Everyone in the media says End one so the other can survive.
Why? Why cant both survive?
Would the world of Home video suddenly explode into a fire ball or something?
I like both and both camps get my hard earned money, so what the harm in both?

The reasons are all pretty shallow. Some people will post here in a little bit to give them to you, but they really aren't all that good.

For example, we shouldn't care if it takes up a little extra retail space. They already have widescreen and full screen dvds, plus millions of other duplicate products for different device formats. This would be just another.

And the studios have shown that they will support small formats if they reach a certain threshold. UMD would have been supported, even if it was a secondary format. And they will be making online versions of their movies, and versions for broadcast. So the fact that they have yet another version to support shouldn't stop them.

All of this leads me to believe we have a format war simply because we like competition and wars, and we want to see one thing beat something else. Otherwise, there's no real reason that both formats couldn't live side by side.

I believe they could, and it would be better for consumers in the long run, but the sycophants have to think they won something.

They can, and most likely will coexist. I have no problem with that. If someone else starts making combo players, they will coexist for quite a while.
J

When political correctness and idiocy meet technology....

The mass majority of people will not buy into next-gen unless there is one true winner.
They wont buy anything if there are two competing formats for fear of picking the wrong format. If that happens both formats will die off because lack of interest.

It’s one of the main reasons why Microsoft is trying to keep HD-DVD alive. Kill off disks and make digital downloads the only way to get HD video.

When political correctness and idiocy meet technology....

The mass majority of people will not buy into next-gen unless there one true winner.
They wont buy anything if there are two competing formats for fear of picking the wrong format. If that happens both formats will die off because lack of interest.

It’s one of the main reasons why Microsoft is trying to keep HD-DVD alive. Kill off disks and make digital downloads the only way to get HD video.

They haven't had that problem with PS/PS2/PS3/Xbox/Xbox360/Wii/NES/NS/N64, AM/FM, or Sirius/XM, plus these discs will play in the same box. Let manufacturers step up to the plate, not consumers.

They can and will co-exist. Everyone seems to like to compare it to VHS and Betamax, well, that's proof that they can co-exist. Betamax didn't really die until the last players rolled off the assembly line in 2002, right around the same time that DVD production started to take off. VHS didn't kill Betamax, DVD did, just like it did to VHS. The better comparison would be SACD and DVD-A, both exist just fine, but both never left the small niche of enthusiasts. That's what will happen with both optical HD formats.

They will until Universal goes neutral.

They already have widescreen and full screen dvds,

At one point, weren't stores carrying Wide screen Laserdisc, Full screen Laserdisc, Widescreen DVD, Full screen DVD, and VHS simultaneously? And the answer is yes, both formats can co-exist, but most likely they will be niche formats like Laserdisc was, so prices won't get real cheap, and while selections will be there for blockbusters and well-known catalog titles, it won't be as large as DVD since it won't have the same wide appeal.

VHS didn't kill Betamax, DVD didWhat are you smoking? :rolleyes:

I actually happen to think competition is good. Do all these BR fanboys that wish HD-DVD would be dead so that only BR remains really think they would have obtained the PQ and prices they get now if it wasn't for the competition ?

I personally don't think that the studios being in Sony's camp is a good long term strategy if Sony ends up crushing HD-DVD. I know there will be fanboys coming in here to tell me BDA is not Sony, but the fact remains that they own quite a few patents on BR and also that PS3 and BR are in the same boat.

Sony is a competing movie studio and already owns MGM, thereby making it the content provider, replicator (Sony DADC), patent owner, and ultimately the all-out "king" of the format. That's another reason why I think it would actually be better for consumers/retailers if we end up with a situation closer to the DVD+R/-R situation, to keep things in check.

I actually happen to think competition is good. Do all these BR fanboys that wish HD-DVD would be dead so that only BR remains really think they would have obtained the PQ and prices they get now if it wasn't for the competition ?

I personally don't think that the studios being in Sony's camp is a good long term strategy if Sony ends up crushing HD-DVD. I know there will be fanboys coming in here to tell me BDA is not Sony, but the fact remains that they own quite a few patents on BR and also that PS3 and BR are in the same boat.

Sony is a competing movie studio and already owns MGM, thereby making it the content provider, replicator (Sony DADC), patent owner, and ultimately the all-out "king" of the format. That's another reason why I think it would actually be better for consumers/retailers if we end up with a situation closer to the DVD+R/-R situation, to keep things in check.

Forgot about that and Windows/Mac.

I guess I was just wondering why the masses hate the fact that two could stand , Im happy with both. I am lucky and so are you all for being able to afford the technology to play both . Some of my friends, co-workers , family say that wont buy because they cant even afford a HD TV yet!
I JUST DONT see any harm in having two formats if the studio's will put ALL movies out one one formate or the other.
Just MOP.
Thanks for answering everybody BTW.

I guess I was just woundering why the masses hate the fact that two could stand , Im happy with both. I am lucky and so are you all for being able to aford the technoigy to play both . Some of my friends,co-workers , family say that wont buy because they cant even aford a HD TV yet!
I JUST DONT see any harm in having two formates if the studio's will put ALL movies out one one formate or the other.
Just MOP.
Thanks for answering everybody BTW.
The masses don't even know about this crap. :(

I think they can and will as well. Both sides are still in the denial phase where they believe they can actually win such a war and frankly it is in their best interest to fight for position. Sooner or later they will have to realize that they have to lie in the bed that they made. IMO both will survive, or a settlement to combine will have to be reached. With each passing month the latter seems less and less likely (especially as the cost to do so rises with respect to not alienating so many strong supporting early adopters).

Both sides have different attributes that can be argued as promising. The amusing thing is that by going in two different directions they have left so much value on the table that they will never get back. A race to the bottom on the hardware side was probably not in anyone's game plan when they started to design these formats.

