Some of my fav. movies are from Universal and it just makes no sense why they are only supporting HDDVD

Neither format has reached critical mass yet, when sales of either format scratch the surface of SD-DVD sales they'll probably re-examine their stance.

Some of my fav. movies are from Universal and it just makes no sense why they are only supporting HDDVD

For the same reason that Disney is only supporting BD. You can bet that if/when one of the HD formats becomes big enough to sell as much or more than SD DVD, all of the studios will be on board.

i'm not sure, but i think for now Universal is cashing in big time because they are the primary movie studio for hddvd, next to warner. Less competition from other studio means more sales come release time because the movie releases are pretty thin.

There's a lot of history between top execs at Universal and Sony. Much information has been posted by others in the past about the rift that occurred and the key executives involved. The fact that Universal has remained HD-DVD exclusive has more to it than just being a business decision. There's some ego and bravado involved on Universal's part.

If Universal switch it would instantly end the format war.
Universal has to sensitive and does not want to ruin any relationship with Microsoft or Toshiba.

In time I am sure they will support BD, but looking for a face-saving situation.

yep...in time, Universal will support Blu-Ray if Blu-Ray is selling million copies to the world. They are stupid if they don't...same for Disney too. I can see Blu-Ray winning it. I only have a few title that I like from Universal...but 100x more on the Sony/Disney movies.

Universal already knows that if they join BDA, this war is indeed over. Sony knows this as well and others in this damn format war. I'm sure there have been closed door negotiations between the two for months....

There's some ego and bravado involved on Universal's part.

Oh, I didn't know it was all Universal's fault.

Did Universal produce Sony's phenomenal DRM Rootkit too? :p

Oh, I didn't know it was all Universal's fault.

Did Universal produce Sony's phenomenal DRM Rootkit too? :p

Universal weren't affected by that, what they were affected by though was UMD and the failure of an idea that turned out to be.

Six months ago I am sure Universal felt it had made the right choice. Seeing the current trend of Blu Ray sales I would think they will start to weigh their options.

There's some ego and bravado involved on Universal's part.

I'm not sure if those sentiments remain with the recent shake-up.

I agree with others that Blu-ray really has to reach mainstream before it garners Unversal's attention.

The good news is, I think Blu-ray is quickly heading that way. I myself have had a hard time finding much sought after Blu-ray titles like Crank, and more recently The Departed. This may not mean much now, but in just a few short months from now some really big name titles will start rolling in (actually, they already are), and even then Blu-ray will still be selling at a fraction of what DVDs make.

But, is it getting there? I certainly believe so. As much as I like HD-DVD, I'm not sure how Universal would want to "counter" the onslaught of upcoming Blu-ray releases.

The next 6-8 months will prove to be very interesting :) .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._v._Universal_City_Studios

There's some ego and bravado involved on Universal's part.

Everybody's quoting you and I cannot resist doing likewise! ....like there's none of that at Sony? Que?

I think Sony Music really P'ed off Universal, earlier in this century over SACD and then Dual-y Disc. I think this is a factor but more like a lesser one. For now, I think Uni's thinking is a business decision. I think they choose HD-DVD because it will be cheaper to distribute. The next factor is lack of faith in Sony format leadership or vability of such. Ithink that's well founded. I wish Panasonic or Pioneer were format leaders. Not nearly so many folks or firms have grudges against either of them.

I wonder if Universal has an exclusive HD-DVD contract for "X" amount of time which would prevent them form going neutral even if they wanted to. But like what's been said, who knows what goes on behind closed doors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Corp._v._Universal_City_Studios

It's scary to think that without Justice Stevens, we would have no home Theatre, no betamax, no vhs, no DVD burners. Basically no home videophiles. period.

In fact, studio revenue would arguably be MUCH MUCH lower without the home video collectors.

And there's no reason for AVSFORUM w/o home theatres.

We came very close to that abyss. Let's not go there again.

Because they don't like you.;)

Oh, I didn't know it was all Universal's fault.

Did Universal produce Sony's phenomenal DRM Rootkit too? :pYou are barking up the wrong tree if you think I blame Universal and like Sony. I was actually putting my personal opinion aside and just reposting information I had seen.

Obviously Sony is the king of arrogance and shady business practice. But I didn't think that needed to be mentioned as the topic was about Universal and Sony is only "one" of the corporations backing BD. :)

One cannot understand why Universal is HD DVD exclusive without asking the same question of Disney and Fox.

From the outside it looks like there's a lot of poor ethics and dirty play involved here. Content providers provide content. The more players that proliferate for each format makes the excuse of exclusive studios less palatable IMO.

My hope is that in 2008 studios exclusivity goes bye bye and that something like Total HD takes over. Frankly I don't care about the extra licensing or lack of disc art. Just allow me to purchase HD movies without the freakin headache.

