statement I've made is correct, but your response is "you're so confused" but without addressing any of the points at all? Is this a new debating style? :p

What's next? Hands on ears "I can't hear you"? :)

What points are you talking about ?? My only point was that if Total HD disks are possible (if Warner and their replication partners get them to work) then it should be a simple matter to make a Blu-Ray hybrid disc by substituting a DVD side for the HD-DVD side. Not that any studio has expressed that they would want to do that, but from a technical standpoint it is possible (if in fact Total HD is possible),

Does that clear up your confusion ??

b2b

I have a question.

How much do you think gamers care about movies, anyway? I'm speaking particularly of those 30 and under. I'm 40 and I work with a lot of guys in their mid-twenties. They all game, and dump a lot in their systems.

However, they don't seem all that interested in more than a handful of movies, they are used to "trading" music, and the compromised audio of the IPOD. A lot are already talking more about down-loading movies, and never mention the compression issues. It also seems like $25-$30 is a price they wouldn't pay for long. I just can't see them ever owning more than 20-30 store-bought movies at a given time.

Those numbers could cause a surge in sales, but level-off in a flash. The sales-slump bell-curve on Hi-Def seems more inevitable to me than it did on DVD.

If that's true. I have about 100 store-bought disks to every one my gamer buddies so, do I get to count as a 100 buyers statistically? ;)

You raise a very good point. I work with lots of gamers as well, thousands in fact and it appears that the primary gaming demographic overlaps well with Theater goers.

On the other hand that may not necessarily coincide exactly with people that buy a wide range of movies and DVD's. Hence the buying habits of the PS3 demographic even when they do buy the big theater blockbusters, still should matter where it concerns other types of movies.

You raise a very good point. I work with lots of gamers as well, thousands in fact and it appears that the primary gaming demographic overlaps well with Theater goers.

On the other hand that may not necessarily coincide exactly with people that buy a wide range of movies and DVD's. Hence the buying habits of the PS3 demographic even when they do buy the big theater blockbusters, still should matter where it concerns other types of movies.

This one poll at a game site indicates that 64.24% of "gamers" who own a PS3 have already purchased Blu-Ray movies. At the other end of the question only 1% said they "never" would buy a BD movie.

http://www.ps3forums.com/showthread.php?t=52855

b2b

On the other hand that may not necessarily coincide exactly with people that buy a wide range of movies and DVD's.

The gamers are ever increasing in numbers (i.e. lot of people both young and not so young are getting into gaming) - not so sure about DVD purchase.

Another point is that gamers like buying games - which are expensive - and that can take away money from movies. Afterall people have limited entertainment dollars ...

...in your opinion :)



Well, in my opinion, and based on public statements by Disney, based on website reports of discussions with Disney reps, based on all available evidence at CES, based on the fact that their VC-1 encode was beyond HD-DVD specs, and based on Disney's strong support of Blu-ray in all their marketing materials.

All that vs. your opinion.

I saw that and found it quite interesting myself ... I'm wondering if this is in any way tied to the new Hardware rumor. If the new hardware is indeed on the way, perhaps they're trying to dry out the channel and flush the old hardware SKU's.

The flip side would be if the scuttlebutt of that HDMI equipped 360 has spread, perhaps the sales have dried up in anticipation of that announcement.

The Osborne Effect is very powerful. It's why companies always deny product until they are ready to announce it.

Gary

Sony do VC-1? a Microsoft codec?

That would be like XBL offering AVC content. Just not gonna happen. :D

This one poll at a game site indicates that 64.24% of "gamers" who own a PS3 have already purchased Blu-Ray movies. At the other end of the question only 1% said they "never" would buy a BD movie.With the sales of BD software outpacing HD-DVD sales, and with far more PS3s in the market compared to CE BD players, who do HD-DVD supporters think is buying movies? Martians? :D

This discussion was perhaps interesting six months ago. Not anymore.

Good read about the much debated hybrid discs: News analysis: Hybrid HD discs (http://www.oto-online.com/pdf/oto_download/2007/01/OTO_Jan07_P22-23_NewsAnanlysis.pdf) (from the January issue of One to One)

Update on the "Combo poll"

20.51% willing to pay more for Combos
17.31% don't want Combos - Period...

b2b

This one poll at a game site indicates that 64.24% of "gamers" who own a PS3 have already purchased Blu-Ray movies. At the other end of the question only 1% said they "never" would buy a BD movie.

http://www.ps3forums.com/showthread.php?t=52855

b2b

The casual gamers -- the ones that buy the majority of the consoles -- don't tend to frequent sites like this. I would say then that 65% of enthusiasts might have already purchased. It's hard to run polls like this when the demographic might not be indicative of the majority of hardware owners. Just my pennies.

The flip side would be if the scuttlebutt of that HDMI equipped 360 has spread, perhaps the sales have dried up in anticipation of that announcement.

The Osborne Effect is very powerful. It's why companies always deny product until they are ready to announce it.

Gary

Agreed ... ;)

Update on the "Combo poll"

20.51% willing to pay more for Combos
17.31% don't want Combos - Period...

b2b

How much more? It seems like we're missing 63% of respondents here ... why not post all the details? *sigh*

With the sales of BD software outpacing HD-DVD sales, and with far more PS3s in the market compared to CE BD players, who do HD-DVD supporters think is buying movies? Martians? :D

This discussion was perhaps interesting six months ago. Not anymore.

Well it's certainly not Wookiees. In a poll 98% of all Wookiees prefered to chew on HD-DVD because the "hard coat" on BD discs made their teeth hurt.. :)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/08/0330chewbacca.jpg

b2b

b2b fears the combo. :)

An interesting IGN interview with Digital Playground's Joone can be found here. (http://gear.ign.com/articles/759/759068p1.html)

Along with confirming that the BD replicators have told him Sony will revoke their BD license if they replicate adult titles, he also gives us some numbers for the costs of replication for each format.

As you know, we had originally announced that we were going to support Blu-ray last year. After that we started working hard authoring. There came the time to begin looking for a replicator to make the discs. There aren't that many replicators out there that do Blu-ray right now. So I started calling them, places here in the US, UK, Canada, and Germany, and they all kept saying, 'We can't do it or Sony will revoke our Blu-ray license.'

IGN: So was the experience of replicating HD-DVD much easier?

Joone: Much easier. HD-DVD is producer friendly. You can use mostly the same manufacturing and maintain the same pricing. It's easier for everyone to get into it. For comparison, a Blu-ray disc comes in at about $2.50 replicated from a $5,000 glass-master. HD-DVDs cost about $1.10 and a $2,500 glass-master. For me to duplicate 1,000 pieces, one will cost $10,000 and the other will cost $5,000. For such a new format HD-DVD is much easier to get into.

his maths no make no sense. :(

b2b fears the combo. :)

I think they are great. All Universal has to do is stop making DVD, replace them with Combos (at the same price as DVD), Microsoft to get some of those $199 dollar HD-DVD players for sale and I will be more than happy to rent some HD-DVD discs. :)

b2b

This one poll at a game site indicates that 64.24% of "gamers" who own a PS3 have already purchased Blu-Ray movies. At the other end of the question only 1% said they "never" would buy a BD movie.

http://www.ps3forums.com/showthread.php?t=52855

b2b

I'm not denying that the gamers I know may buy a few movies if they have a PS3, I'm just doubting they will buy many. They don't have many DVDs (30 or less), I don't see why they would buy a lot of BD or HD titles.

The guys I know (and it's mostly guys) would rather steal (download) music and movies, and don't seem to mind the quality issues associated with that either.

This is a generation of YOUTUBE, IPOD users, they beg borrow and steal, and as far as I can tell are not the perfectionists. When they see all my DVDs they tell me I should be ripping-clones from Netflix rather than investing the kind of $ I do.

I know this is a little conspiracy-theory-ist ... but ... would it be possible to start shipping the new PS3's with Hardware Scalers as the same unit? Just kinda ... slip it in to channel? Umm, because the 2M PS3's already shipped wouldn't be able to run new software making use of the scaler?

That's my point ... what would you expect them to say? "We're lowering shipping estimates to allow room for the new hardware SKU." ? That'll just get less people out there buying what's in channel.

This way they can allow the retailers to flush the channel as they see fit ... and they can do so without having to discount the hardware -- yet.

highly doubt it

1) it does not look good to investors when companies cut the number in projected sales
2) they did not say stop shipping but less then expected
3) if it was true the benefit of saying our numbers will be lower because we are working on a replacement that won't be out on time (be it HD DVD 360 or a 360 with some minor tweaks like HDMI) is much better then any ramification of announcing a slow down because no one is buying and worth the cost of some people waiting for the new one (don't forget if they switched they most likely have less to sell so it works out well)
4) if like you are guessing it is a bundle and not a new HD DVD SKU then there is no reason to slow down people that might buy today and an add-on later

The casual gamers -- the ones that buy the majority of the consoles -- don't tend to frequent sites like this. I would say then that 65% of enthusiasts might have already purchased. It's hard to run polls like this when the demographic might not be indicative of the majority of hardware owners. Just my pennies.

but the person that runs out and waits in line or the person that goes in every day asking do you have any new PS3 that came in, is not the casual gamer. In 2008 what you said might be right but as for the momment you are wrong. Gamers, some HD movie fans and some rich show offs are the ones that own PS3s. And HD fans buying it for BD will use it for movies, rich show offs will use it and now we know most gamers that frequent PS3 forum will do it as well

Fair enough. I just think that Disney is getting ready to two time Blu-ray, or at least is preparing for the possibility at the while Universal has just renewed its wedding vows to HD DVD. Disney is removing a barrier to go neutral while Universal is erecting one.Disney could be getting ready to go neutral, but we already know that they could use VC-1 or AVC on HD DVD.
My position is clear, so I'll link my last statement on it again - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9604108&&#post9604108Oh yes, the one where you tried to make people believe that my statement wasn't correct (even though you and I both know you did what I said) by stating your current position, as if you didn't change your position after doing what I said you did.
As you know, VC1 doesn't require 30 mbps to give a class-beating picture, and 30 mbps is about 10 mbps beyond the point of no additional returns from what we've heard from professional encoders here.Are you confusing ABR with PBR again? Please show us where professional encoders have said that there are no additional returns beyond 20Mbps PBR. If there aren't why do so many VC-1 encodes for HD DVD have PBRs above 20Mbps for the video?
I'm sorry - did I hear correctly? You're basing this whole discussion on your "belief" that "you can't really remember but it looked pretty high to me"??

First off, the bit rate meters in most players are notoriously innaccurate - heck, there are movies where the HD DVD bit rate meters *regularly* show rates way beyond the theoretical maximums for the format. Using such data as evidence is already highly suspect, but made far worse when you forget what the rates supposedly were anyway...