I actually happen to think competition is good. Do all these BR fanboys that wish HD-DVD would be dead so that only BR remains really think they would have obtained the PQ and prices they get now if it wasn't for the competition ?

DVD sure did fine.

I don't see why they can't. Some people seem to NEED one format to die so they can say they were right about which one was better.

There is only one factor which would allow both formats to coexist:

Dual format players have to be the norm.

If this were to happen, neutral studios could select their format of choice, and consumers wouldn't be left guessing as to which format has the best version of the film. No matter if the case was blue or red, the consumer could buy the disc and pop it in their machine.

There is only one problem in the creation of this utopia: PS3. The PS3 is the highest owned Blu-ray player, and it will never be dual format. Even if all CE companies decided to release dual format players tomorrow, it would take years before their numbers could catch up with PS3. And that is why a dual format player can never be the norm, and thus, both formats can not coexist.

There are far more DVD players than PS2s, so I don't see that as an issue. The HDDVD group needs to do their part too. They need to allow for region coding on discs. That should guarantee that Disney and almost all animation becomes the standard for HDDVD.

While they CAN co-exist, it's simply a waste of money for both consumers and firms. Why spend money on making dual players if single players could suffice? And sure, stores can stock both BD and HD, but each of them will be less profitable than a single format, so the joint set of titles will be smaller than if there were a unified format.

The issue is not whether they can co-exist, but at what cost in terms of more expensive players and a smaller selection of movies.

They can, they do, and they will.

Formats this small and efficient don't have to die the way laser and Beta did, the irony seems to be that the closer a format is to it's competitor, the better chance it has of co-existing.

If one fades it will be long after universal players have rendered it a non-issue.

HD is destined for niche status because DVD is dirt-cheap to release content to and because downloads are going to shrink (not dry up) movies-on-disk in general. The only chance it has of completely replacing DVD is very slow, very consumer friendly transition.

I don't think retail stores are going to carp about duo-format stocking, at least they shouldn't since they have steadily pushed all non mass-appeal content out anyway.

To get interesting HD on disk titles you'll have to go to places like DDD and Amazon.

There is a whole thread devoted to why having and supporting 2 formats is a bad thing:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=817149

Read that thread for the details, but the gist of the argument is that the format competition is costing consumers more money in the end while offering little to no gain. The idea that the format competition is good for consumers is a myth at this point: all the benefits of the format competition were gained the day both formats hit the shelves back in 2006. The normal benefits of competition (increased quality and lowered price) are accomplished by competition within a format, not between. Observe:

What is more likely to cause Sony to drop the price of the BD player: a $400 Toshiba HD DVD player or a $400 Toshiba BD player?

What is more likely to cause Fox to add features and reduce the cost of their discs: Universal showing huge sales for doing just that on HD DVD, or Universal showing huge sales on Blu-ray?

The studios and manufacturers compete with each other within a format. The "extra" competition is not really needed (anymore).

Rock-bottom prices (like we see currently with DVD) are due to economies of scale. If the two formats co-exist we automatically cut that down the middle. Essentially, in that case HD disc becomes the new Laserdisc. If one format becomes the standard, that format becomes the new DVD. Which would you rather have?

Plus, having two players that do the same thing just to play different content makes the home video market turn into the video game market. Do we, or especially J6P, really want that?

Sony is a competing movie studio and already owns MGM...Sony doesn't own MGM. If they did I doubt they would have allowed Fox to take over distribution for MGM. Sony owns a relatively small portion of MGM (I've heard around 20%). Not enough to keep the majority from taking distribution away from Sony, like they did.


As far as the subject of the thread, the competition definitely has its advantages, and its negatives. I would personally like to see HD DVD add the TL51 disc support with 1.5x spin rate. If they do I think that will be a direct result of the competition. Probably stating the obvious, but the biggest problem right now is that people can't buy one reasonable player and get all the content. If they could then there wouldn't be nearly as many complaints about the war.

--Darin

There is a whole thread devoted to why having and supporting 2 formats is a bad thing:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=817149

Read that thread for the details, but the gist of the argument is that the format competition is costing consumers more money in the end while offering little to no gain. The idea that the format competition is good for consumers is a myth at this point: all the benefits of the format competition were gained the day both formats hit the shelves back in 2006. The normal benefits of competition (increased quality and lowered price) are accomplished by competition within a format, not between. Observe:

What is more likely to cause Sony to drop the price of the BD player: a $400 Toshiba HD DVD player or a $400 Toshiba BD player?

What is more likely to cause Fox to add features and reduce the cost of their discs: Universal showing huge sales for doing just that on HD DVD, or Universal showing huge sales on Blu-ray?

The studios and manufacturers compete with each other within a format. The "extra" competition is not really needed (anymore).

Rock-bottom prices (like we see currently with DVD) are due to economies of scale. If the two formats co-exist we automatically cut that down the middle. Essentially, in that case HD disc becomes the new Laserdisc. If one format becomes the standard, that format becomes the new DVD. Which would you rather have?

Plus, having two players that do the same thing just to play different content makes the home video market turn into the video game market. Do we, or especially J6P, really want that?

Excellent summary.

They would get Fox too, assuming AACS actually fixes the cracking issue.

As Amir stated today, Region coding had nothing to do with Fox's decision to back bluray.

The unspoken reason why Fox backs bluray is simply the success of the PS2. That's really it. Nothing more than that.

And to answer the OP, the reason they can't coexist is simply because Sony doesn't want them to. And Sony (maker of much of the digital cameras used in movie production) has been strong arming their tyrannical will in this fight for over a year now.

They haven't had that problem with PS/PS2/PS3/Xbox/Xbox360/Wii/NES/NS/N64, AM/FM, or Sirius/XM, plus these discs will play in the same box. Let manufacturers step up to the plate, not consumers.