One cannot understand why Universal is HD DVD exclusive without asking the same question of Disney and Fox. Great point. I think the OP posted the question under the assumption that Blu-Ray is or eventually will be the dominant format. Something that is far too early to tell no matter which format any of us on AVS prefer. In fact, the two formats could very well co-exist for years to come with the advent of dual format players. In which case, Universal would be very happy not to put a single penny into Sony's hands in the way of licensing fees and royalties.

If Universal switch it would instantly end the format war.
I seriously doubt that.

I seriously doubt that.

You can seriously doubt it all you like, it'll happen! Face the music and dance!

You can seriously doubt it all you like, it'll happen! Face the music and dance!

If the masses cannot afford it nobody will care except the nerds like us that have all the time in the world to be here bemoaning this stuff.

If Universal switch it would instantly end the format war.I seriously doubt that.

It probably would end the war. If a user can buy a single machine that will cover 100% of available HD titles, while the competing format does not, the competing format (HD DVD in this case) becomes a very hard sell. Given that there is no significant performance difference between BD and HD DVD to drive purchasing decisions - game over.

Whether or not BD would succeed in supplanting SD DVD is another question. As has been pointed out, the price point for BD is too high for J6P, and there is a long way to go before it's low enough to become the true heir to SD DVD.

If BD manages to put HD DVD under with content, only to die itself a year later due to a bad pricing strategy that cannot move into the mass market, what's the point? If that happens, we all lose.

Obviously Sony is the king of arrogance and shady business practice.

They are amateurs in this area compared to Micro$oft.

I have despised Sony as much as anyone. However I have to be honest and say I couldn't be happier with my PS3. In fact, I now prefer using it over the HD-A1. It works flawlessly and delivers the same high quality image that made me an HD DVD enthusiast. And Sony's Blu-ray promotions are enabling me to build a new high definition library more rapidly.

Yes Virginia it is good to be neutral.

Some of my fav. movies are from Universal and it just makes no sense why they are only supporting HDDVD
They are not supporting Blu-ray because the temperature in hell hasn't dropped one degree yet. :D

Seriously, it's like an HD DVD fan asking why Sony Pictures hasn't supported HD DVD yet...DUH! There's a war on...and they basically chair the HD DVD Forum. :rolleyes:

They are not supporting Blu-ray because the temperature in hell hasn't dropped one degree yet. :D

You're really not understanding this global warming thing-y. The temps in hell are going up too. Don't believe me, just google Al Gore.... ;)

Universal has to wait until CES '08 before they join BD, so why are you guys worried?

Universal has to wait until CES '08 before they join BD, so why are you guys worried?
They may officially announce or reaffirm their commitment to Blu-ray at CES 08 but they will most definitely join up before Christmas 07.

One cannot understand why Universal is HD DVD exclusive without asking the same question of Disney and Fox.

From the outside it looks like there's a lot of poor ethics and dirty play involved here. Content providers provide content. The more players that proliferate for each format makes the excuse of exclusive studios less palatable IMO.

My hope is that in 2008 studios exclusivity goes bye bye and that something like Total HD takes over. Frankly I don't care about the extra licensing or lack of disc art. Just allow me to purchase HD movies without the freakin headache.
Thats pretty much how i feel. I have no emotional attachment to either brand. No malice or ill will towards either, either.

If they both succeed and THD becomes the de facto norm, I can see the Blu-Ray & HD-DVD camp competing and driving down the cost of players while increasing their quality all the faster. Which in the end, only benefits the consumer. :)

Universal has to wait until CES '08 before they join BD, so why are you guys worried?Sorry, it isn't going to happen.

Thats pretty much how i feel. I have no emotional attachment to either brand. No malice or ill will towards either, either.

If they both succeed and THD becomes the de facto norm, I can see the Blu-Ray & HD-DVD camp competing and driving down the cost of players while increasing their quality all the faster. Which in the end, only benefits the consumer. :)


Except that Sony, Fox, MGM, Disney, Lionsgate, and Universal are gungho about staying with their format (5 BD v 1 HD DVD) and so they'll never go flipper. They all want one format. Universal's just being stubborn about not wanting to change in the face of overwhelming BD support.

Given that, I don't see how a flipper format is going to do anything to improve things for the consumer who doesn't care about a more expensive flipper that attempts to prolong the format war.

The consumer just wants to pay less money for HD discs. BD and HD DVD are around the same price, depending on the movie company. And the consumer wants one format, not two glued together. Especially not at a premium.

It still boggles the mind. HD DVD was supposed to save people money over BD, but instead it's going to wind up costing people money when they're footing the bill for fragile HD DVD sides to BD/HD DVD flippers.

The flipper is bound to be somewhat more expensive both to author and to encode.

Once the format war is over, I expect the THD format to disappear. Even Warners will switch to a discrete format at some point. Why keep producing THD's when their research shows that everyone has dumped the losing format.