Even IF the rate on this particular title *was* higher than HD DVD (which I am now seriously doubting) it still doesn't mean that Disney couldn't bring it to a harmonious level at the drop of a hat for other releases if they chose to.I don't need to remember the exact numbers because what I was looking for was whether it went beyond what HD DVD does and that is what was important to me and so what I remember for checking it maybe a month ago. While not perfect, I think the bitrate meter in the PS3 is pretty good. Good enough that I was able to estimate the average bitrate for Crank to pretty close to what benes got by using the file size and length method. It looks like it can have some issues up high that may be related to the buffer getting full, but as I have mentioned multiple times, both formats have buffers and can go above the max mux rates for very short periods of time. As far as Flightplan, benes's numbers from checking the sizes on the disc estimate close to 28Mbps just for the average bitrate for the video and anybody following it can see that it varies quite a bit as the movie goes along.

You can believe that the Flightplan encode wasn't outside of what HD DVD can do right now if you want to. You could ask Amir if the encode for that one is compatible with the GOP limitation, the buffer size limitation, and the bitrate limitations for HD DVD. I bet if you do you won't get an answer because it wouldn't work on HD DVD.

As far as Disney being able to do an encode for HD DVD, of course they could and nothing I said even implied that they couldn't.

--Darin

How much more? It seems like we're missing 63% of respondents here ... why not post all the details? *sigh*

he did in a previous post. The other two categories are

If they are priced the same I would be happy to buy a combo
and
If they are priced the same I would reluctently buy a combo

or something like that

his maths no make no sense
that is why HD DVD fan boys are so excited if the numbers made sense they would not be able to comprehend them

I'm not denying that the gamers I know may buy a few movies if they have a PS3, I'm just doubting they will buy many. They don't have many DVDs (30 or less), I don't see why they would buy a lot of BD or HD titles.


but if 1M people buy 2 movies it is better then 200k buying 10 movies. Studios don't care if crappy movies don't sell much but care if a movie that should sell in the millions only does in the tens of thousand

Oh yes, the one where you tried to make people believe that my statement wasn't correct (even though you and I both know you did what I said) by stating your current position, as if you didn't change your position after doing what I said you did.I didn't change my position, and yes, your statement was a misrepresentation - so I called it out. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9604108&&#post9604108 Your continued misrepresentation is quite typical.

Are you confusing ABR with PBR again? No.

Please show us where professional encoders have said that there are no additional returns beyond 20Mbps PBR. I didn't say PBR - again, your "knack" for re-stating what is said is apparent to anyone who reads.

I don't need to remember the exact numbers... That's you prerogative, I suppose. The point was more that Disney will get better at using VC1 and could start releasing to HD DVD any time they like with this experience.

As far as Disney being able to do an encode for HD DVD, of course they could and nothing I said even implied that they couldn't.

--DarinCorrect - the problem seems to be that some have taken offence at others who say that Disney might...

that is why HD DVD fan boys are so excited if the numbers made sense they would not be able to comprehend them
Actually, his numbers make perfect sense and it is what MANY people have been saying in these threads for Months.

However, it does not meet with certain BD supporters' perception of reality, so they are unable to assimilate it :)

The producer is saying that BD replication would have cost him $2.50 per disc on a minimum quantity of 10,000 discs - whereas HD DVD would have cost him $1.10 per disc on a minimum run of only 5,000.

It seems pretty obvious that the replicators were unable to quote the BDA subsidy into these, because the "adult" market is not on the "subsidy approved" list, I would imagine.

So it seems to me we now have evidence that the BDA subsidises Bluray disc production by about $1.40 per disc to help it stay competitive with HD DVD...

Imagine that!

but if 1M people buy 2 movies it is better then 200k buying 10 movies. Studios don't care if crappy movies don't sell much but care if a movie that should sell in the millions only does in the tens of thousand

I think studios look at video as chance to break-even or better on a "crappy movie." Van Helsing was Box-office failure and DVD Success.

The biggest thing griping studios about DVD has been it's zero growth for what's going on three years now. You all may get a kick out of seeing the numbers rise and fall as early adopters buy their requite handful of titles, but there is no way either format will take hold if they don't keep on buying.

HD isn't suddenly going to make a collector out of a non-collector, and I think it's naive to think high-def is some market rocking sensation. If it were, the TVs would have done a lot better by now.

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of HD, I'll be entering the ring myself in a couple weeks.

Hmm - U left out the rest of my answer, so I'll refer back again to my post on what I saidThe rest of your post was opinion based on your personal believe that using VC-1 makes it more likely that a studio will support HD DVD. An opinion I would disagree with since there is no evidence for that. After all you can make a VC-1 encoding on Blu-ray that won't even play on HD DVD and from the sounds of it the only VC-1 encoding that Disney has made so far has a peak video bit rate over 30 Mbps.


BTW - now you're DENYING that Disney has switched to VC1?? :rolleyes:rdjam, what I am pointing out is that currently Disney supports VC-1 just as much as Paramount supports MPEG-4 AVC. Add in the fact that recent Disney releases are in MPEG-4 AVC and your theory seems to be based solely on your personal opinions. Disney might one day switch to VC-1 but I think it is ridiculous to claim that they have already switched over to it.


None of us know what their ultimate moves will be, but their using VC1 is clearly a positive for HD DVD.Just curious but if Disney was to start regularly using VC-1 on their Blu-ray releases and continued to exclusively support Blu-ray how would that be a positive for HD DVD?


As you know, VC1 doesn't require 30 mbps to give a class-beating picture, and 30 mbps is about 10 mbps beyond the point of no additional returns from what we've heard from professional encoders here.I didn't say PBR - again, your "knack" for re-stating what is said is apparent to anyone who reads.Not that I think Darin needs help against this claim but this doesn't even make sense. If you were referring to ABR than you were trying to mislead us since it is the PBR that is important in terms of maximum bit rate.

but if 1M people buy 2 movies it is better then 200k buying 10 movies. Studios don't care if crappy movies don't sell much but care if a movie that should sell in the millions only does in the tens of thousand

Unless those two are the only movies that the 1M people will buy - like in PSP.

I don't see how anyone can argue with this, and agree that any combo pricing premium will be minimized. It's becoming apparent that Universal is a highly motivated ally in this "war", and I for one, and beginning to wonder if the cost of victory in a previous conflict, is finally coming home to roost, for Sony.


For giggles, what victory in what previous conflict? :confused:

Any just how do you expect Universal to price these "mythical" 30GB single layer discs. ;) Oops :o

I bet Amir wishes that HD DVD had 30GB on a single layer. A "mythical" 60GB dual layer disc would be even better. Sure would simplify the conversations around here. ;)

Guess we'll have to wait until TL51s to come around so HD DVD can say 51 > 50 .

Hmm... I'm starting to see even more "madness" to their method.. :)

Universal replaces their DVD production with hybrid HD-DVD combo discs (and sells them for the same price as DVD) the stores and rental shops fill with the new discs and Microsoft gets cheapo HD-DVD players coming from China @ $199.00 dollars or less.... Hmmm..

Now I like that. If Hollywood wants to replace DVD with combos (at the same price) and I can get a HD-DVD player for $50 dollars more than a upconverting DVD player, then HD-DVD has got a winner on their hands... :)

b2b That's what we have been trying to tell you for months. :p

You may have just had a vision of the future.

Remember, first format with players for $199 or less wins.

(at least 70% market share ;) )

I don't think they will have to. If Warner and their replication partners get Total HD working, it should be a simple matter of subsituting a DVD side for the HD-DVD half of a Total HD disc. That would be the easy thing to do. I think Sony DADC will just continue optimizing the pressing process for standard 25GB & 50GB Blu-Ray discs. They got a lot of BD disc orders to fill with millions of PS3s in consumer homes don't forget.. ;)

.... The JVC solution is like the HD-DVD single sided disc with a DVD layer (forgot the name) that was never made. JVC even passed out samples at CES 2006. Warner Total HD is a double sided flipper with a HD-DVD side glued to a BD side. If you can glue a HD-DVD side to a BD side, it should be a simple matter to glue a DVD side just as easy (more easy it would seem).

b2b...My only point was that if Total HD disks are possible (if Warner and their replication partners get them to work) then it should be a simple matter to make a Blu-Ray hybrid disc by substituting a DVD side for the HD-DVD side. Not that any studio has expressed that they would want to do that, but from a technical standpoint it is possible (if in fact Total HD is possible),
I agree with you.

If Total HD can be made at an economical cost, then a NonTotalHD combo disc can be made for the same price or less by just using DVD layers instead of the HD DVD layers.

There is a way to probably test the accuracy of the PS3 bitrate meter (assuming there is a reference HD DVD reading available.)

Grab a Warner HD DVD that also exists on Blu Ray in VC1 because the encode will be identical. Take the average HD DVD bitrate and compare it to the readings from the PS3. If the HD DVD reading is accurate or known to be correct, then you can extrapolate if the PS3 is spiking the readings or not, and by how much.

Just an experiment for anyone who cares.

The producer is saying that BD replication would have cost him $2.50 per disc on a minimum quantity of 10,000 discs - whereas HD DVD would have cost him $1.10 per disc on a minimum run of only 5,000.

rdjam you miss the forest for the trees (like usual) Let's see if I can make you understand.
For comparison, a Blu-ray disc comes in at about $2.50 replicated from a $5,000 glass-master. HD-DVDs cost about $1.10 and a $2,500 glass-master. For me to duplicate 1,000 pieces, one will cost $10,000 and the other will cost $5,000.

1) it does not say anything about the prices for different quantities
2) but let's assume it makes sense
so 2.50 a disk, 5,000 for master for 1000 pieces we have 2.5*1000+5000=7500
and 1.1 a disk, 2,500 for master for 1000 pieces we have 1.1*1000+2500=3600

neither of the numbers add up to the totals for 1000 disks. One is off by 2500 and the other 1400.

not to mention that it makes no sense that a replicator would tell them "we won't make your disks but if we did it would be X$ a disk, y$ for the master and Z$ total because we can't add or multiply

Hmm... I'm starting to see even more "madness" to their method..

Universal replaces their DVD production with hybrid HD-DVD combo discs (and sells them for the same price as DVD) the stores and rental shops fill with the new discs and Microsoft gets cheapo HD-DVD players coming from China @ $199.00 dollars or less.... Hmmm..

Now I like that. If Hollywood wants to replace DVD with combos (at the same price) and I can get a HD-DVD player for $50 dollars more than a upconverting DVD player, then HD-DVD has got a winner on their hands...

b2b

At long last, the epiphany!

For giggles, what victory in what previous conflict? :confused:

http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/sony_v_universal_decision.html

The producer is saying that BD replication would have cost him $2.50 per disc on a minimum quantity of 10,000 discs - whereas HD DVD would have cost him $1.10 per disc on a minimum run of only 5,000.

It seems pretty obvious that the replicators were unable to quote the BDA subsidy into these, because the "adult" market is not on the "subsidy approved" list, I would imagine.

So it seems to me we now have evidence that the BDA subsidises Bluray disc production by about $1.40 per disc to help it stay competitive with HD DVD...


Seems $2.50 makes sense to me, for 10K quantity. Now, what is it for 100K quantity, which is probably the sizes being ordered now? And how about for a title like Casino Royale, which I wouldn't be at all suprised if the number is 250K?

For small independents producing conventional films certainly low volume production is currently an issue when wholesale is $12-$17 a disc, but for porn producers selling mostly direct at $40-$50 for DVDs?! Give me a break.

Gary

That's what we have been trying to tell you for months. :p

You may have just had a vision of the future.