Since you brought up PS2... PS2 was the far dominant console because of the sheer number of exclusive titles compared to its competitors. This is the situation that hd dvd is looking at. not only that, hd dvd doesnt have the chance to reset the clock and start all over again like consoles do whenever there is a new generation. Imagine if PS2 was the last console ever built...sure xbox and gamecube would coexist, but it would be a marginal existance at best.

For both to coexist, one of two things have to happen.

1) All studios release all movies on BOTH formats at the same time for the same price.
2) There are affordable players that play both formats.

Until the typical consumer can walk into the store and buy their favorite movie in high-def regardless of format neither will achieve true success. There aren't enough people out there who want to buy equipment that won't play half the movies they want to watch.

There's a thing called standard, and there's a thing called variety.

People want more variety, but they want one standard. Don't get mixed up.

As Amir stated today, Region coding had nothing to do with Fox's decision to back bluray.

The unspoken reason why Fox backs bluray is simply the success of the PS2. That's really it. Nothing more than that.From a 2005 article, http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050810-5194.htmlSony, Disney, and now News Corp's Twentieth Century Fox have all committed to Blu-ray, and have no plans to sell HD DVD products. Sony gained Twentieth Century Fox just last week when the Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) reportedly agreed to add watermarking technology to the spec.Personally, I don't believe anything Amir says.

Sony doesn't own MGM. If they did I doubt they would have allowed Fox to take over distribution for MGM. Sony owns a relatively small portion of MGM (I've heard around 20%). Not enough to keep the majority from taking distribution away from Sony, like they did.

--Darin


Sony needed investors to wrangle MGM from falling into Warner Brothers hands, Fox was a huge investor. When Sony began to botch SD releasing of MGM titles so the board that supported the acquisition insisted FOX take the reins.

I can't tell how loud a groan was let out by movie buffs when the best studio for catalog titles (Warner) lost the bid to the worst (Sony/FOX).

Ironically most of MGM's library does rest in Warner's hands when they bought out Ted Turner. A big chunk of what MGM had to sell was Orion's previous holdings, which included American International, and Filmways.

A better question might be: Why do people want HD and BD to coexist ?

A better question might be: Why do people want HD and BD to coexist ?
For me because I have already spent $1100 for a A2 & PS3.

And to answer the OP, the reason they can't coexist is simply because Sony doesn't want them to. That's not what the studios and retailers say.
And Sony (maker of much of the digital cameras used in movie production) has been strong arming their tyrannical will in this fight for over a year now.Nice try, but you're woefully misinformed. Sony's digital movie cameras aren't popular because of marketing, they're popular because of long-standing relationships with directors and producers. Lucas and Spielberg have a decades-long history with Sony, and there are other directors (like Rodriguez) who have raved about the ease and responsiveness of working with Sony on films. Not only that, at least one of the Blu-ray exclusive studios and one of the neutral studios is larger and more profitable than Sony. It's hard to strongarm someone who's in a better position than you.

From a 2005 article, http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050810-5194.htmlPersonally, I don't believe anything Amir says.


Oh well, another thread drifts off-topic into Amir-bashing land.

It is however a good example of how vitriolic the those who insist BD must stand alone are.

The unspoken reason why Fox backs bluray is simply the success of the PS2.

How many games has Fox sold?

When political correctness and idiocy meet technology....

The mass majority of people will not buy into next-gen unless there is one true winner.
They wont buy anything if there are two competing formats for fear of picking the wrong format. If that happens both formats will die off because lack of interest.

It’s one of the main reasons why Microsoft is trying to keep HD-DVD alive. Kill off disks and make digital downloads the only way to get HD video.

I don't get this reasoning, keep it alive but just enough so it fails? How exactly are they supposed to do that when they are not responsible for content? They made the codec and put support for it in Vista, what would you expect them to do? Put a new, as yet, unestablished blue laser drive in the xbox360? That would certainly make them sell lots of consoles...
Its Universal, Warner and Paramount who will 'let it die', if anyone is going to. Unless you are one of these people that believe Sony are secretly handing over suitcases of cash to studios.
Microsoft would make money on the license for the codec whether it was downloaded or sold on disc.

A better question might be: Why do people want HD and BD to coexist ?

Because they bought HD DVD and don't want to see their investment as waisted.

IMHO its similar to Republicans preaching bi-partisanship now, after six years of insane partisanship.

From a 2005 article, http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050810-5194.htmlPersonally, I don't believe anything Amir says.

Are watermarking and region coding the same thing? I though the were separate forms of security. I read the article an see nothing in specifically mentioning region coding.

It's an interesting question. But isn't it the bestbuys and walmarts and studios that said they don't want two formats?

--------------

Are watermarking and region coding the same thing? I though the were separate forms of security. I read the article an see nothing in specifically mentioning region coding.

As I understand it, all BD-rom has to have a watermark that can be traced back to the pressing house. All BD players will also not play any BD-rom without watermarking. In the event a pressing house moonlights and pirates a shipment of BD disks, the offending pressing house can be identified and investigated.

Watermarking seems to be a fair mechanism since it is unobstrusive and should not affect the end user in anyway. Unless it is cracked, it is a big deterrent to the well organized piracy rings.

----

Region coding is because some studios still sell their movies to cinemas in obscure places more than a year after they stop in the major markets. It's kind of bizarre, but I think the money they make off the small markets' theatres must be very small, so I don't quite know why Fox wants to do this, the extra revenue is likely tiny.

Are watermarking and region coding the same thing? I though the were separate forms of security. I read the article an see nothing in specifically mentioning region coding.From: http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=15194
...the ROM Mark 'guards against mass production piracy or the mass duplication and sale of unauthorised copies of pre-recorded media' and also confirms that a digital signature is buried in the recording which can identify whether an individual disc was pressed from an authorised glass master.

Although every machine used to laser-cut a master disc is theoretically the same, the motor that spins the blank disc and moves the laser along a spiral track varies slightly in speed and precision. So if a digital marker is put in the middle of a recording, e.g. after exactly 60 minutes, its physical position on the master disc - and every disc then pressed - will be a unique fingerprint of the cutting machine.