This is a fundamental problem with both combo players and combo disks: the customer cannot rely on this as a long term solution. Most customers are going to wait for a complete resolution with all vendors supporting the same format.

Sorry, it isn't going to happen.
Do you work at Universal? :confused:

They have power with the HD-DVD forum and probably a financial incentive (more than movie sales) for its success. With Blu-ray they'd just be a small fish in a big pond - fairly unimportant.

They have power with the HD-DVD forum and probably a financial incentive (more than movie sales) for its success. With Blu-ray they'd just be a small fish in a big pond - fairly unimportant.

Better to be a small fish in a big pond than a big fish in a pond that's rapidly drying up.

So, is Hell endothermic or exothermic ;)

I's ahsume youin's jest kan't sphell.... ya'll must mean extreehottie.... ;) Like

Like that famous B-52 commander sez, " ...it's always summer in hell...".

I would love to see Universal on board for the Blu Ray format, huge edge there for HD-DVD, but each studios have their own exclusives.

They may officially announce or reaffirm their commitment to Blu-ray at CES 08 but they will most definitely join up before Christmas 07.
source? link?

Better to be a small fish in a big pond than a big fish in a pond that's rapidly drying up.

I own both formats, but purchase blu ray if possible.

6 months ago HD DVD had a chance to knock out Blu Ray. They failed to deliver that blow and Blu Ray has caught up and has a very strong upward trend at the moment.

Hopefully they won't screw it up. :D

The question is why don't you just buy an HD DVD player and buy Universal HD movies? Its going to be a long battle, Sony is known for milking their dud products...

They'll sell all the exclusive HDdvds they can for awhile, then go neutral and sell them all again on BD.

I have to agree. Universal don't care about their loyal HD-DVD consumers. The majority of the consumers complain about combo discs with increase price. What do they do? They decide to produce 90% of future release in combo. They don't care about the voice of consumers. The funny thing is that the HD-DVD buyers continue to buy them because 1) they are desperate for movies 2) they can't face the fact that their HD-DVD might be obsolete someday LOL.

In the end, Universal is not to be blame...only the HD-DVD consumers who chose to continue to be "loyal" to them even when they don't care. It's so obvious that the loyal consumers do not see it happening. Oh well...we try to show them data, but they are still in denial LOL :D

They'll sell all the exclusive HDdvds they can for awhile, then go neutral and sell them all again on BD.

I have to agree. Universal don't care about their loyal HD-DVD consumers. The majority of the consumers complain about combo discs with increase price. What do they do? They decide to produce 90% of future release in combo. They don't care about the voice of consumers. The funny thing is that the HD-DVD buyers continue to buy them because 1) they are desperate for movies 2) they can't face the fact that their HD-DVD might be obsolete someday LOL.

In the end, Universal is not to be blame...only the HD-DVD consumers who chose to continue to be "loyal" to them even when they don't care. It's so obvious that the loyal consumers do not see it happening. Oh well...we try to show them data, but they are still in denial LOL :D

Wow, just wow, blind sided, but that is your opinion. The majority of consumers are still buying SD DVD's. The funny thing is that only die hard AV junkies are purchsing HD content.

yep.yep..don't take it personal please because it's only an opinion. Don't forget to sign the petition to Universal that you hate combo discs :) Maybe they'll retract their statement about producing 90% of future releases in combo discs.

I wouldn't mind seeing both format to co-exist in going forward. However, if there must be only 1 format to exist, then I rather side with Blu-Ray just because I like Sony more than the monopoly/dirty business from Microsoft.

Wow, just wow, blind sided, but that is your opinion. The majority of consumers are still buying SD DVD's. The funny thing is that only die hard AV junkies are purchsing HD content.

Universal knows that they have die hard fan base in the HD-DVD camp. They will milk some extra sales out of these people before moving over to blu-ray. They know most of the hardcore early adapter types such as HD-DVD owners will probably buy up BD without skipping a beat.

They'll sell all the exclusive HDdvds they can for awhile, then go neutral and sell them all again on BD.


exactly

The majority of the consumers complain about combo discs with increase price.

No, this is a misconception brought on by spending too much time on these forums. The majority of consumers:

1) Still don't know what HD DVD and BD are

2) Have several SD DVD players

3) Will not be willing to purchase the same movie more than once.

Thus, Universal is trying to position their products to be attractive to a wider market than is currently buying HD media. The cost of pressing the combos will drop in the same manner as the cost of pressing the BD discs, thus the end game is to have two options for the average consumer. In one camp, you have Disney and Fox, but the families will be buying everything in SD for the mini-van & kids' rooms. In the other camp, you have only Universal, but they are making a single disc that will play in both the mini-van AND in Dad's new home theater.

What do they do? They decide to produce 90% of future release in combo. They don't care about the voice of consumers.