Remember, first format with players for $199 or less wins.

(at least 70% market share ;) )

The $199 dollar players might be the easy part. Talking Hollywood (all of Hollywood, not just Universal) into replacing all new titles with combos for the same price as DVD will a bit more difficult. ;)

b2b

At long last, the epiphany! You know if there's hope for him, there's hope for every lost soul to see the light and the true path to economical HD goodness.

For small independents producing conventional films certainly low volume production is currently an issue when wholesale is $12-$17 a disc, I have always said that production costs for small content providers is a big advantage for HD DVD and that those smaller guys with more niche products can more easily produce content in HD DVD. Also studios can afford to release more content with smaller sales expectations with HD DVD because the break even point is lower with lower replication costs.

What points are you talking about ?? My only point was that if Total HD disks are possible (if Warner and their replication partners get them to work) then it should be a simple matter to make a Blu-Ray hybrid disc by substituting a DVD side for the HD-DVD side. Not that any studio has expressed that they would want to do that, but from a technical standpoint it is possible (if in fact Total HD is possible),

Does that clear up your confusion ??

b2b

Warner, Paramount & Universal all apparently seem to think highly of combos so why wouldnt they for sales of BR/DVD combos? I think if it is as easy putting a dvd side attached to a BR side then it would have already been done by at least Warner and Paramount if not the other BR exclusive studios too.

so 2.50 a disk, 5,000 for master for 1000 pieces we have 2.5*1000+5000=7500
and 1.1 a disk, 2,500 for master for 1000 pieces we have 1.1*1000+2500=3600


One is still almost exactly 50% of the other. If you want to strictly go by what was quoted, then you could read in that the set-up cost would be $1,400 for HD DVD ($5,000 - $3,600) and $2,500 for BRD ($10,000 - $7,500.)

He could be telling you that the bottom line cost is $10k per 1000 BRD and $5k per 1000 HD DVD, an also giving you cost per disc but leaving out the setup fees.

Either way, it appears to be much more expensive to replicate BRD, which makes perfect sense.

but if 1M people buy 2 movies it is better then 200k buying 10 movies. Studios don't care if crappy movies don't sell much but care if a movie that should sell in the millions only does in the tens of thousand

Demographically, PS3 skews overwhelmingly male, and relatively young. There are plenty of crappy blockbusters that will appeal to this sub-set of consumers, but what about romantic comedies, period dramas, and all of the timeless classics residing deep in studio catalogs? Given the still-modest market penetration of HDTV, if either of these HD formats is to meet with lasting success, there is simply no alternative, but to appeal to the broadest possible spectrum of consumers.

if Total HD disks are possible (if Warner and their replication partners get them to work) then it should be a simple matter to make a Blu-Ray hybrid disc by substituting a DVD side for the HD-DVD side.

I am still unclear as to the rules on any BRD / DVD combo proposals. I don't think the DVD forum would unanimously cooperate with Warner or Sony in allowing such a media to be approved.

One is still almost exactly 50% of the other. If you want to strictly go by what was quoted, then you could read in that the set-up cost would be $1,400 for HD DVD ($5,000 - $3,600) and $2,500 for BRD ($10,000 - $7,500.)

He could be telling you that the bottom line cost is $10k per 1000 BRD and $5k per 1000 HD DVD, an also giving you cost per disc but leaving out the setup fees.

Either way, it appears to be much more expensive to replicate BRD, which makes perfect sense. He was giving an interview, not taking a math test. :D

His point was clear, he was convinced that Blu-ray cost far more than HD DVD for his needs and it was driving him to release on HD DVD.

It's becoming apparent that Universal is a highly motivated ally in this "war", and I for one, and beginning to wonder if the cost of victory in a previous conflict, is finally coming home to roost, for Sony.
Originally Posted by Kosty
For giggles, what victory in what previous conflict? http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/sony...l_decision.html I completely forgot that Universal was involved in the Betamax case.

Its funny, but the egos involved in executive decisions may have in reality a lot to do with these things. Egos may have a lot to do with a lot of this format war.

Your idea is not as outlandish as one might think at first glance.

That's you prerogative, I suppose. The point was more that Disney will get better at using VC1 and could start releasing to HD DVD any time they like with this experience.

Correct - the problem seems to be that some have taken offence at others who say that Disney might...

I think DISNEY will go neutral because I wrote them a nice letter asking them to. ;)

Hypothetical; Who would win if all studios were neutral?

I think studios look at video as chance to break-even or better on a "crappy movie." Van Helsing was Box-office failure and DVD Success.

The biggest thing griping studios about DVD has been it's zero growth for what's going on three years now. You all may get a kick out of seeing the numbers rise and fall as early adopters buy their requite handful of titles, but there is no way either format will take hold if they don't keep on buying.

HD isn't suddenly going to make a collector out of a non-collector, and I think it's naive to think high-def is some market rocking sensation. If it were, the TVs would have done a lot better by now.

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of HD, I'll be entering the ring myself in a couple weeks.

I agree. I never said people that are not buying will buy BD (but renting is a bit harder so people might up their buying a bit). That is why I said 2 per player and I did not care for the ones that buy more (like the guys in the poll on movies and player thread) and 10 for the same period on HD DVD. A run away hit on BD can sell many more copies then a hit on HD DVD even if in total for the same period is the same. This gives a bigger incentive for a studio to launch a title on BD then HD DVD.

Like Nataraj Joke on UMD pointed out when Sony showed some titles doing well (a couple reaching 100k early on) the studios flocked not wanting to miss an opportunity to dbldip (DVD for home UMD for on the go) when the tryout period ended (and PSP owners realized thy did not need to buy movies to see them on a PSP) and the rest of the movies could only sell in the tens of thousands. They gave up on it.

Remember, first format with players for $199 or less wins.

(at least 70% market share ;) )

There already is a less than $199 HD DVD option. Do you see 2.5 million of those sold? Heck, how about 250K?

How much do you think a BD standalone player or a PS/3 will be when the first HD DVD hits $199?

Gary

http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/sony...l_decision.html

I completely forgot that Universal was involved in the Betamax case.

Its funny, but the egos involved in executive decisions may have in reality a lot to do with these things. Egos may have a lot to do with a lot of this format war.


I guess that means Disney will be switching sides next, because they were involved along side Universal in that suit. :)

I am sure that the guard has long since changed in reality, and that when Disney and the other studios do jump ship it will be for reasons unrelated to ego (probably quite the opposite of ego given their present boisterous stance against HD DVD.)

The $199 dollar players might be the easy part. Talking Hollywood (all of Hollywood, not just Universal) into replacing all new titles with combos for the same price as DVD will a bit more difficult. ;)

b2b

That will depend entirely on package pricing, and how they fare in the marketplace. The synergistic effect of low-cost players, and cheap combos might logically tend to obviate the need for much arm-twisting. ;)

I have always said that production costs for small content providers is a big advantage for HD DVD and that those smaller guys with more niche products can more easily produce content in HD DVD. Also studios can afford to release more content with smaller sales expectations with HD DVD because the break even point is lower with lower replication costs.

You can ignore 17% saying they'll never buy a combo from major studios, but on the other hand claim the purchasers of small independent titles can have a great influence on the outcome of the battle? :rolleyes:

Gary

I am still unclear as to the rules on any BRD / DVD combo proposals. I don't think the DVD forum would unanimously cooperate with Warner or Sony in allowing such a media to be approved.

Hi Sean, I thought the same thing and wondered if it violated any rules but at the same time the same should hold true for these THD discs, the one side (HD DVD) is approved by the DVD Forum and the other side (Blu-ray) is not approved. So if anything could be done about it, I'm sure these THD discs would be stopped also.

I've asked about this on the Insiders thread but didnt really get an answer.

There already is a less than $199 HD DVD option. Do you see 2.5 million of those sold? Heck, how about 250K?

How much do you think a BD standalone player or a PS/3 will be when the first HD DVD hits $199?

Gary


This is gold. :)

How much will the PS3 be when HD DVD players hit $199? According to your quote it will be $500-$600 because there is already a $200 HD DVD option.

Or were you suggesting that the 360 add-on HD DVD drive is a stand alone player now?

Well you really should not call that thing a $200 option because in order to function it requires a (minimum) $300 Xbox 360, or an even more expensive PC in addition to the $200 sticker price.

A run away hit on BD can sell many more copies then a hit on HD DVD even if in total for the same period is the same. This gives a bigger incentive for a studio to launch a title on BD then HD DVD.


With 2 million BR players out and 200k HD DVD players, sales for software seem to be virtually the same for both formats. If what you were saying is true I would expect BR to be selling 5:1 what HD DVD is selling right now

If you want to strictly go by what was quoted, then you could read in that the set-up cost would be $1,400 for HD DVD ($5,000 - $3,600) and $2,500 for BRD ($10,000 - $7,500.)


mastering can either be the creation of the data (which then should be the same) or the setup cost.
One is still almost exactly 50% of the other.
but it is still poisoned fruit. If something verifiable is wrong then why automatically assume something none verifiable is right? is it just because it is what you want to hear?
It still does not answer the question that if no replicator is willing to replicate what is the likely hood that they will tell them either the total or the mastering and price per disk cost.

What if the total is right for HD DVD and the price per disk and mastering is right for BD? what if the price per disk and mastering is right for HD DVD but wrong for BD?

what if the HD DVD prices and BD prices did not include the same stuff?
......

if the numbers from one source make sense and they match what is hypothesised then one has a reason to assume they are right. Once the numbers don't make sense from the source there is no reason to assume they back anything.

Hi Sean, I thought the same thing and wondered if it violated any rules but at the same time the same should hold true for these THD discs, the one side (HD DVD) is approved by the DVD Forum and the other side (Blu-ray) is not approved. So if anything could be done about it, I'm sure these THD discs would be stopped also.

I've asked about this on the Insiders thread but didnt really get an answer.

Hi right back Tom, :)

That's a good point, but we still have yet to see any titles presed in the total HD format. Even if that comes to pass, I am not sure that the DVD forum would look upon both sets of circumstances equally.

Allowing BRD / DVD combos could take away HD DVD's biggest advantage, but HD DVD / BRD combos won't really do more than cross-pollinate (forgive my lack of a better term) the much smaller HD disc market... Total HD discs won't be breaking into the massive DVD market the way single SKU combo discs will.

There already is a less than $199 HD DVD option. Do you see 2.5 million of those sold? Heck, how about 250K? err... that only applies to Xbox 360 owners and its been in limited supply. It is a major HD DVD advantage though, ;) Lets see how many have sold by the end of the year.

How much do you think a BD standalone player or a PS/3 will be when the first HD DVD hits $199? A lot more than $199 :D

I am still unclear as to the rules on any BRD / DVD combo proposals. I don't think the DVD forum would unanimously cooperate with Warner or Sony in allowing such a media to be approved.

they don't exactly have a say. Such adisk will conform to the DVD specs and the BD specs. Neither side has a say

Hi right back Tom, :)

That's a good point, but we still have yet to see any titles presed in the total HD format. Even if that comes to pass, I am not sure that the DVD forum would look upon both sets of circumstances equally.