The new system also buries some digital code on the disc which describes where the marker should be for the machine that created the master disc, for instance 25% round the thousandth turn of the spiral track. A modified player used by Customs checks the described position with the actual position. If they match, the disc is genuine. If they don't, the disc is a fake pressing.

To beat the system, pirates would have to reverse engineer the entire marker description and check process - which they are unlikely to have the time, expertise or money to do.

Because they bought HD DVD and don't want to see their investment as waisted.

IMHO its similar to Republicans preaching bi-partisanship now, after six years of insane partisanship.

I actually prefer HD DVD, I think it is what is best for HD, and I admire it's economy. I'm not heavily invested financially, but when I look at the parties involved and their track records with SD, I'm even more swayed.

However, people want BD for their own sets of priorities, and I don't think they should have to abandon them either. Especially when there are hardware solutions.

Oh well, another thread drifts off-topic into Amir-bashing land.

It is however a good example of how vitriolic the those who insist BD must stand alone are. So you believe that 'region coding had nothing to do with Fox's decision to back bluray' as Amir stated? His statement is not accurate. The reason for Fox supporting Blu-ray has been very well documented and widely reported. I commented on the veracity of Amir's statement which was raised here regarding Blu-ray and quite frankly I don't believe him.

"A lie of omission is a method of deception and duplicity that uses the technique of simply remaining silent when speaking the truth would significantly alter the other person's capacity to make an informed decision." - http://mataliandy.blogspot.com/2004/09/fact-vs-truth-lies-of-omission.html

They can't co-exist because the "average joe" market won't accept 3 different formats. The AVS early adopter crowd in the long run is only maybe 1% of the overall market.

DVD is here for another 5 years minimum.

Maybe then Blu-Ray or HD-DVD can build an audience as a secondary/higher end format in addition to DVD, sort of the way CDs slowly built up their market for years while co-existing with regular cassette tapes.

But only one of them will do that. You won't have two alternative formats, I just don't believe it can work. It's overkill, it causes consumer confusion and ultimately frustration and retailers don't like it either. It didn't work for MiniDisc, Super Audio CD and DVD-Audio killed each other because neither could establish itself as a dominant format.

So you believe that 'region coding had nothing to do with Fox's decision to back bluray' as Amir stated? His statement is not accurate. The reason for Fox supporting Blu-ray has been very well documented and widely reported. I commented on the veracity of Amir's statement which was raised here regarding Blu-ray and quite frankly I don't believe him. http://mataliandy.blogspot.com/2004/09/fact-vs-truth-lies-of-omission.html


I know they co-own a great deal of intellectual property now, and I know FOX is hyper-concerned about piracy (foolishly so).

But I have to say when people start to tack this guys hide to the wall for whatever reason my eyes just glaze over. Were all big boys and girls, we all know you have to skeptical about what reps and thinly veiled partisans say from either party. As in politics we often give a pass to those who spin to our liking and nail those who don't.

Why let so many threads degenerate into character assassination? Isn't it enough to respectfully disagree and state why?

Both formats could co-exist, but no one should want them to. Ok, maybe MSFT does, but no one else.

Why? The studios and hardware companies want there to be one format because otherwise it will slow the rate of adoption. Whether you personally think two formats are a good idea or not, market testing shows that for movie delivery people are less likely to buy during a format war. We actually saw this on a smaller scale with DVD+/-R (and CDR+/-R) where they didn't see nearly as significant of market penetration until one format won (CD-R) or combo drives became prevalen (DVD+/-R). Of course this format war has been better publicized, and more consumers are aware of it. Hence, more will be afraid to adopt it until one format dies. This isn't just mass consumer hysteria; remember that BD and HD DVD are competing against the installed user base of DVD. The advantages of both formats are a lot less attractive when you have to give up a format that everything comes out on to pick one that doesn't (or worse, buy two machines that are more expensive). Also, in real life people don't usually have giant equipment racks to put lots of players in, that's why people prefer to have one machine. Heck, that's why I wish Denon or someon had made a Blu Ray player that played DVDA and SACD.

That's bad for everyone, but there's actually a good reason why you should personally want one format to die; unless combo players become the norm (which is pretty rare in these situations, DVD+/-R aside) then we will never see the shear amount of titles released to DVD be released on HD optical media. Ever. The cost of releasing will either always be higher (to relese to both formats) or have a smaller user base (if you are exclusive to either format) and hence it will not be cost effective to release smaller-run niche titles. And I want my jazzercising to the oldies on Blu Ray now! Ok, but I actually would like for all of my Discovery Channel documentaries to be available in HD, and the smaller titles in particular will never be released unless one format wins and the other one dies (assuming the winning one replaced dvd).

So the only reason I can imagine why someone would want both formats to survive is if their chosen format is losing and they don't want to let go, or if your company strategy is to prevent the widespread adoption of a replacement for DVD so you can migrate everyone faster to, say... downloaded media.

Padriac's summary is excellent because it deals with the fact that format competition partitions the market in such a way that meaningful competition cannot occur.

There is another point: use cases.

Multiple formats can exist when they have different use cases. For example, 8 track tapes and LP records were used in very different ways: 8 track in cars, LP's in homes. It was virtually impossible for LP's to be used in cars (although it has been done)! Other examples include LP and 45rpm records.

In the case of Blu-ray and HD DVD, there are no significantly different use cases. In fact, in many ways the formats have both been engineered to have exactly the same use cases.

The implication is that the customer recognizes that he really only needs one of the formats. Either would be good to go. Further, the customer instinctively realizes (and has been told at every turn by mainstream press) that only one will survive.

So he waits.

The fact that the customer is waiting is messing us all up in terms of getting the titles, features, and prices that we all want.

A better question might be: Why do people want HD and BD to coexist ?