No, it's that they are targeting the wider market - not just the enthusiasts. The buyer who only cares about his $10K front-projection system with 130" screen may get uptight about paying an extra $2 for a disc without artwork, but the soccer mom who wants to buy the new family film will be glad that the extra $2 allows her to not have to make a choice or buy two discs.

If you really want to understand the marketing choices that are at work here, you have to think beyond your own personal prejudices.....

They'll sell all the exclusive HDdvds they can for awhile, then go neutral and sell them all again on BD.

Yup.

However, if there must be only 1 format to exist, then I rather side with Blu-Ray just because I like Sony more than the monopoly/dirty business from Microsoft.

Why in the world does everybody put Microsoft in the middle of all this?! Microsoft has NOTHING to do with HD-DVD. They didn't develop it, they didn't market it, they didn't do anything but support it like Fox or Lionsgate does for Blu-ray.

And let's not forget, Sony has quite a dirty history itself.

I only said what I said not to imply that Universal is being a bad company or anything but let's face it, companies are in BUSINESS to be successful and to make $$$.
Especially big companies. That's why I think it's a bit funny that people are all like SONY IS EVIL! or M$..!!!
They are in business to make $, not to be nice guys or do anyone a favor.
If BD really takes off, they would be STUPID not to re-release their titles in BD.
Right now they are being rather clever. Since they one of the very few HDdvd exclusive companies in existance, they know that content starved HDdvd owners will buy virtually any Uni. title now, even paying $5.00 more average for the dreaded combo, (I know, I know, we can play them in the car...)
People are buying some titles they would normally not just to have some new content and to "keep supporting HDdvd and fighting the good fight!!!!" which is indeed very admirable but may ultimately be pointless.
If they eventually go neutral it's all cheddar, port the titles over and sell them anew.

just my 2 cents....

Why in the world does everybody put Microsoft in the middle of all this?! Microsoft has NOTHING to do with HD-DVD. They didn't develop it, they didn't market it, they didn't do anything but support it like Fox or Lionsgate does for Blu-ray.

And yet HD DVD would have already been dead if it weren't for them. Perhaps you're unaware of the HD DVD Software and Player forums here at AVS. That's where you see Microsoft in action defending their beloved HD DVD. They used to crash the Blu-ray areas frequently but now that Blu-ray has taken the lead in the format war they've pretty much given up on the idea of converting. They pretty much stick to trying not to lose any more HD DVD supporters these days.

M$ has nothing to do with HDdvd..?!?!?
yeah, and I got a bridge in NYC for sale....

Which company does Amir (you know, the guy driving the HDdvd demo bus around..)
work for again...?

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/amirm/default.mspx

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/feature_microsofthddvdinterview.html

;)

hmmm.... 3 guesses

Why in the world does everybody put Microsoft in the middle of all this?! Microsoft has NOTHING to do with HD-DVD. They didn't develop it, they didn't market it, they didn't do anything but support it like Fox or Lionsgate does for Blu-ray.

And let's not forget, Sony has quite a dirty history itself.

I am not saying anything negative about Microsoft.

But it is very clear that Microsoft has become the chief corporate spokesman and strategist for HD DVD. This includes:
-- extraordinary efforts last year to get their VC-1 encoder working well for HD DVD. They sent staffers into help the studios achieve excellent encodes. They only provided the conversion software (apparently quite simple) to allow the encoding to work with Blu-ray when Warners asked for it.
-- added the XBox 360 add-on to their line.
-- plenty of publicity and advertising, including their road tour, "evangelists" on the web promoting HD DVD
-- they are now involved in getting Chinese manufacturers to build cheap HD DVD players. They also worked with companies like Meridian to get them to build HD DVD players.

There is nothing wrong with any of these things. Clearly they saw this as a competitive situation.

But I now think that Microsoft is leading the charge.

indeed, I doubt Toshiba could have kept it afloat as long as it has without them.

Some people think that ultimately MS wants NO format to really catch on to clear the way for an HD OnDemand type of scenario which Bill Gates himself has said is the likely ultimate scenario...

I am not saying anything negative about Microsoft.

But it is very clear that Microsoft has become the chief corporate spokesman and strategist for HD DVD. This includes:
-- extraordinary efforts last year to get their VC-1 encoder working well for HD DVD. They sent staffers into help the studios achieve excellent encodes. They only provided the conversion software (apparently quite simple) to allow the encoding to work with Blu-ray when Warners asked for it.
-- added the XBox 360 add-on to their line.
-- plenty of publicity and advertising, including their road tour, "evangelists" on the web promoting HD DVD
-- they are now involved in getting Chinese manufacturers to build cheap HD DVD players. They also worked with companies like Meridian to get them to build HD DVD players.

There is nothing wrong with any of these things. Clearly they saw this as a competitive situation.