Allowing BRD / DVD combos could take away HD DVD's biggest advantage, but HD DVD / BRD combos won't really do more than cross-pollinate (forgive my lack of a better term) the much smaller HD disc market... Total HD discs won't be breaking into the massive DVD market the way single SKU combo discs will.

Yes but markets aside just that if they can take a format such as HD which was an approved standard and bundle it with BR which is not approved without anything being done about it then the same may apply with BR and DVD.

Also as an example is the LG player that doesnt meet HD standards but is being sold nonetheless as a combo player

I didn't change my position, and yes, your statement was a misrepresentation - so I called it out. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9604108&&#post9604108 Your continued misrepresentation is quite typical.I thought the original thread getting deleted right before you started a new one complaining about the arguing in it was bad enough, but now claiming that you didn't do what I pointed out is pretty pitiful even for you. Here is a post where you referred to the original thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8576129&&#post8576129

I'm guessing you remember it. People can see that it is gone. It is the one where you also claimed that most VC-1 encoded are under 12Mbps. I'm curious, are you going to now say that you didn't ask for that thread to be deleted, just before you started a new thread on the subject? You know, the one where your stance changed to be more what I and Richard had been telling you in that original thread. If you are going to be dishonest about this, maybe somebody could provide the email that your brother sent out to the people on your petition list with a claim on this subject that you defended, given that some of the evidence here was magically removed.

As people who follow the link above can see, my post there included this for Amir to answer:
Does using VC1 for Blu-ray mean that there will be an encode that will work for HD DVD?That was the discussion we were having in the thread that magically got deleted and if you hadn't kept defending that it did mean they would have an encode that was compatible with HD DVD, then I wouldn't have gone to the insiders thread to try to get it cleared up for people (even though I understood it and I think it should have been clear before that).
I didn't say PBR - again, your "knack" for re-stating what is said is apparent to anyone who reads.Then maybe you just don't comprehend the subject matter of the discussion that you stepped into. It is PBR that has to with whether the encode is compatible with HD DVD's bandwidth limitations (~30Mbps max mux rate). ABR is the one that is about size. After the amount of time you have spent here, you should know enough to know that the following statement, that was the discusssion you jumped into, referred to PBR:
And after checking it out I can assure you that the encode would not work on HD DVD with its current bandwidth limitations.
...
I don't remember the average bitrate (or really what would have been my estimate for the average from watching the bitrate move around for a while). It was pretty high. But the peaks definitely went above what they could do for HD DVD right now.Is it too much for me to expect that you understand that the discussion was about the peaks being too high? If you knew that, then were you trying to throw people off with:
As you know, VC1 doesn't require 30 mbps to give a class-beating picture, and 30 mbps is about 10 mbps beyond the point of no additional returns from what we've heard from professional encoders here.Because if you know the discussion was about PBR and in the above you weren't talking about PBR, but were trying to deflect to something else, then that wouldn't look very good for your credibility here.

If you think I'm wrong about that encode being incompatible with HD DVD's bandwidth limitations we could always wager on it. :)

And BTW: My position is that Disney might go neutral. I don't expect it soon, but I can't say it won't happen. That is separate from the factual question of whether doing a VC-1 encode means getting something that can be used on HD DVD, which was the main argument in that thread that got deleted.

--Darin

He was giving an interview, not taking a math test.

well then they should not be talking out of their a$$ because some others might not have failed math and might see what they are saying makes no sense what so ever.

On the other hand if these were actual numbers then they would magically add up no matter how much they did not study for it.

His point was clear, he was convinced that Blu-ray cost far more than HD DVD for his needs and it was driving him to release on HD DVD.

funny I did not read where he said he did not want to do BD because of price. I thought he said several times that he could not do BD because no BD replicator would work with him.

The rest of your post was opinion based on your personal believe - snip-...
Yes, as I said in another post: "the problem seems to be that some have taken offence at others who say that Disney might... "

We have a difference of opinion, that's all. We may as well just leave it there.

rdjam you miss the forest for the trees (like usual) Let's see if I can make you understand.


1) it does not say anything about the prices for different quantities
2) but let's assume it makes sense
so 2.50 a disk, 5,000 for master for 1000 pieces we have 2.5*1000+5000=7500
and 1.1 a disk, 2,500 for master for 1000 pieces we have 1.1*1000+2500=3600

neither of the numbers add up to the totals for 1000 disks. One is off by 2500 and the other 1400.

not to mention that it makes no sense that a replicator would tell them "we won't make your disks but if we did it would be X$ a disk, y$ for the master and Z$ total because we can't add or multiply
Yep - I'll have to admit I rushed the post and misquoted, mixing minumum quantities for the mastering costs.

But the ultimate point is valid - HD DVD is cheaper by far.

But in turn, your math gets it wrong as well - wierd math...

He clearly indicates that the replication cost is separate from the mastering cost. This is why he gets $5,000 and $10,000 respectively for HD DVD and Bluray on a straight 1,000 copy run.

With 2 million BR players out and 200k HD DVD players, sales for software seem to be virtually the same for both formats. If what you were saying is true I would expect BR to be selling 5:1 what HD DVD is selling right now

well it is 2:1 now and growing. Things don't magically change over night most of those 2M PS3s are not even a month old.

You can ignore 17% saying they'll never buy a combo from major studios, but on the other hand claim the purchasers of small independent titles can have a great influence on the outcome of the battle? :rolleyes:

Gary Not ignoring the 17%, but I don't think a poll here is accurate for this kind of question of a pure pricing decision of a future item .

Higher prices = bad. I and most every other sentient movie buyer would prefer lower prices. If asked I say I want lower prices. But sometime in the future when I actually am going to make that buying decision other factors come into play and I may indeed buy the shiny disc. Its just that a poll question like this doesn't correlate well into actual behavior because its comparing a defined concept to a vague future buying decison of an unknown item.

On the other subject, I don't think small niche products will determine the war, but if Blu-ray wins outright I think they will be a casualty of Blu-ray dominance. Porn may be an exception, but I think that small content providers , like music, art adn travel will be an advantage for HD DVD but their impact will be small.

I believe that small independent titles and studio titles that may not have a lot of sales potential will never be released on Blu-ray for economical reasons. They will stay DVD forever if Blu-ray dominates the format war.

The only chance for those low volume titles to ever see HD goodness id for HD DVD to survive and create enough players in the wild to make it worthwhile to release them in HD. If HD DVD replication costs can be driven to DVD levels I think those titles may be released on combo discs or HD DVD only.

If blu-ray dominates, they stay on DVD because it will not be economical to produce them on Blu-ray for many years.

[snippity snip snip] mastering can either be ...

but it is still poisoned fruit. If something ...? is it just because ...?
It still does not ....

What if the...? what if the ...?

what if the ...?
......

if the numbers ... to assume they back anything.
Looks like obfuscation to me... ;)

Bottom line is that I think we have a real good insight into just how much Sony/BDA are subsidising their "approved" studios for Bluray disc production to help it match HD DVD costs...

I thought the original thread getting deleted right before you started a new one complaining about the arguing in it was bad enough, but now claiming that you didn't do what I pointed out is pretty pitiful even for you. Here is a post where you referred to the original thread:(SNIP)

--Darin
I've snipped the rest of this post to save space, since it's big on conspiracy theory but not much else.

I didn't say what you claimed - end of story.

You claimed then that I requested that the thread be closed, but I didn't. You managed to close it all by yourself with some pretty objectionable posts, and then wondered why it was gone.

What is MOST funny about this is that you are completely changing the subject now. The post you linked was about whether the Microsoft tools for VC1 were encoding to an HD DVD stream then converting to a Bluray-compatible stream with a second tool.

You claimed that this was a lie, and that the MS VC1 encoder could directly output Bluray VC1 streams. You were wrong then, but you probably still won't admit it. The fact was (and maybe still is) that the MS VC1 encoder output a HD DVD "wrapped" VC1 stream (regardless of bandwidth) which was then stripped and "re-wrapped" to a Bluray compatible VC1 stream.

This argument has nothing to do with your mis-statement of my opinions about Disney and VC1 anyway, so:

I link this for the third time - it's simple: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9604108&&#post9604108

I am still unclear as to the rules on any BRD / DVD combo proposals. I don't think the DVD forum would unanimously cooperate with Warner or Sony in allowing such a media to be approved.

The only "rules" are branding qualifications and paying for patent rights. All of the details would be up to the lawyers to figure out.

b2b

funny I did not read where he said he did not want to do BD because of price.
Try reading it again... he mentioned price as one of the reasons.

well it is 2:1 now and growing. Things don't magically change over night most of those 2M PS3s are not even a month old.
What utter nonsense.

Bottom line is that I think we have a real good insight into just how much Sony/BDA are subsidising their "approved" studios for Bluray disc production to help it match HD DVD costs...



you would think nothing is proof of something. You hought you had proof that LG and Disney would change sides before CEDIA last year and that we would have <300$ chinese HD DVD players last year. You have a nack at jumping to illogical conclusions and assuming your wishful thinking is proven where there is nothing.

I didn't say what you claimed - end of story.You aren't doing much for your credibility here. Let's revisit what I said that you claim isn't true:
I know rdjam was telling people that using VC-1 meant that they would have an HD DVD compliant encode (which wasn't and isn't true), ...And look back at that insiders thread I pointed to earlier at the post just before your response. My question to Ben was here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8576051&&#post8576051

And in it I quoted the claim I was arguing against in that thread that got deleted (not just closed):
Now, not all of you may realize this, but the only way to get a VC1 encode for Bluray is to do a VC1 encode for HD DVD first. THEN, you run a tool provided by Microsoft which converts the HD DVD stream into a Bluray stream.

So the end result is that you have a “free” HD DVD version of the movie “lying” around."You even responded in the post right after mine there, where you put the link to thread that got deleted later.

Please answer this question:

Is it your claim now that you were not trying to get people to believe:
So the end result is that you have a “free” HD DVD version of the movie “lying” around.with respect to using VC-1 for Blu-ray? You can link back to what your new claim is now as many times as you want, but please answer whether that was your claim at one time or not.

--Darin

Try reading it again... he mentioned price as one of the reasons.

yes I see it now (http://www.pagebypagebooks.com/Aesop/Aesops_Fables/The_Fox_and_the_Grapes_p1.html) if you read on he does mention the ripeness price as a reason

you would think nothing is proof of something. You hought you had proof that LG and Disney would change sides before CEDIA last year and that we would have <300$ chinese HD DVD players last year. You have a nack at jumping to illogical conclusions and assuming your wishful thinking is proven where there is nothing.
More nonsense. I said that LG and Samsung were working on Hybrid players and have always said that. Anyone can see through your misinformation here because they know I have always maintained that position. I still maintain that Smasung will bring out a Hybrid player too, for the record ;)

I have not made great comment on the chinese players at all, since it is not an area I am familiar with, so you are confusing someone else's posts here.

And finally, I have supported the idea on Disney switching, and pointed to their use of VC1 as increasing the odds of them supporting HD DVD - but I did not make the statements that darin is trying to attribute.

And I most certainly never said Disney would add HD DVD support before CEDIA last year. You just seem to make stuff up as you throw it. An interesting posting style...