Basically people who have invested heavily in HD DVD and now have realized Blu-ray at best won't go away and at worse (for them), will outright win the war thus nulling their heavy investment. Some HD DVD supporters are seeing the writing on the walls and they are hoping for the next best thing ...coexistence.

They cannot coexist in the long run because economically BD is not a viable format. Their only option is to kill HD DVD and get back to 5th Element quality titles....check out some of the recent Fox releases for a sample of qualitative regression.

BD cannot cost effectively produce top quality content, HD DVD can. Hence why BD wants no benchmark higher better than DVD to compete against qualitatively. Goal of BDA is to give you slightly better than SD at twice the price and more content protection. If that is what you want because you spent $600 on a PS3, all power to you :)

Bottomline is that is not for Amir, people here would be talking about how House of Flying Daggers is reference quality. Sony wants to get back there in a hurry. Don't help them....for heavens sake!

A vote for BD exclusivity is a vote for a future with SD, in my books ;)

Most people HD DVD investment does not exceed a cost of a couple of days vacation in DC!

Not a big deal in terms of cost. But certainly a big deal for those who don't want to regress.

The fact that the customer is waiting is messing us all up in terms of getting the titles, features, and prices that we all want.

The customer has been waiting on HDTV for close to a decade, and were still only at a 30% penetration. It's had a lot to do with price, and a lot to do with simply not caring until they have to.

Now when people need a new set, they probably go HD because it makes sense to them, but DVD will play on them, so even to some HDTV owners it's seen as a superfluous expense.

If as many state the format war is over, well then I guess there is no worry, and such claims should lend the confidence to go out and buy. Obviously it's not, and I don't even see why this is crucial until the big switcharoo in 09. By then hybrids may be in an acceptable price rage rendering this argument moot.

Goal of BDA is to give you slightly better than SD at twice the price and more content protection. If that is what you want because you spent $600 on a PS3, all power to you :)

I agree, and again you need look no further than how these companies have performed on DVD to make such a prediction. I think there is a degree of blind idealism about what HD media can be VS what it's actually likely to be in the wrong hands.

Even if Universal put out fabulous looking BDs, if FOX and Sony continue with sloppy overpriced releases because they think it's all sewn up, we lose. The average consumer will never separate these entities in their mind, they will just hear the format is very hit-and-miss, then opt out.

Studios and corporations don't change their spots to stripes without massive overhauls or someone cracking the competition whip.

BD cannot cost effectively produce top quality content, HD DVD can. Hence why BD wants no benchmark higher better than DVD to compete against qualitatively. Goal of BDA is to give you slightly better than SD at twice the price and more content protection. If that is what you want because you spent $600 on a PS3, all power to you.

This is the nuttiest thing I have read in a long time. The extra cost of QC to make a good encode is minimal compared to other costs in the production of media for either format, and the cost of encoding is indentical, since both formats support the same codecs. How on earth can it be more costly to produce a high quality BD than a high quality HD DVD?

Fox has produced some phenominal BDs, and some stinkers. The same is true for Universal and HD DVD. The MI3 HD DVD in VC-1 looks worse than the BD. It all comes down to how companies treat their media in production, and that will be true regardless of who wins the format war (or if niether does).

I agree, and again you need look no further than how these companies have performed on DVD to make such a prediction. I think there is a degree of blind idealism about what HD media can be VS what it's actually likely to be in the wrong hands.

This is silly; if HD DVD wins then by your logic Sony and Fox will simply put out shoddy HD DVDs. Either way, the point is that both formats coexisting is far worse for us as consumers than a single clear winner.

VC-1 has already shown that it can look just as bad as HD mpeg2 encodes. Worse, MS seems more interested in maximizing efficiency (hmm, what other use would lower-bandwidth movies have for them..?) than in maintaining transparency to the master. The early releases were pretty close to flawless, but now they seem more concerned with testing what the market will accept in their endless pursuit of squeezing files sizes to prep movies for internet dowloads.

Compare any major DVD released in the last year with an release from 1997 and tell me with a straight face that movie encoding has suffered due to lack of competition. Even with one format companies will want to make their releases (and rereleases) ever better looking (and sounding) so they have marketing claims to justify yur financial outlay for more software. The best way to ensure the most and best looking HD movies is for one format to win, period.

The customer has been waiting on HDTV for close to a decade, and were still only at a 30% penetration.I wonder what it would have been if some tuners could only get ABC-HD, CBS-HD, and FOX-HD, while others could only get CBS-HD, FOX-HD, and NBC-HD, among the majors, and the only one that could get all of them was expensive and left out some key features.

--Darin

Most people HD DVD investment does not exceed a cost of a couple of days vacation in DC!

Not a big deal in terms of cost. But certainly a big deal for those who don't want to regress.

Unfortunately not all early adopters are in the same financial boat as you are nor the same perception of value.

They cannot coexist in the long run because economically BD is not a viable format. Their only option is to kill HD DVD and get back to 5th Element quality titles....check out some of the recent Fox releases for a sample of qualitative regression.

BD cannot cost effectively produce top quality content, HD DVD can. Hence why BD wants no benchmark higher better than DVD to compete against qualitatively. Goal of BDA is to give you slightly better than SD at twice the price and more content protection. If that is what you want because you spent $600 on a PS3, all power to you :)

Bottomline is that is not for Amir, people here would be talking about how House of Flying Daggers is reference quality. Sony wants to get back there in a hurry. Don't help them....for heavens sake!

A vote for BD exclusivity is a vote for a future with SD, in my books ;)

What is the evidence for this?

Warners, for example, is pressing identical VC-1 byte strings onto Blu-ray and HD DVD disks. They look identical. Warners further claims that they can press the THD disks with BOTH formats and that the price is not materially different.

I find the claim that BD cannot be economically viable to be quite incredible.

I wonder what it would have been if some tuners could only get ABC-HD, CBS-HD, and FOX-HD, while others could only get CBS-HD, FOX-HD, and NBC-HD, among the majors, and the only one that could get all of them was expensive and left out some key features.