But I now think that Microsoft is leading the charge.

I see where you're coming from, but again, they are only supporting it.

-The HD-DVD truck and advertising was for their own promotion for the 360 addon. It was only last summer just before the HD-DVD drive was released.
-VC-1 is the standard of the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers. Yes, it was developed from Microsoft's wmv9, but not exclusively for HD-DVD. Blu-ray adopted it along with AVC in 2004. Movie studios use it primarily for HD-DVD titles because the compression allows better usage of the disc space.
-Microsoft developing HD-DVD players with Meridian is the same as companies like Samsung making a player for Blu-ray. By the way, Meridian is interested in developing for both HD-DVD and Blu-ray (announcement (http://avzombie.com/blog/2007/01/10/meridian-refutes-hd-dvd-hardware-announcement/) ).

It's funny how companies can get fingers pointed at them for being on the "other side" of this format war. Though, here's one that gets overlooked...
-Disney actually developed iHD for HD-DVD, but they are Blu-ray exclusive. Go figure.

Some of my fav. movies are from Universal and it just makes no sense why they are only supporting HDDVD


Why hasb't Fox and Disney supported HDDVD?

Why hasb't Fox and Disney supported HDDVD?
You won't like the answers, but they already spoke volumes on this. They say BD is the superior technology.

Their real reasons?

Fox is primarily seeing the ability to protect their movies from copying with optionally enabled BD+ if AACS is cracked. The rom-mark watermark requirement for BD-rom playback prevents widescale clandestine replication of their movies from pressing houses.. Presumably a valid ROMmark on a pirated disk is required to play the disk, and if such a watermark exists, it can be traced back to the plant?

Content protection is Fox's main problem with releasing their HighDef content. Turns out that the worry they have is a valid one.

Disney appears to be in it from the technology alone. Their latest disks experiment with cutting edge codecs at the high bitrates allowed only with BD. They tried AVC and VC1. Casanova for example is VC-1 encoded and peaks at >45Mbps - something that they can't do on HD DVD as that format has a max video bitrate of 28. If BD50 was truly science fiction or violates laws of physics, Disney would have been the first to abandon BD. But the technology worked and that explains their current stance.

Is there a list somewhere of all the Universal HD-DVD's? Or could someone compile one. I'm just wondering what we're missing out on.

You won't like the answers, but they already spoke volumes on this. They say BD is the superior technology.

Their real reasons?

Fox is primarily seeing the ability to protect their movies from copying with optionally enabled BD+ if AACS is cracked. The rom-mark watermark requirement for BD-rom playback prevents widescale clandestine replication of their movies from pressing houses.. Presumably a valid ROMmark on a pirated disk is required to play the disk, and if such a watermark exists, it can be traced back to the plant?

Content protection is Fox's main problem with releasing their HighDef content. Turns out that the worry they have is a valid one.

Disney appears to be in it from the technology alone. Their latest disks experiment with cutting edge codecs at the high bitrates allowed only with BD. They tried AVC and VC1. Casanova for example is VC-1 encoded and peaks at >45Mbps - something that they can't do on HD DVD as that format has a max video bitrate of 28. If BD50 was truly science fiction or violates laws of physics, Disney would have been the first to abandon BD. But the technology worked and that explains their current stance.
The same can be said for the reasons Universal gave for not supporting BR.
This is a statement by the President of Universal Studios Home Entertainment, he seems to think HD DVD is the better technology:

Comments supporting HD DVD last week by Craig Kornblau, president of Universal Studios Home Entertainment, at the electronics design show CEDIA EXPO 2006, have dealt a serious a blow to the Blue-ray camp, led by Sony.

“The reviews are in and HD DVD is hands down the leader in picture quality, audio experiences and interactive capabilities that have never been seen before,” said Kornblau.

http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/5647/53/

And committing to release 100 movies in one year during CES '07 is a big, HUGE commitment wouldn't you say?

We here at High-Def Digest contacted Universal to follow-up on the release and inquire about the persistent web rumors that the studio may not remain exclusive to HD DVD. The firm word back from the studio is that they have "no plans" to support Blu-ray, nor Warner's controversial Total Hi-Def hybrid disc format, which also debuted at CES. However, they will continue to aggressively push HD DVD/DVD combo discs; the studio estimated as many as 90 percent of its 2007 HD DVD releases will be combos.
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/news/list/2

Everybody's quoting you and I cannot resist doing likewise! ....like there's none of that at Sony? Que?

I think Sony Music really P'ed off Universal, earlier in this century over SACD and then Dual-y Disc. I think this is a factor but more like a lesser one. For now, I think Uni's thinking is a business decision. I think they choose HD-DVD because it will be cheaper to distribute. The next factor is lack of faith in Sony format leadership or vability of such. Ithink that's well founded. I wish Panasonic or Pioneer were format leaders. Not nearly so many folks or firms have grudges against either of them.