... but I did not make the statements that darin is trying to attribute.Who do you claim wrote what I qouted in that insiders thread in the post right before your response on the subject (here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8576051&&#post8576051)):
Now, not all of you may realize this, but the only way to get a VC1 encode for Bluray is to do a VC1 encode for HD DVD first. THEN, you run a tool provided by Microsoft which converts the HD DVD stream into a Bluray stream.

So the end result is that you have a “free” HD DVD version of the movie “lying” around."Was it you, your brother, or are you going to tell us that you really don't know? If that thread hadn't gotten deleted people could of course follow that link you posted. As it is, it may take longer to find somebody who has a copy of that "newsletter" type thing that I believe was emailed out around October 1st of last year. I'm hoping you will just be honest on this one and tell us who wrote it originally.

--Darin

You aren't doing much for your credibility here. Let's revisit what I said that you claim isn't true:
And look back at that insiders thread I pointed to earlier at the post just before your response. My question to Ben was here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8576051&&#post8576051

And in it I quoted the claim I was arguing against in that thread that got deleted (not just closed):
You even responded in the post right after mine there, where you put the link to thread that got deleted later.

Please answer this question:

Is it your claim now that you were not trying to get people to believe:
with respect to using VC-1 for Blu-ray? You can link back to what your new claim is now as many times as you want, but please answer whether that was your claim at one time or not.

--DarinMY credibility? :p

You are now trying to change the goalposts again, as I "spotlighted" in my last response to you. Now you are trying to make the argument about whether VC1 encoding with MS's encoder resulted in an HD DVD compliant stream, which was then converted to a Bluray "wrapper" version via another tool.

And the answer is "YES" - not only have I said this but it is true, despite your not understanding it and claiming it to be wrong - but it is NOT what we have been debating and is only a red herring.

You even went to the insider thread, as did I, more than once and confirmed with Ben Waggoner and Amir that this is how the MS VC1 encoder worked.

Yes, it was possible to set the encoder to produce streams that are too high for HD DVD, but they were still HD DVD "wrapped" streams, and they still had to be converted to bluray "wrapper" streams. So if you set the encoder to stay within certain parameters, you effectively WOULD have an HD DVD encode first.

I assume you now realize that this was always true, since your post that started this says "which was and wasn't true" - which means that your continuous posts on this issue are just to split hairs to try to claim some sort of victory.

You were wrong back then, way off. My posts were accurate. You refused to accept it and had the facts confused. You got a thread closed because of your posting style and then accused me of trying to shut down my own thread. You were wrong on that too.

I'm finished with this subject now - it's clogging up some other perfectly good battles.

Well it's certainly not Wookiees. In a poll 98% of all Wookiees prefered to chew on HD-DVD because the "hard coat" on BD discs made their teeth hurt.. :)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/08/0330chewbacca.jpg

b2b
Perhaps the Wookiees will feel better when they realize that its not really a hard coat, to quote Amir but an extra protective layer.

No self-respecting wookiee likes getting defeated by a hard coat, but a protective layer.. now that is some serious **** :D

I'm finished with this subject now - it's clogging up some other perfectly good battles.Mighty convenient that you won't tell us who wrote this:
Now, not all of you may realize this, but the only way to get a VC1 encode for Bluray is to do a VC1 encode for HD DVD first. THEN, you run a tool provided by Microsoft which converts the HD DVD stream into a Bluray stream.

So the end result is that you have a “free” HD DVD version of the movie “lying” around."Whoever wrote that was wrong then and is wrong now.

What I said here:
I know rdjam was telling people that using VC-1 meant that they would have an HD DVD compliant encode (which wasn't and isn't true), ...is still true and I haven't changed the goalposts. Those using VC-1 for Blu-ray could choose to make an encode that would be compatible with HD DVD (just set things up to HD DVD's specs instead of Blu-ray's specs before doing the encode), but using VC-1 for Blu-ray does not mean that you have an HD DVD compliant encode. There is no "free" HD DVD version of the movie "lying" around. They would need to encode it for HD DVD's specs even though it is for Blu-ray.

I think it is too bad that you can't be honest about supporting a claim that, "So the end result is that you have a “free” HD DVD version of the movie “lying” around."

As I said, feel free to ask Amir if Disney's VC-1 encode of "Flightplan" was compatible with HD DVD. According to that claim, there would be a "free" version just "lying" around. But that claim wasn't true.

--Darin

If blu-ray dominates, they stay on DVD because it will not be economical to produce them on Blu-ray for many years.

Warner thinks it is economical to produce a BD glued to an HD DVD this year. And they think so selling to all those 2.3 million new HD DVD owners Toshiba is projecting this year. Go figure.

But, the market doesn't disappear. And while it is regretable for the BD owner they may have to wait a while for BD cost to drop sufficiently for small producers, it will most assuredly become economical for them.

In the meantime, how can this possibly compare with the HD DVD exlusive owner who must remain confident of the eventual domination of HD DVD AND wait for the release of titles from five MAJOR studios which may NEVER happen before discs are replaced with something else.

Is low quality HD porn, and some low volume independent titles really a fair compensation for that situation?

Gary

err... that only applies to Xbox 360 owners and its been in limited supply. It is a major HD DVD advantage though, ;) Lets see how many have sold by the end of the year.


Microsoft to offer HD-DVD drive as Xbox 360 accessory (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/gaming/2006-01-04-xbox360-hd-dvd_x.htm)


An independent survey of Xbox 360 owners found that 10% of HDTV owners bought their high-def set at the same time they bought an Xbox 360.

Sixty percent of Xbox 360 owners also have an HDTV — that's compared to nearly 20% of households that have a digital TV (some of which display video of less quality than full HD).

Overall, 90% of Xbox 360 owners either own or intend to buy an HDTV in the next six months.


Seemed like the PERFECT demographic to sell HD DVD add-on into. Now 10 million people with 90% already owning or intending to buy an HD set.

Yet, they are waiting for a $199 Chinese made standalones?


A lot more than $199 :D

How much more? Sony and Panasonic regularly dominate the display sales despite being considerably more expensive.

There is more to it than price. Price is the lubricant to generate a transition from general to mass adoption when the pieces are in place. It isn't the means to try to encourage those pieces (e.g. studio support) to fall into place.

Gary

There is more to it than price. Price is the lubricant to generate a transition from general to mass adoption when the pieces are in place. It isn't the means to try to encourage those pieces (e.g. studio support) to fall into place.

Sony's strategy of piggybacking BD onto a gaming console with a per-unit subsidy of $300 makes this seem like an entirely disingenuous line of argumentation, as the BDA has clearly attempted an end-run around the conventional new format hardware pricing model.

Do you honestly suppose we're sufficiently naive to believe that all the BDA studios embraced exclusivity purely as a result of the "potential" technological benefits of capacity and interactivity BD offered over HD-DVD ( which even now, have yet to see the light of day ), or would it be reasonable to surmise that the promise of millions of heavily subsidized players in the marketplace had just a little something to do with it? :rolleyes:

Sony's strategy of piggybacking BD onto a gaming console with a per-unit subsidy of $300 makes this seem like an entirely disingenuous line of argumentation, as the BDA has clearly attempted an end-run around the conventional new format hardware pricing model.


And Toshiba responded in kind, launching eight months before. And the result has been no other competitors at the $499 SRP.


Do you honestly suppose we're sufficiently naive to believe that all the BDA studios embraced exclusivity purely as a result of the "potential" technological benefits of capacity and interactivity BD offered over HD-DVD ( which even now, have yet to see the light of day ), or would it be reasonable to surmise that the promise of millions of heavily subsidized players in the marketplace had just a little something to do with it? :rolleyes:

Why should I give a damn how full studio support is accomplished, as long as it IS accomplished? Why should I fight against the idea of Sony giving me a $1500 performance player for $500?

Feel free to go ahead and fume. But, I can't figure why anyone takes the PS/3 so personally.

Gary

A $199 Toshiba HD-DVD player might sell well.

But would a $199 Chinese-branded HD-DVD player sell well? What is the distribution channel for these unfamiliar brands in the developed markets?

How much of the DVD hardware adoption was driven by these no-name brands actually being purchased? Or was it the fact that name-brand makers lowered their prices (but not as much as the no-name brands) and those were the ones which got picked up?

So maybe Chinese HD-DVD players will make other name-brand makers lower their price and produce a much lower point of entry for the HD-DVD ecosystem.

Oh wait, there is only one name-brand maker supporting HD-DVD.

So BD-only studios like Disney are already producing titles with higher bitrates than what HD-DVD could do while HD-DVD studios and neutral studios are bound by the HD-DVD bitrate?

Now why do HT enthusiasts want Disney to go neutral again , meaning reducing bitrates?

Why do people who clamor for the best PQ support format neutrality with their dollars when it could be argued that HD-DVD is keeping bitrates lower than they otherwise might be?

Feel free to go ahead and fume. But, I can't figure why anyone takes the PS/3 so personally.

Who's fuming? I was simply responding to an argument that I think is patently hypocritical. I do hope you can see the total incongruity between these two statements:

There is more to it than price. Price is the lubricant to generate a transition from general to mass adoption when the pieces are in place. It isn't the means to try to encourage those pieces (e.g. studio support) to fall into place.

Why should I give a damn how full studio support is accomplished, as long as it IS accomplished? Why should I fight against the idea of Sony giving me a $1500 performance player for $500?

So, pray tell; why should I give a damn how MS and Toshiba convince any of the BD studios to go neutral, if cheap Chinese manufactured players are one means to help accomplish it?

Why do people who clamor for the best PQ support format neutrality with their dollars when it could be argued that HD-DVD is keeping bitrates lower than they otherwise might be?

Where is the clear, highly suggestive body of empirical data, that it makes any difference whatsoever? Please! I've been waiting for anyone participating in this thread to provide something other than anecdotal claims, but have thus far, been entirely disappointed. If BD really offers performance which is unambiguously superior to HD-DVD, it should be easy enough to discern with a proper set of objective criteria and procedures. So some guy who works for a magazine, or your next door neighbor, or an AVS member waxes orgasmic over the comparative PQ or AQ of one format over another........guess what? It's essentially meaningless! Even a nebulous definition of "truth" demands something more than a collection of disparate opinions collected in an ad-hoc manner. It's the end results that matter, not numbers, unless you can offer a convincing level of "proof" to an objective standard that they do.

Where is the clear, highly suggestive body of empirical data, that it makes any difference whatsoever?

"Superman Returns". Prosecution rests.

"Superman Returns". Prosecution rests.

I'm afraid more than one data point is necessary to comprise a "clear, highly suggestive body of empirical data.".........But then, I'm sure you already know that.

I'm afraid more than one data point is necessary to comprise a "clear, highly suggestive body of empirical data.".........But then, I'm sure you already know that.


OK. "King Kong": no lossless audio. No extras from the DVD version (when ALL previous Universal releases had ALL the 2 disc extras).

most of those 2M PS3s are not even a month old

So wait a second...

Not only do you claim that there are 2 million PS3s sold (False) but you are also claiming that at least 1,000,001 PS3 systems were sold in the past 30 days?

Oh my, :D When the full NPD and Media Create numbers for January are compiled I'll post them here so you can see to what extent you have been mislead.