--Darin

I'm afraid I'm not qualified to answer, my LCD projector of five years is HD, but my TVs are not. I will probably use a converter until my primary set poops. I just never cared if the hour broadcast TV I watch daily is, or isn't HD.

'Iger says the HDTV DVD business will not take off until a clear winner emerges.'

http://www.tvpredictions.com/iger030707.htm

ken

A few of you need to ask Amir if he'd be willing to get a room to help you "work" through your obsession. ;)

Because there is no benefit to utility.

'Iger says the HDTV DVD business will not take off until a clear winner emerges.'

http://www.tvpredictions.com/iger030707.htm

ken

Sure he does, it's no secret that BD supporters are more interested in a kill than HD DVD supporters.

I don't want that thar blu-ray runnin all loose and crazy-like on it's own.

Bottomline is that is not for Amir, people here would be talking about how House of Flying Daggers is reference quality. Sony wants to get back there in a hurry. Don't help them....for heavens sake!

A vote for BD exclusivity is a vote for a future with SD, in my books ;)

And if BD dies, then Sony somehow magically puts out something better on HD DVD? And if HD DVD dies, then Universal somehow magically puts out something worse on BD?

Nothing about either format changes the quality demands of any given studio. If Sony's end goal is substandard product, then its going to be substandard no matter what happens. There is little about the particular format used that makes a major difference there.

Gary

They cannot coexist in the long run because economically BD is not a viable format. Their only option is to kill HD DVD and get back to 5th Element quality titles....check out some of the recent Fox releases for a sample of qualitative regression.

BD cannot cost effectively produce top quality content, HD DVD can. Hence why BD wants no benchmark higher better than DVD to compete against qualitatively. Goal of BDA is to give you slightly better than SD at twice the price and more content protection. If that is what you want because you spent $600 on a PS3, all power to you :)

Bottomline is that is not for Amir, people here would be talking about how House of Flying Daggers is reference quality. Sony wants to get back there in a hurry. Don't help them....for heavens sake!

A vote for BD exclusivity is a vote for a future with SD, in my books ;)

If the goal of the BDA was to give us a substandard product then why are Disney and Sony knocking all of the transfers out of the park these days. Before you mention HoFD and TFE, just take a look at any calender (I recommend the one in your Windows taskbar) and you will see it is March 2007, not July 2006.

While Amir deserves credit for keeping HD DVD competitive, it is hardly fair to say that he is responsible for BDs recent strong showing, I would say it was SCEA myself.

They cannot coexist in the long run because economically BD is not a viable format.
...
A vote for BD exclusivity is a vote for a future with SD, in my books ;)

plazman,

The simple fact is that amir and the other HD DVD insiders may have been sincere in their belief that BD-50 is not economical to produce, but after all the evidence is available today, it should be clear that well meaning though HD DVD insiders can be in warning about the incredible high costs of manufacturing BD25 and BD50, the per unit delta has been verified by lots of people to be minimal for BD and HDDVD.

So amir could believe with all his heart that his numbers are correct enough to convince a lot of people. But hightech is not static, manufacturing processes do continue to improve, and cost curves continue to be driven down.

In some cases new inventions for creation of BD masters could actually be very useful for DVD manufacturing too, and factories WILL retool if the numbers makes sense even if they may only make DVDs.

I think this assumption that costs are constant for the player side since day one should be examined carefully. The same BRCM chip that drives the HD-A1 can actually be used on BD players, and these players are not using some pentium chip. Meaning outside of the optical drive, the BD player itself may be cheaper.

Remember that the PS3 has crossed 2M units, this is when economies of scale and improvement in the manufacturing process kicks in for the optical drive components, including that infamous blue laser pickup assembly.

I think the costs will be comparable. The question is only whether the CE manufacturers should be allowed to recoup their R&D that goes into their box. Apparently MSFT says no.

---

And as for the authoring costs. Well, MSFT gives away PEP right? I mean that's like saying buying adobe Photoshop is too expensive because a souped up Paintbrush is free in Windows. The same business model behind IE that others could not compete against because there is nothing cheaper than free.

And if BD dies, then Sony somehow magically puts out something better on HD DVD? And if HD DVD dies, then Universal somehow magically puts out something worse on BD?

Gary

Why reward the people doing the crappiest job?

I feel like were frequently asked to turn a blind eye iffy-looking disks and a pricier format variant that is never finished, just because the BD camp cut some shrewd deals before they went to market. Nuts to that.

No format and no company should be given a free pass. Those who see banding in HD DVD, but not in BD are demonstrating their bias more than their expert credentials. IMHO. Fortunately, on my 50 inch plasma bot formats look good. I don't have a problem with BD's current quality. However, I do have a problem with their business practice. To each his own....

after all the evidence is available today, it should be clear that well meaning though HD DVD insiders can be in warning about the incredible high costs of manufacturing BD25 and BD50, the per unit delta has been verified by lots of people to be minimal for BD and HDDVD.

This isn't still based on that one guy's blog who did some cold-calling a month ago is it?

No format and no company should be given a free pass. Those who see banding in HD DVD, but not in BD are demonstrating their bias more than their expert credentials. IMHO. Fortunately, on my 50 inch plasma bot formats look good. I don't have a problem with BD's current quality. However, I do have a problem with their business practice. To each his own....


I've gotta go on reviews, which I know need scrutiny themselves.

The reviews of BD disks I read are for the titles I could actually see myself owning some day, and honestly it bugs me equally to see bad BD reviews as it does HD DVD reviews, because some day I'll probably have both.

These disks have to be looking noticeably better than DVD, or like most, I won't upgrade them.

If the goal of the BDA was to give us a substandard product then why are Disney and Sony knocking all of the transfers out of the park these days. Before you mention HoFD and TFE, just take a look at any calender (I recommend the one in your Windows taskbar) and you will see it is March 2007, not July 2006.