I think you're confusing Universal Pictures with Universal Music Group, which is understandable, as they used to parts of the same company. The two companies first split in early 2001.

Universal Pictures (and Studios) are owned by NBC/GE and are firmly (for now) in the HD-DVD camp.

Universal Music Group is owned by Vivendi SA (a French conglomerate) and is officially format agnostic, maintaining memberships in both the BDA and the DVD Forum. UMG has released DVD-Audio, Dual Discs, and SACDs in the recent past.

Universal Pictures has had nothing to do with SACD, DVD-A, or Dual Disc.

Both companies have released UMD product. Universal Pictures did make some hostile press comments about Sony concerning the lack of developed market for UMD product not too long ago

Univeral Music Group has its first HD release coming out on Feb. 27 (Nine Inch Nails Live: Beside You in Time) and it will be available on BD, HD-DVD, and DVD.

Cheers

I think you're confusing Universal Pictures with Universal Music Group, which is understandable, as they used to parts of the same company. The two companies first split in early 2001.

Universal Pictures (and Studios) are owned by NBC/GE and are firmly (for now) in the HD-DVD camp.

Universal Music Group is owned by Vivendi SA (a French conglomerate) and is officially format agnostic, maintaining memberships in both the BDA and the DVD Forum. UMG has released DVD-Audio, Dual Discs, and SACDs in the recent past.

Universal Pictures has had nothing to do with SACD, DVD-A, or Dual Disc.

Both companies have released UMD product. Universal Pictures did make some hostile press comments about Sony concerning the lack of developed market for UMD product not too long ago

Univeral Music Group has its first HD release coming out on Feb. 27 (Nine Inch Nails Live: Beside You in Time) and it will be available on BD, HD-DVD, and DVD.

Cheers

OK, what you say makes purr-fect sense but it seems like Uni executive types are as agrivated with the various Sony divisions as many of the rest of us. So much so, that it obviously affects their decisions. The quotes I heard attributed to one of their high officals came off like, I don't trust Sony snake oil..... :)

Did Universal produce Sony's phenomenal DRM Rootkit too?It has been reported elsewhere that the rootkit came from Sony BMG, which is a fully independent company from Sony (50% owned by Sony and BMG), just as Sony Ericsson is independent of Sony. What this means is the management responsible for the rootkit have no bearing whatsoever on anything having to do with Blu-ray.

If the masses cannot afford it nobody will care except the nerds like us that have all the time in the world to be here bemoaning this stuff.The masses couldn't afford DVD in the first few years of launch, either, yet that worked out pretty well. The sooner we get to a single format the sooner the sales volume will drive lower prices.

Disney actually developed iHD for HD-DVD, but they are Blu-ray exclusive. Go figure.No, Microsoft developed iHD with token input from Disney (mostly so they could list Disney as a co-inventor).

And word is that Sony was originally pushing for iHD in the Blu-ray spec, but it was voted down by the BDA in spite of that.

why aren't all studios format neutral? then i can decide what i want to buy without being force-fed a format? if all studios were neutral, HD-DVD would have won this war 3-6 months ago. so how about we get them all to go neutral and let the consumer have some freedom of choice? isn't that how it's supposed to be? are we going to go buy 2 tvs if we need one to watch ABC and one to watch CBS? c'mon gimme a break. that's why i won't buy 2 formats - i should not be made to, and i won't.

No studio knows where either format is going so saying it's a business descision from Universal isn't right, but I'm sure some type of dea must have been madel or the company's involed support each other and Sony is a direct threat.

You won't like the answers, but they already spoke volumes on this. They say BD is the superior technology.

Their real reasons?

Fox is primarily seeing the ability to protect their movies from copying with optionally enabled BD+ if AACS is cracked. The rom-mark watermark requirement for BD-rom playback prevents widescale clandestine replication of their movies from pressing houses.. Presumably a valid ROMmark on a pirated disk is required to play the disk, and if such a watermark exists, it can be traced back to the plant?

Content protection is Fox's main problem with releasing their HighDef content. Turns out that the worry they have is a valid one.

Disney appears to be in it from the technology alone. Their latest disks experiment with cutting edge codecs at the high bitrates allowed only with BD. They tried AVC and VC1. Casanova for example is VC-1 encoded and peaks at >45Mbps - something that they can't do on HD DVD as that format has a max video bitrate of 28. If BD50 was truly science fiction or violates laws of physics, Disney would have been the first to abandon BD. But the technology worked and that explains their current stance.

Well then, Universal thinks HDDVD is the superior technology (and so did Fox and Disney at first), so the answer is the same, thanks. I hope that clears things up.

I don't buy for a minute that Disney prefers MPG2 over the much more efficient VC-1.

Most of the studio's want a format that gives the consumer a reason to rebuy the movies they already own.