I do hope you can see the total incongruity between these two statements:


Sure, I'm expressing two different ideas. Why would you expect otherwise?


Price is the lubricant to generate a transition from general to mass adoption when the pieces are in place. It isn't the means to try to encourage those pieces (e.g. studio support) to fall into place.


When the product is such that it will appeal to the mass market AND is inexpensive, then the mass market will adopt. Missing studios (either format) will not appeal to the mass market.

"The first format to $199 wins."

Please, look at the prices of a WMV-HD and Divx-HD players. What do you suppose is the missing ingredient that failed to make those sub $200 players take over?


Why should I give a damn how full studio support is accomplished, as long as it IS accomplished?


We all want full studio support. Why should how it is accomplished be the reason for rejecting a format?


So, pray tell; why should I give a damn how MS and Toshiba convince any of the BD studios to go neutral, if cheap Chinese manufactured players are one means to help accomplish it?


If I ask why should I give a damn, it would be rather hypocritical to think you should.

Please, encourage away.

Gary

In the meantime, how can this possibly compare with the HD DVD exlusive owner who must remain confident of the eventual domination of HD DVD AND wait for the release of titles from five MAJOR studios which may NEVER happen before discs are replaced with something else.

Is low quality HD porn, and some low volume independent titles really a fair compensation for that situation?

Gary

Your acting like Hi-def is equal to oxygen. I think my DVDs will get me by for a long time, as they house stuff that may never make it to Hi-def. DVD is still the elephant in the room, HD/Blu-ray may stay a niche.

I saw an ad in the paper from Radio Shack, selling converters so that you non-HD set will work with coming HD broadcast standard. It cost a whopping $20. How many people will just cheap out and go for that or something like it until they have to buy a new set?

I'm not a typical buyer, I'm all about independent labels like Anchor Bay, Image, Kino, Criterion and Dark Sky. Ironically most studio titles I buy are from Warner and Universal anyway. It used to also buy a lot of MGM DVDs because of their Orion holdings, that is til Sony and Fox bought them out an choked off the fun catalog titles they were putting out (to a sizable profit). Sony demonstrated in a hurry that they were inept at such releases, and investors pushed those holdings into Fox's hands. Before any HD disks were a reality, film fans were groaning about Sony winning the bid for the MGM holdings, because they knew it meant a kink in the hose for stuff MGM was putting out great affordable editions of.

If HD remains a niche market similar to Laserdiscs, catalog titles and smaller labels will indeed have a combined impact perhaps enough to keep both formats alive.

It's also silly to think that either camp wouldn't release to the others format if there is money to be made, of course they will. Shareholders will insist on it.

Total HD seems like a misfire to me, maybe even a bluff. Combo players on the other hand seem very probable indeed.

OK. "King Kong": no lossless audio. No extras from the DVD version

King Kong does nothing to back up your assertion that "Picture Quality" (because that was the original argument being made) suffers as a result of lower bitrates. Kong is by and large regarded as among the best looking, if not the pinnacle of HD video on any platform.

I am not too sure you should be picking on the audio quality of Kong either, as there is far worse out there, lossless track or not.

Remember, first format with players for $199 or less wins.You've made this claim repeatedly, and it's simply baseless. A Konka HD DVD player for $198 isn't going to convince millions of consumers that the format is viable, even if they could get enough retail distribution and brand presence for people to know about it. There's far more complexity to the format battle than simply a race to the bottom for price.

It is 2:1 now and growing.What utter nonsense.What do you dispute about DVDEmpire's 65.5 to 34.5 advantage for Blu-ray over HD DVD sales? It's the most accurate indicator we've got; a site which only sells discs (so isn't skewed by hardware sales), and is reporting exactly the relative number of discs sold, not the ranking of discs in a way which can't possibly result in a meaningful direct comparison.

You're really going to have to get used to accepting market data you don't like, because it's going to happen with increasing regularity in the future!

You're really going to have to get used to accepting market data you don't like, because it's going to happen with increasing regularity in the future!

Wow, did you slam your fist down on your desk as you wrote that? Check your pulse,

Wow, did you slam your fist down on your desk as you wrote that? Check your pulse,

I guess if HD-DVD didn't spook BD supporters a little these arguments wouldn't be so passionate. I doubt the passion is just a well-meaning attempt to spare hapless HD supporters heartache.

I'm sure this may have made it here already,
I read it on Endgadget.

"While Disney continues to insist that Blu-ray is a better standard and will eventually win the format war, the company seems to be edging toward a position of supporting -- or at least releasing movies in -- both HD DVD and Blu-ray formats. At a recent shareholders' meeting Disney CEO Robert Iger talked up Blu-ray, but then went on to say that the company would "probably publish in both formats." The move mirrors similar decisions by other studios, such as Warner Brothers and Paramount, both of which had originally been HD DVD-only, but later went on to declare format neutrality. And while there are still a couple of studios with exclusive ties to one format over another, most seem to be following a trend also being pursued by hardware vendors and hedging their bets. Of course, the day we see Sony Pictures release an HD DVD disc is the day the format war officially ends."

common Sony, you can do it! :D

What do you dispute about DVDEmpire's 65.5 to 34.5 advantage for Blu-ray over HD DVD sales? It's the most accurate indicator we've got; a site which only sells discs (so isn't skewed by hardware sales), and is reporting exactly the relative number of discs sold, not the ranking of discs in a way which can't possibly result in a meaningful direct comparison.

You're really going to have to get used to accepting market data you don't like, because it's going to happen with increasing regularity in the future!

Talk, why would companies like ONKYO, MERIDIAN, ALPINE, LG, LITE-ON, and 5 Chinese manufacturers recently choose HD DVD, if all the sales are on the BD side.? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

It seems like you´re afraid of the upcomming sub $199,- HD DVD players. Those companies are able to produce and sell more HD DVD players, than the BD side could even dream of. :D

King Kong does nothing to back up your assertion that "Picture Quality" (because that was the original argument being made) suffers as a result of lower bitrates. Kong is by and large regarded as among the best looking, if not the pinnacle of HD video on any platform.

I am not too sure you should be picking on the audio quality of Kong either, as there is far worse out there, lossless track or not.
Well, if the extras are so precious to Universal, the only reason they would have left them out is if the PQ would suffer due to saving space via lower bitrate.

What do you dispute about DVDEmpire's 65.5 to 34.5 advantage for Blu-ray over HD DVD sales? It's the most accurate indicator we've got; a site which only sells discs (so isn't skewed by hardware sales), and is reporting exactly the relative number of discs sold, not the ranking of discs in a way which can't possibly result in a meaningful direct comparison.

You're really going to have to get used to accepting market data you don't like, because it's going to happen with increasing regularity in the future!

And Talk, why don´t you tell us all the DVDEmpire numbers.??

Take a look.:

Percentage of total
Hi-Def sales:

Format: HD-DVD Blu-Ray
Week: 34.54% 65.46%
Month: 40.58% 59.42%
Year: 56.28% 43.72%


Titles: 199 218
Studios: 18 17

:D

I guess if HD-DVD didn't spook BD supporters a little these arguments wouldn't be so passionate. I doubt the passion is just a well-meaning attempt to spare hapless HD supporters heartache.

I'm sure this may have made it here already,
I read it on Endgadget.

<snip>

common Sony, you can do it! :D


How about an article that is not nearly a year old and any subsequent statements or market positions?

Well, perhaps CES 2007.

Oh, that's right. They didn't. Matter of fact they announced a huge lineup of titles and a HD DVD vs Blu-ray FAQ on their website.

And Talk, why don´t you tell us all the DVDEmpire numbers.??

Take a look.:

Percentage of total
Hi-Def sales:

Format: HD-DVD Blu-Ray
Week: 34.54% 65.46%
Month: 40.58% 59.42%
Year: 56.28% 43.72%


Titles: 199 218
Studios: 18 17

:D

Year has been since this time last year. Not 2007.
Not sure how the studio count breaks down, if their using Toshiba math to skew the numbers (Warner & New Line & HBO = 3 for HD DVD, Warner (including New Line & HBO) = 1 for BD.

Perhaps it's all those porn studios?

HD = HD DVD??? Well then BD = Beyond HD!

And Talk, why don´t you tell us all the DVDEmpire numbers.??

Take a look.:

Percentage of total
Hi-Def sales:

Format: HD-DVD Blu-Ray
Week: 34.54% 65.46%
Month: 40.58% 59.42%
Year: 56.28% 43.72%


Titles: 199 218
Studios: 18 17

:D

It's not obvious how an apparent HD DVD supporter can be pleased with sales numbers that clearly show a trend in favor of BD.

LAGOSIAN has posted an interesting interview (http://gear.ign.com/articles/759/759068p1.html) with Joone, Digital Playground founder.

Apart from the question of porn ostracism, other general points:

Replication
- BD replicators are not running at capacity
- BD titles have a run of about 20,000
- One single company replicates about 95% of all the adult content that's produced in the Valley.

Replication costs
- A Blu-ray disc comes in at about $2.50 replicated from a $5,000 glass-master. HD-DVDs cost about $1.10 and a $2,500 glass-master. For a small studio to duplicate 1,000 pieces, one will cost $10,000 and the other will cost $5,000.

Authoring, encoding and interactivity
- HD DVD has been doing a lot of handholding for porn since early 2006 (in the back alley, of course ;) )
- The authoring tools aren't there. Authors that are used to GUIs now have to hand-code things down to exactly where everything is on the screen. Big studios have the corporate aid, money and personnel to pull it off; small studios don't. The authoring side needs to catch up, which will probably take a year at least.
- The internet-interactive features of HD-DVD will be cool, but right now no one can make it work.

You've made this claim repeatedly, and it's simply baseless. A Konka HD DVD player for $198 isn't going to convince millions of consumers that the format is viable, even if they could get enough retail distribution and brand presence for people to know about it. There's far more complexity to the format battle than simply a race to the bottom for price.
Many of the "people" who buy at Wally Mart and other such outlets neither know nor care who makes their cheap electronics. My wife's dad said, "It's just a dollar more to go first-class." Guess how many people won't pay a dollar more if they don't have to? Yep, that many! :p

Mighty convenient that you won't tell us who wrote this:
Whoever wrote that was wrong then and is wrong now.
Now, not all of you may realize this, but the only way to get a VC1 encode for Bluray is to do a VC1 encode for HD DVD first. THEN, you run a tool provided by Microsoft which converts the HD DVD stream into a Bluray stream.

So the end result is that you have a “free” HD DVD version of the movie “lying” around."

Those using VC-1 for Blu-ray could choose to make an encode that would be compatible with HD DVD (just set things up to HD DVD's specs instead of Blu-ray's specs before doing the encode), but using VC-1 for Blu-ray does not mean that you have an HD DVD compliant encode. There is no "free" HD DVD version of the movie "lying" around. They would need to encode it for HD DVD's specs even though it is for Blu-ray.That quote you're bandying about is correct. Sure, it is a simplification, but it is inherantly correct. It's obvious you take offense at over-simplifications, but that doesn't change the fact that Microsoft's VC1 encoder produced HD DVD compliant encodes by default. Yes, it has already been made clear that the operator could *Choose* to use data rates that are above the spec of HD DVD, and in so doing cause the encodes to be "out of spec", but it doesn't change the fact that it still was in an HD DVD "wrapper", nor the fact that it still had to be converted to a Bluray "wrapper" by a second utility after the fact - Do you DISPUTE this fact?