American Psycho, the BD I want the most.

Who besides Sony is pressing 50GB disks for studios?

As of right now I don't Know. In the future that may change.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=9985120&&#post9985120

Sony DADC will work with Oerlikon and Singulus in order to offer independent disc manufacturers the technology and equipment for 50-GB Blu-ray Discs.

Sony DADC will provide its wet embossing technique for replication, which has been already applied in the company's plants in Europe, the U.S. and Japan. Sony will particularly disclose process technology and testing inspection technology for the BD-50 format, in an effort to accelerate the availability of BD-50 amongst commercial replicators.

Let us remember that DAT, DCC, D-Theater and Laserdisc were single formats.

Why reward the people doing the crappiest job?


The job being done is a matter of opinion. Do you own Blu-ray? If you don't how are you judging the crappy or not crappy of Blu-ray? (Please, for goodness sake, let's not go back to June 2006 again here).

You see people complaining about the quality of some Warner releases on BD. These are identical on HD DVD, yet somehow they are not crappy on HD DVD?

Does this all come down to Universal and only Universal versus all the other studios and turning that into a format issue (conveniently ignoring Warner and Paramount in the process)?


I feel like were frequently asked to turn a blind eye iffy-looking disks and a pricier format variant that is never finished, just because the BD camp cut some shrewd deals before they went to market. Nuts to that.

And TL51, single sided combos, and HD DVD-RW are all hallmarks of a completed format variant?

Gary

The job being done is a matter of opinion. Do you own Blu-ray? If you don't how are you judging the crappy or not crappy of Blu-ray? (Please, for goodness sake, let's not go back to June 2006 again here).

You see people complaining about the quality of some Warner releases on BD. These are identical on HD DVD, yet somehow they are not crappy on HD DVD?

Does this all come down to Universal and only Universal versus all the other studios and turning that into a format issue (conveniently ignoring Warner and Paramount in the process)?

And TL51, single sided combos, and HD DVD-RW are all hallmarks of a completed format variant?

Gary

I own both formats and I agree with Timothy on both points.

"Crappy" is a matter of opinion certainly, but I have largely been disappointed with BD from the start... mostly because of lack of extras, but as whole I think BD has been lots of promises and very little delivery. Why are so many BD releases still BD25? When they are on BD25, why do so many still use MPEG2? PCM is nice audio, but they could use lossless compression and use that extra space for more productive things. Where are all the interactive features that are supposed to be available?

Triple Layer 51 is not part of the HD DVD spec. Assuming it gets finalized & approved, it's an enhancement to the spec, just as BD75, BD100 or BD200 would be if they are ever produced.

Single sided combos have never shown up, and HD-DVD ROM or RW as a whole has pretty much been a no-show - so I agree on those points. In terms of pre-recorded HD content though, I think HD DVD has overall, done a far, far better job.

In terms of pre-recorded HD content though, I think HD DVD has overall, done a far, far better job.

an entire month with no content to purchase...yeah, :rolleyes: ....

an entire month with no content to purchase...yeah, :rolleyes: ....

Okay.... How about this...

In terms of pre-recorded HD content quality though, I think HD DVD has overall, done a far, far better job.

Seriously, you can't even express an opinion without someone making a snide remark. You would think some people here never left junior high.

The job being done is a matter of opinion. Do you own Blu-ray? If you don't how are you judging the crappy or not crappy of Blu-ray? (Please, for goodness sake, let's not go back to June 2006 again here).

Gary

I've read some pretty lukewarm responses to Planet of The Apes and American Psycho, stating they having disappointing PQ. Not so? They are two titles I would have bought if I had BD.

I wouldn't buy a so-so HD DVD title either (I'm sure there are some), so far I can't complain, but that's what reviews are for, to keep you from throwing your $ away, particularly since in most cases I own the DVDs.

Okay.... How about this...

In terms of pre-recorded HD content quality though, I think HD DVD has overall, done a far, far better job.

Seriously, you can't even express an opinion without someone making a snide remark. You would think some people here never left junior high.

I own both formats, and IMHO nothing on HDDVD has exceeded the quality of:

Open Season AVC
Black Hawk Down Mpeg2
Tears of the Sun Mpeg2
Casino Royale AVC
The Prestige AVC
Crank Mpeg2

Hulk, Kong, Ridick & Pitchblack arguably tie...but IMO do not beat out any of the above titles. But thats it...everything else on HDDVD is either good or great, but not perfect. (both formats have their fair share of mediocrity)

This doesn't even factor in sound quality where BD totally OWNS HDDVD
As meh :rolleyes: as House of flying artifacts looks, I can still put it in and be amazed, because of the lossless soundtrack.

I wouldn't buy a so-so HD DVD title either (I'm sure there are some.

stay away from "Derailed" then, thats easily the worst HDDVD i've seen next to Superman the movie.

stay away from "Derailed" then, thats easily the worst HDDVD i've seen next to Superman the movie.

I've been told and stayed away from the import HD DVD of THE FOG, though I think it's great horror film.

So I have. I'd love that not to be true? :(

But this isn't a software-specific thread so I'll knock it off.

Getting back on topic, I think that both formats will have to coexist for some time, perhaps forever and here's why.

I don't own either player yet, and I think I'm like a couple of hundred million other Americans who just don't have a sense of urgency about resolving this issue. Unlike DVD vs. VHS ( where everything about DVD was better-- the PQ, the AQ, no rewind, chapters, no wear, etc) HD/BD are only incrementally better than SD. And the incrementally better PQ doesn't even seem to kick in until screen size exceeds 50" or so. (Please-no need to attack here-just my opinion).

HDTV adoption is still around 25% of households ( don't crucify me on the numbers), and I think it's fair to say that the bulk of HDTVs sold are smaller than 60" or 72" or 110". So most people, even when they get their HDTV will plug in their SD player and get astoundingly good results. Just no urgency.