MPEG2 and broken Java technology isn't going to do it.

HDDVD web based technology and primary VC-1 codec is the answer to their question.

It all boils down to DRM which I agree is stronger in Blu-Ray or perceived to be.
That is all they seem to care about.

Superior tech? codec and video quality, they are the exact same.

I know I won't (and haven't) rebuy a movie I already own if there are no extras and the unrated cut isn't included (which is the case with most of Fox/MGM and Disney stuff).
Of the handful Blu-Ray discs I own, zero are Fox and Disney.

Of the handful Blu-Ray discs I own, zero are Fox and Disney.

If you didn't care about Fox and/or Disney releases, what led you to buy BluRay instead of HD DVD?

why aren't all studios format neutral? then i can decide what i want to buy without being force-fed a format? if all studios were neutral, HD-DVD would have won this war 3-6 months ago. so how about we get them all to go neutral and let the consumer have some freedom of choice? isn't that how it's supposed to be? are we going to go buy 2 tvs if we need one to watch ABC and one to watch CBS? c'mon gimme a break. that's why i won't buy 2 formats - i should not be made to, and i won't.


Because it costs money to produce titles in two different formats.

BD and HD-DVD titles are presently very expensive and time-consuming to produce. The market is too underdeveloped for studios to begin thinking about making decent profits on these early titles.

There are various non-obvious reasons why a studio might pick one format over another. Each studio has various alliances with technology and CE companies, some studios have patent portfolios that are relevant to one particular format, and all studios have technology strategy groups that make recommendations based on what is important to that individual studio.

For instance, Studio "A" might think that the cost of manufactured discs might be the over-riding factor in picking a format, while Studio "B" might emphasize how well available production tools integrate into production workflow. Studio "C" might want specific interactive features that can be done more easily with one format, and Studio "D" might want the best copy-protection.

Sony Pictures in unlikely to ever support HD-DVD because their corporate parent has too much invested in BD. Sony Electronics have bet the farm on two technologies for the near future: Blu-ray and PS3.

>>if all studios were neutral, HD-DVD would have won this war 3-6 months ago<<

Not realistic.

>>if all studios were neutral, HD-DVD would have won this war 3-6 months ago<<

Not realistic.

I'm not so sure. If all the studios were neutral from the start, HD-DVD would proably have an insurmountable lead...?....in the U.S. Myself, I'd of proably never bought a Blu player, in that case.

I'm not so sure. If all the studios were neutral from the start, HD-DVD would pro ably have an insurmountable lead...?....in the U.S. Myself, I'd of proably never bought a Blu player, in that case.
I can say the same. But, since the majority of the studios are supporting BD, I feel it's safe to say all it would take is Universal going BD and we'd be reading about the end of HD-DVD.

For everyones sake (other than Tos., MS, and the HD-DVD early adopters), this thing needs to end sooner than later. The longer it draws out, the worse off we all are... regardless of which side you're on.

Universal, for the love of god... please just go neutral so we can end this thing! :(

Ya gotte blame BOTH sides, not just the opposition as you see it!

I'm not so sure. If all the studios were neutral from the start, HD-DVD would proably have an insurmountable lead...?....in the U.S. Myself, I'd of proably never bought a Blu player, in that case.


It's not a realistic premise because if all the studios were truly "neutral" there would have been only one format released. It's unrealistic to think that now that two formats have been released that suddenly all the studios will go "neutral" when it was the lack of neutrality that brought us two formats in the first place.

It's not a realistic premise because if all the studios were truly "neutral" there would have been only one format released. It's unrealistic to think that now that two formats have been released that suddenly all the studios will go "neutral" when it was the lack of neutrality that brought us two formats in the first place.

You're twisting a silly hypothetical....that's all I need say.

People who want to look for a silver lining in the strengths of either format can always pull something out. MSFT is very good at writing software and this shows in this HDi/iHD (whatever that thing is) when compared to BD-J.

I don't really know what proportion of people who watch movies really go for this interactivity stuff. All the studios do think it is important. MSFT tells us it is important. The Java people tell us it is important. Apparently Universal really like the interactive stuff too.

I can't even stand the popups that slide in with the loud screech, so sometimes in these interactivity discussions, I feel like I'm Arthur Dent held captive in a room of Vogons reciting poetry on interactivity. And at least I collect and watch movies, most of these young people who push the interactivity stuff code so much that they probably haven't even watched 500 movies since they got their driver license.

I don't really know what proportion of people who watch movies really go for this interactivity stuff. All the studios do think it is important. MSFT tells us it is important. The Java people tell us it is important. Apparently Universal really like the interactive stuff too.
I think the studios feel it's important this time around to enhance the value proposition over DVD and they have decided to do this by being "big" on interactivity. I don't speak for the studios, but I believe they feel that getting "average Joe" into BD or HD DVD SOLELY on higher A/V quality will be a difficult sell for them (and/or the format could become commoditized quickly if it's just an A/V upgrade).