If you want to stretch this to the maximum, neither the HD DVD encode, nor the converted Bluray encode can be placed directly on the disc and shipped to customers - there is more work to take place on either version - would you say, then that they don't get a Bluray encode from this process EITHER?

Get realistic - this discussion is ridiculous. My statements were correct, and the worst that could be said about them was that they were a simplification of the process. Your attacking these statements as a lie is futile, as anyone here who knows the process also knows that the statements are essentially correct.

I think it is too bad that you can't be honest about supporting a claim that, "So the end result is that you have a “free” HD DVD version of the movie “lying” around."I think you should admit you were wrong instead of continuing this vendetta. Unless the operator set the data rate settings on the encoder above the maximums for HD DVD, then you did get a HD DVD encode on the way to getting the Bluray encode - which makes it an essentially free byproduct of the process.

As I said, feel free to ask Amir if Disney's VC-1 encode of "Flightplan" was compatible with HD DVD. According to that claim, there would be a "free" version just "lying" around. But that claim wasn't true.Don't even try to turn this into a discussion about "Flightplan" - my statements were made long before Flightplan was produced and were representative of the overall process. You are attacking those statements, and whether Disney chose to use data rates above or below the HD DVD spec for "Flightplan has absolutely no bearing on your attack on my statements about the general process. It's just another way for you to move the goalpost.

You wrong but will never admit it, and I will never cave to these types of attacks by you, so it would suit everyone else on the forum if you left it be.

What do you dispute about DVDEmpire's 65.5 to 34.5 advantage for Blu-ray over HD DVD sales? It's the most accurate indicator we've got; a site which only sells discs (so isn't skewed by hardware sales), and is reporting exactly the relative number of discs sold, not the ranking of discs in a way which can't possibly result in a meaningful direct comparison.

You're really going to have to get used to accepting market data you don't like, because it's going to happen with increasing regularity in the future!
That's rich, coming from the folks who attacked the Amazon numbers for months as being lies, and attacking Amazon for being in Microsoft's pocket and falsifying numbers :p

DVD empire is a much smaller entity than Amazon and until the Videoscan numbers start becoming public, it'll be hard to know how the overall market is behaving.

...

DVD empire is a much smaller entity than Amazon and until the Videoscan numbers start becoming public, it'll be hard to know how the overall market is behaving.

Agreed. But the change in trend at Amazon is clear:

http://www.hdgamedb.com/amazon/history.aspx?TYPE=10&SPAN=14

and the one anecdotal online sales report with actual percentages (dvdempire.com, current week: 65.46% Blu-Ray; 34.54% HD-DVD) also supports the trend of Blu-ray sales pulling away from HD-DVD.

Do you have current verifiable evidence to suggest otherwise?

Replication costs
- A Blu-ray disc comes in at about $2.50 replicated from a $5,000 glass-master. HD-DVDs cost about $1.10 and a $2,500 glass-master. For a small studio to duplicate 1,000 pieces, one will cost $10,000 and the other will cost $5,000.


Wow, it looks like those glass-master prices have dropped a LOT! Last spring the number $40K was being thrown around.

So, at this point, BD is approaching 2x HD DVD cost and falling apparrently very rapidly.

Gary

[quote]
"...At a recent shareholders' meeting Disney CEO Robert Iger talked up Blu-ray, but then went on to say that the company would "probably publish in both formats."

March 2006 is recent?

Gary

And now for something completely different:

Oh my - there's going to be some big discussions now!

Warner have just announced their Bluray and HD DVD lineup for this year.

Notice that The Matrix trilogy and the Harry Potter movies are HD DVD - only!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...2&&#post9615952

Year has been since this time last year. Not 2007.D'oH! :D

I guess if counting sales before BD existed makes them feel better, so be it. :)

Umm, because the 2M PS3's already shipped wouldn't be able to run new software making use of the scaler?

Seems like the same stance they're taking with the first set of shipping BR players ... besides, if it's part of the SDK, it could simply check for it and run the instruction if available. Similar to the way the MS handles the HDD availability for streaming/caching.

Anyways ... like I said ... conspiracy theory for sure ... ;)

Well, if the extras are so precious to Universal, the only reason they would have left them out is if the PQ would suffer due to saving space via lower bitrate.

How did I know someone would make this argument next?

OK, let's take a BD50, load up a 28-30Mbps VC1 encode of King Kong (a 3 hour film) with a 5.1 LPCM track. How much room is left over for extras then? Just about none.

So if you are suggesting that King Kong could be loaded with extras while also running VC1 at a very high bitrate (past the point of diminishing returns) with a LPCM audio track on a Blu Ray50 disc, you are mistaken.

As for any potential video and audio improvements that might be afforded by the spike in VC1 bitrate and the LPCM audio over the HD DVD release? There would probably be little to none based upon on all of the current reviews.

Could they take the same VC1 encode and DD+ audio that they used on the HD DVD and pack it on a BD50 and then add extras? Sure they could. They could also make it a 2 disc HD DVD set and pack in even more goodies while giving the customer more percieved value from a marketing perspective.

Blu Ray is not the answer.

Originally Posted by Kosty
Remember, first format with players for $199 or less wins.
You've made this claim repeatedly, and it's simply baseless. A Konka HD DVD player for $198 isn't going to convince millions of consumers that the format is viable, even if they could get enough retail distribution and brand presence for people to know about it. There's far more complexity to the format battle than simply a race to the bottom for price. Stated by a advocate who seems to conceede that Blu-ray is clearing losing that race, so it doesn't matter anymore.

Price matters. Value matters.

Consumers will buy a lot more $199 players than $999 ones.

Talk, why would companies like ONKYO, MERIDIAN, ALPINE, LG, LITE-ON, and 5 Chinese manufacturers recently choose HD DVD, if all the sales are on the BD side.? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

It seems like you´re afraid of the upcomming sub $199,- HD DVD players. Those companies are able to produce and sell more HD DVD players, than the BD side could even dream of. :D :)

Many of the "people" who buy at Wally Mart and other such outlets neither know nor care who makes their cheap electronics. My wife's dad said, "It's just a dollar more to go first-class." Guess how many people won't pay a dollar more if they don't have to? Yep, that many! :p Wal-Mart can sell off brand items to a mass audiance because their policy take the perceived risk out of a buying a non-brand name item decision and consumers have generally found that Wal-Mart sells reliable items that provide value. In a sense "Wal-Mart" is the brand, not the name on the product faceplate.

Indeed price one factor among many, but it is a significant one when anticipating consumer behavior.

Its silly to imply otherwise.

What do you dispute about DVDEmpire's 65.5 to 34.5 advantage for Blu-ray over HD DVD sales? It's the most accurate indicator we've got; a site which only sells discs (so isn't skewed by hardware sales), and is reporting exactly the relative number of discs sold, not the ranking of discs in a way which can't possibly result in a meaningful direct comparison.

You're really going to have to get used to accepting market data you don't like, because it's going to happen with increasing regularity in the future! What if it changes when a lot of HD A2 stand alone players are sold? Or when more HD DVD movies are released?

Your counting a lot of those Blu-ray chickens before they're hatched.

What if it changes when a lot of HD A2 stand alone players are sold? Or when more HD DVD movies are released?

Your counting a lot of those Blu-ray chickens before they're hatched.

I find it interesting that these on-line numbers/percentages are treated as both garbage and undisputable fact by the same groups of people. If the numbers are to be used, they need to be used ... or just thrown out altogether. What I mean is, the gist seems to be something like this ... and I don't mean to state that all supporters of either camp are doing this, just some of them:

HD-DVD
When Ahead : See? We're Ahead on the numbers, that has to mean something.
When Behind : Numbers still mean something, give reasons why (ie: no newly released discs during the period) they might be behind.
- Numbers seem to always matter ...

Blu-Ray
When Behind : Those numbers are crap, it's just crap. Garbage. It's crap.
When Ahead : Ohh! In your face! We're winning!
- Numbers seem to only matter when they can be used for their argument ... For example, Amazon numbers were garbage for forever ... yet DVD Empire's numbers are rock solid.

:confused:

is still true and I haven't changed the goalposts. Those using VC-1 for Blu-ray could choose to make an encode that would be compatible with HD DVD (just set things up to HD DVD's specs instead of Blu-ray's specs before doing the encode), but using VC-1 for Blu-ray does not mean that you have an HD DVD compliant encode. There is no "free" HD DVD version of the movie "lying" around. They would need to encode it for HD DVD's specs even though it is for Blu-ray.

FWIW, even if a .vc1 was made that wasn't compliant to HD DVD specs, having a BD compliant one is already pretty far down the road to making a HD DVD one. All of the capture, dithering, and other preproduction is already done, a project is set up, etcetera. It's easy to just tweak the settings at that point for HD DVD, do the initial 2-pass encode, and use the existing 3rd pass decisions as a starting point for further tweaking.

I'd say having the BD version is at least half the way to getting a HD DVD done as well.

95% of the way if you include a good remastering job in the overall effort:).

And now for something completely different:

Oh my - there's going to be some big discussions now!

Warner have just announced their Bluray and HD DVD lineup for this year.

Notice that The Matrix trilogy and the Harry Potter movies are HD DVD - only!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/show...2&&#post9615952

I believe the titles will be released in both formats. Only the IME will be available on HD DVD.

The sales numbers we have access to show trends and snapshots of the data.

Its undeniable that Blu-ray's sales have increased while HD DVD sales have remained relatively constant.

The issue is whether or not that recent surge will be sustained by Blu-ray so that sales will move past and then surpass and remain higher than HD DVD, or whether or not new HD DVD 2nd generation and Xbox 360 add on sales moving into retail inventory and new HD DVD movie releases will move HD DVD sales off their current plateaus.

The Blu-ray surge has so far been of relatively short duration and its basically achieved parity with HD DVD. If thats a best shot by Blu-ray with a fortunate set of circumstances, then HD DVD sales will eventually recover their upward trend and will rise past Blu-ray.

If the PS3 attach rates rise , Blu-ray sales will rise, but if they are pegged only to initial PS3 sales then any PS3 sales slowdown after Xmas will soon shoe up in those trends.

I believe the data was relatively accurate when HD DVD was leading and now when Blu-ray has surged and achieved both near term parity and for now what has been a short term sales lead.

Wow, it looks like those glass-master prices have dropped a LOT! Last spring the number $40K was being thrown around.

So, at this point, BD is approaching 2x HD DVD cost and falling apparrently very rapidly.

Gary

My understanding was that a new way to master was developed that dropped the price considerably. In fact, I remember someone saying that the same process will be used for both formats soon, so I don't know why it would be cheaper to master in one format over the other. It should be essentially the same soon.

It's the replication that I find interesting. I don't see the evidence that those cost are falling rapidly, what are you basing this statement on? I was told by many people on this board that it was a myth that HD DVD was cheaper to replicate, so I'm not sure what to believe.

bliklian, considering you work at Microsoft shouldn't you have that fact in a signature? After all the fuss that recently happened over the issue of insider signatures I just wanted to mention that though what is weird is that I thought you already had a signature.I leave off my signature when I'm posting as a non-insider, not using any of my insider knowlege, and I don't want my statements taken as canon. When I'm making random conjectures, I'd rather not have people take it the wrong way. It's not like people don't know who I work for whether or not the .sig is there, I just don't want some newsie taking my statements as fact because of the signature when they may be just wild assed guesses :)

Replication costs
- A Blu-ray disc comes in at about $2.50 replicated from a $5,000 glass-master.


Good info. Is that glass master only for SL?

[QUOTE=Timothy Ramzyk]



March 2006 is recent?

Gary


Oops! :o

I don't see the evidence that those cost are falling rapidly, what are you basing this statement on?


I believe this is the first time I see real(none subsidized) per disc cost for bluray SL.

I believe the titles will be released in both formats. Only the IME will be available on HD DVD.
Nah - the story that occompanies the announcement makes it clear its the movies - HD DVD only.

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dvdrama.com%2Fnews.php%3F18624&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools

It is France, though, but probably still indicative of the state of readiness of the HD versus BD versions. It'll be interesting to see the US release schedule...

Nah - the story that occompanies the announcement makes it clear its the movies - HD DVD only.

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dvdrama.com%2Fnews.php%3F18624&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools

It is France, though, but probably still indicative of the state of readiness of the HD versus BD versions. It'll be interesting to see the US release schedule...

I dont understand ... the Matrix release is June ... when the new super-duper Interactivity Supporting BR players are supposed to be released. The other titles are scheduled to be released even later.

Having those releases come out with interactive BR features would be huge considering the availablility of the new units, no? :confused:

Nah - the story that occompanies the announcement makes it clear its the movies - HD DVD only.

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dvdrama.com%2Fnews.php%3F18624&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools

It is France, though, but probably still indicative of the state of readiness of the HD versus BD versions. It'll be interesting to see the US release schedule...

Warner is supposed to be uninterested in region coding, so presumably the Europeans can always import the NA titles.

Gary

It's the replication that I find interesting. I don't see the evidence that those cost are falling rapidly, what are you basing this statement on? I was told by many people on this board that it was a myth that HD DVD was cheaper to replicate, so I'm not sure what to believe.

Well, when the studios announce the intention to release the vast majority of titles in a form that is 2.5x DVD to make (combo), that eliminates a lot of the difference.

"It only costs 1.2x DVD to make HD DVD" - Wonderful, if the majority of discs to be made are going to be pure HD DVD.

A flip side argument would be the $499 PS/3. If Sony makes almost none of them available, really the PS/3 is $599.

We never had good numbers before for the actual replication costs of BD, so it's hard to know whether the prices have dropped and by how much. Certainly the mastering has become a near non-issue. This was a critical factor for small production runs from small producers.

Gary

believe the data was relatively accurate when HD DVD was leading and now when Blu-ray has surged and achieved both near term parity and for now what has been a short term sales lead.
I don't think the overall trend toward BD will/can be seen until the total cumulative BD disk sales exceed HD sales. I doubt that will happen for a long while.

That quote you're bandying about is correct. Sure, it is a simplification, but it is inherantly correct. It's obvious you take offense at over-simplifications, but that doesn't change the fact that Microsoft's VC1 encoder produced HD DVD compliant encodes by default. Yes, it has already been made clear that the operator could *Choose* to use data rates that are above the spec of HD DVD, and in so doing cause the encodes to be "out of spec", but it doesn't change the fact that it still was in an HD DVD "wrapper", nor the fact that it still had to be converted to a Bluray "wrapper" by a second utility after the fact - Do you DISPUTE this fact?This stuff quoted here is not correct:
Now, not all of you may realize this, but the only way to get a VC1 encode for Bluray is to do a VC1 encode for HD DVD first. THEN, you run a tool provided by Microsoft which converts the HD DVD stream into a Bluray stream.

So the end result is that you have a “free” HD DVD version of the movie “lying” around."Putting a cowboy hat on doesn't make someone a cowboy. And we have already been told that the person doing the encoding needs to input the values to use. In fact, they wouldn't want to choose the number of B-frames to match HD DVD because the encode might not work on Blu-ray if they did that. The game that you have been playing is like claiming that a person will get a free visit to Florida if they flew from Seattle to New York, because they could choose to go through Florida if they wanted to and there is some weirdness with the boarding passes that says New York, FL where a person crosses out the FL and puts NY. Encoding with VC-1 for Blu-ray does not mean getting an HD DVD version for free and the little file format issue doesn't change that. The underlying encode would need to be setup for HD DVD if they want to make it compatible with HD.

This is very simple, if encoding for Blu-ray with VC-1 meant getting a "free" HD DVD version because Microsoft chose to use a separate tool for the file format conversion then the "Flightplan" and "Casanova" encodes would be compatible with HD DVD.

It is false to say that the only way to get a VC-1 encode for Blu-ray is to encode for HD DVD first. Again, if that were true then Disney would have had to encode "Flightplan" and "Casanova" for HD DVD. The simple file format issue does not mean that they had to encode those for HD DVD and never did.

--Darin

FWIW, even if a .vc1 was made that wasn't compliant to HD DVD specs, having a BD compliant one is already pretty far down the road to making a HD DVD one. All of the capture, dithering, and other preproduction is already done, a project is set up, etcetera. It's easy to just tweak the settings at that point for HD DVD, do the initial 2-pass encode, and use the existing 3rd pass decisions as a starting point for further tweaking.

I'd say having the BD version is at least half the way to getting a HD DVD done as well.

95% of the way if you include a good remastering job in the overall effort:).So, I take it that you disagree with these statements that rdjam says are correct:
Now, not all of you may realize this, but the only way to get a VC1 encode for Bluray is to do a VC1 encode for HD DVD first. THEN, you run a tool provided by Microsoft which converts the HD DVD stream into a Bluray stream.

So the end result is that you have a “free” HD DVD version of the movie “lying” around."given that they wouldn't have to do any of that stuff you just said if Disney doing "Flightplan" and "Casanova" with VC-1 for Blu-ray meant that they had to do an encode for HD DVD first.

I get the feeling that there are those who would like people to be deceived into thinking that Blu-ray exclusive studios using VC-1 means that they will have "free" HD DVD versions they can use without doing a separate encode for HD DVD. You and I both know it doesn't mean that though. If a person flies from Seattle to New York they could choose to go through Florida and once they get to New York they are closer to Florida if they want to go there, but going from Seattle to New York doesn't mean that they will go through Florida.

--Darin

Sony to slash PS3 price by 25% (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/01/29/sony_price_cut_forecast/)


Sony has yet to launch the PlayStation 3 in Europe but already one analyst is forecasting a first-year price cut which will see at least €150 knocked off the €599 launch price.

According to Wedbush Morgan Securities analyst Michael Pachter, cited by GamesIndustry.biz, the price cut will come within 12 months of the PS3's 23 March European launch, he believes.

Analysts opinion.


Sony said 1m consoles will be allocated for the launch. Pachter said he believes that stack of machines will have been sold by the end of April, a month or so after the launch. UK stocks will "quickly disappear" after launch, he forecast. Pre-ordering appears to be the name of the game, that suggests, just as it was with Nintendo's Wii launch in December 2006.


My contacts indicate that in affluent cities of England stores are being allocated the upwards of 1 PS/3 per 1000 residents!

The UK stock will probably disappear on launch day. I'd be surprised if the one million survives a week for the UK + Europe.

Gary

So, I take it that you disagree with these statements that rdjam says are correct:
given that they wouldn't have to do any of that stuff you just said if Disney doing "Flightplan" and "Casanova" with VC-1 for Blu-ray meant that they had to do an encode for HD DVD first.

I get the feeling that there are those who would like people to be deceived into thinking that Blu-ray exclusive studios using VC-1 means that they will have "free" HD DVD versions they can use without doing a separate encode for HD DVD. You and I both know it doesn't mean that though. If a person flies from Seattle to New York they could choose to go through Florida and once they get to New York they are closer to Florida if they want to go there, but going from Seattle to New York doesn't mean that they will go through Florida.

--Darin

The most obvious reason for a custom VC-1 encode on BD is that you don't ever have intentions to do a HD-DVD release in the first place. :)

Disney has no plans to support HD-DVD, so limiting the process (and time wasted tweaking to save bits) to the absurdly low ceiling of 30mbs mux rate of HD-DVD would be the acme of foolishness. ;)

b2b

BTW: rdjam, to simplify this, I find it quite incredible that you claim that this (which you also defended in the past but won't tell us whether you wrote it or your brother wrote it) is correct:
Now, not all of you may realize this, but the only way to get a VC1 encode for Bluray is to do a VC1 encode for HD DVD first. THEN, you run a tool provided by Microsoft which converts the HD DVD stream into a Bluray stream.

So the end result is that you have a “free” HD DVD version of the movie “lying” around."but that my:
I know rdjam was telling people that using VC-1 meant that they would have an HD DVD compliant encode... referenced here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9604108&&#post9604108) was an inaccurate "quote". I'm guessing that other people can see through your attempts to claim that I was wrong about what you were telling people. Or are you going to say that it can be an HD DVD version even if it isn't compliant with HD DVD to try to get out of your contradiction?

--Darin

PS3, PSP See Price Hikes in Canada
http://www.dailytech.com/PS3+PSP+See+Price+Hikes+in+Canada/article5867.htm

Gamers in the U.S. are asking for a price cut, Japanese gamers are already got a drop and Europeans are just plain waiting. Canadians, however, could be seeing one of the first ever console price hikes.

The Canadian dollar has slipped recently due to the reduction in oil prices. But, Sony is saying there is no change. And you can see from Sonystyle.ca (http://www.sonystyle.ca/commerce/servlet/CategoryDisplays?storeId=10001&langId=-1&catalogId=10001&categoryId=100345&navigationPath=n100152) they are still selling it for CAD$549/$649.

Prices going up in a situation where there is supposedly oversupply and low demand? That would be a first, don't you think? ;)

Gary

PS3, PSP See Price Hikes in Canada
http://www.dailytech.com/PS3+PSP+See+Price+Hikes+in+Canada/article5867.htm

Gamers in the U.S. are asking for a price cut, Japanese gamers are already got a drop and Europeans are just plain waiting. Canadians, however, could be seeing one of the first ever console price hikes.

Probably due to exchange rates more than anything..

http://ichart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=USDCAD=X&t=1y&q=&l=&z=&p=m50,m200&a=v

b2b

I dont understand ... the Matrix release is June ... when the new super-duper Interactivity Supporting BR players are supposed to be released. The other titles are scheduled to be released even later.

Having those releases come out with interactive BR features would be huge considering the availablility of the new units, no? :confused:
I suppose they could do advanced features on the Bluray versions but there'd possibly be problems for some owners of 1st gen players. We know that most of these players probably can't do the features and would supposedly ignore them, but I wonder how many might barf?

Do the Bluray versions of both the Matrix and Harry Potter series have a release date for the US yet?

This stuff quoted here...
Ignored