Well then, Universal thinks HDDVD is the superior technology (and so did Fox and Disney at first), so the answer is the same, thanks. I hope that clears things up.

I don't buy for a minute that Disney prefers MPG2 over the much more efficient VC-1.

Most of the studio's want a format that gives the consumer a reason to rebuy the movies they already own.

MPEG2 and broken Java technology isn't going to do it.

HDDVD web based technology and primary VC-1 codec is the answer to their question.

It all boils down to DRM which I agree is stronger in Blu-Ray or perceived to be.
That is all they seem to care about.

Superior tech? codec and video quality, they are the exact same.

I know I won't (and haven't) rebuy a movie I already own if there are no extras and the unrated cut isn't included (which is the case with most of Fox/MGM and Disney stuff).
Of the handful Blu-Ray discs I own, zero are Fox and Disney.


Did you even read the post you're responding to? He said Disney is in it for the more advanced codecs (AVC and VC1) at higher bitrates than is possible on HD DVD. He never said Disney was interested in mpeg2, but certainly mpeg2 has been used to do some impressive discs in addition to some not-so-impressive ones.

But his argument is still true. Disney is using the higher bitrates and LPCM to great effect on BD.

It is superior tech. More space, higher thoroughput. It is not the fault of BD that most who use VC1 use it to port from HD DVD and show no improvement at all. More studios need to take advantage of the superior specs of BD in order to prove how much finer these encodes can be with BD-only level encodes. Unfortunately, WB sees fit to make their movies only up to the LCD (HD DVD), which will always be to BD's disadvantage. It leaves you with the (mistaken) impression that BD cannot be superior to HD DVD, when that is plainly not the case.

So strange to see people obsessed with the interactive features. I wonder how many people watch more than once. I know I don't even normally watch them the once. I guess that's why BD's state of Java doesn't bother me one bit. I wouldn't use the features even if they are there. If BD's had just the movie at max'ed thoroughput, I'd be happier with the format than I'd be if it were the same as it is now except complete with the Java.

I don't buy discs for "The Making Of." I buy discs for the movies. ;) And from most people I talk to, I'm not alone.

If you didn't care about Fox and/or Disney releases, what led you to buy BluRay instead of HD DVD?

Where is the law that you have to have one?

I happily own both formats.

It is superior tech. More space, higher thoroughput. It is not the fault of BD that most who use VC1 use it to port from HD DVD and show no improvement at all. More studios need to take advantage of the superior specs of BD in order to prove how much finer these encodes can be with BD-only level encodes. Unfortunately, WB sees fit to make their movies only up to the LCD (HD DVD), which will always be to BD's disadvantage. It leaves you with the (mistaken) impression that BD cannot be superior to HD DVD, when that is plainly not the case.


Wow, more space = superior tech? I can't argue with that. Any other definitions I need to change to follow that logic?

I guess since PCM lossless takes up so much more space than Dolby HD, it must be the more advanced sound codec.

I never said BD can't be superior, the video and sound output (what matters most) should be exactly the same, but you can't argue that the Blu-Ray interactive system isn't broken.

Where is Batman Begins, Troy, and T3 on Blu-Ray? Is it just a coincendence they haven't been released yet?

I guess it is the superior technology that makes Lionsgate put 2 versions of the film on a Blu-Ray disc so it can do the same PIP that HDDVD does in its sleep.

To show I'm not a format basher, I purchased the Blu-Ray version of The Departed because the extras were the same and I hate the abomination that is "Combo Discs".

You can buy vinyl fencing at Home Depot and Lowes for a low price.
What they don't tell you is that the material is inferior and that the fence is not as good as the Bufftech product. But. Since its Home Depot... People go ahead and buy it with the assumption that its a great deal and product.

Blu Ray is Home Depot. You have a 50/50 chance of picking up a movie with a good transfer and have to go under the assumption that if its Sony...its good.

You can go sell crazy somewhere else! We are all stocked up here.

And word is that Sony was originally pushing for iHD in the Blu-ray spec, but it was voted down by the BDA in spite of that.That word is wrong. Sony never broadly supported iHD (do you think they wanted the PS3 dependent on a largely Microsoft-created platform?). That's not to say they strongly supported BD-J, but they weren't supporting iHD.

MSFT is very good at writing softwareMany, many people here will disagree with you on that point.
and this shows in this HDi/iHD (whatever that thing is) when compared to BD-J.Perhaps if you take a very short-term view, as in which technology has a shorter learning curve for creating fairly trivial applications. If BD-J were only shooting for the same level of flexibility as iHD you'd likely see similar content being created today. The fact is BD-J is intended to support a far greater range of applications, and as such it is taking longer for the authoring community to become proficient in it.