Even if HD or BD each have good months here and there, for both software and hardware sales, the numbers in the short run will be so small that it's really just a game of "Million dollar spit in the ocean" . Even the magical $199 player so ballyhooed is doubtful to make many millions of people get off the fence, if they have to choose one format or the other.

Unless BD can get HD to cave, and that seems unlikely, it would seem logical that both sides endure until someone brings out a reasonably priced dual format player. If the Chinese, or someone else, can bring out a $199 single format player, by then a dual format at $299 should not be far behind. I think you would get a lot more owners of HDTV to jump at a $299 dual format player than a $199 single format machine. Much less risk. IMO

At that point both formats would ,in fact, coexist and the pressure of limited media choice would be lifted. Studios would open the floodgates and prices would fall dramatically, and that's when mass transition will begin to take place. Sure, it won't be a stampede until that $299 player drops to $199, but that senario is likely to be the beginning, and the price decreases will come.

I do not think the general public has a ingrained resistance to high def DVD, but it does require the transition from DVD to be reasonably priced and risk free.
JMHO.

Who besides Sony is pressing 50GB disks for studios?

Panasonic.

This isn't still based on that one guy's blog who did some cold-calling a month ago is it?
I think we are seeing a large sale on amazon.com, many of those disks (BHD, KoH) are BD50 and they continue to be restocked after going out of stock.

I expect if a disk can be sold for 14.49, there is very little likelyhood that they can cost that much to press. In fact, we find today that BD has been selling at prices generally cheaper than HD DVD (ok, Fox is still expensive, but so is Universal and warner combos, and most of fox catalogs are now only 2c more than warner titles on amazon).

The studios know what they are paying to press BD25 and BD50, and I'll bet it's a lot cheaper than what we can get by cold calling or reading up published list prices. That pressing cost horse is long dead, and no amount of flogging will make blood pump through its veins.

I think we are seeing a large sale on amazon.com, many of those disks (BHD, KoH) are BD50 and they continue to be restocked after going out of stock.

I expect if a disk can be sold for 14.49, there is very little likelyhood that they can cost that much to press. In fact, we find today that BD has been selling at prices generally cheaper than HD DVD (ok, Fox is still expensive, but so is Universal and warner combos).

The studios know what they are paying to press BD25 and BD50, and I'll bet it's a lot cheaper than what we can get by cold calling or reading up published list prices. That pressing cost horse is long dead, and no amount of flogging will make blood pump through its veins.


There is no doubt that the price consumers pay for the disc isn't really related to the cost to manufacture. It's demand for the content on the disc that sets the price. The cost to produce is a pretty small factor.

There is no doubt that the price consumers pay for the disc isn't really related to the cost to manufacture. It's demand for the content on the disc that sets the price. The cost to produce is a pretty small factor.
My point all along, but the pressing cost keeps getting raised even though people should have realized that even one slot of advertising in primetime TV is significantly more expensive than any authoring and setup costs can possibly be.

The studios know what they are paying to press BD25 and BD50, and I'll bet it's a lot cheaper than what we can get by cold calling or reading up published list prices. That pressing cost horse is long dead, and no amount of flogging will make blood pump through its veins.


I guess long-term, it's the ease of current SD plant conversion to HD DVD compared to the starting-from-scratch method needed for BD that I still wonder about.
Right now there is so little demand for HD, thats it's no biggie, but what if (saints preserve us) HD takes off down the road. Which will make our software cheaper faster?

...

This doesn't even factor in sound quality where BD totally OWNS HDDVD
As meh :rolleyes: as House of flying artifacts looks, I can still put it in and be amazed, because of the lossless soundtrack.

I think that quite a few people might argue that fact. I'm not aware of any hd-dvd movies that do not have DD+ at a minimum, and a number that have lossless tracks. Aren't there blu-ray movies that only have DD/DTS?

So, from a format perspective, both formats have lossless audio available to them should a studio decide to utilize them. So therefore, BD does NOT OWN HD-DVD in regards to SQ. :p

I wonder about the ability of disc manufacturers to gear up for MASS production of BR as well. My first thought is that the requirement for completely new BR production lines could become a limiting factor, should high quantities be needed. Given the present state of affairs, that's not likely.

Dave

I wonder about the ability of disc manufacturers to gear up for MASS production of BR as well. My first thought is that the requirement for completely new BR production lines could become a limiting factor, should high quantities be needed. Given the present state of affairs, that's not likely.

Dave

Part of the Blu-ray/PS3 strategy is that the PS3 games are pressed onto Blu-ray as well. This justifies building more plants than movies alone would. We'd see a bottleneck in PS3 games well before we'd see one for movies. So, as long as there isn't a sudden shortage of PS3 games, everything will be fine.

Economies of scale is a key concept for many threads on this forum.

So, from a format perspective, both formats have lossless audio available to them should a studio decide to utilize them. So therefore, BD does NOT OWN HD-DVD in regards to SQ. :p

True enough in theory, but in practice there are simply far more BDs with uncompressed or lossless tracks than there are HD DVDs. This is compounded in my setup by the superior audio DACs the Panny has over the A1.

While HD DVD's AQ is a step up over DVD, in practice more Blu Ray movies sound better. Often much better. At this point in time (at least with the movies I own) Blu Ray does indeed own HD DVD in AQ.

But this is niether he nor there as relates to the issue of format coexistence, which is possible, but would really suck for consumers.

I wonder about the ability of disc manufacturers to gear up for MASS production of BR as well. My first thought is that the requirement for completely new BR production lines could become a limiting factor, should high quantities be needed. Given the present state of affairs, that's not likely.

Dave

IIRC, the BDA group had some sort of announcement (or maybe it was some BD troll posting FUD), indicating that they were now capable of doing 12 Million BD-50 discs/month worldwide, and with the 2nd-tier replicators, it was growing.

I mentioned this in the TotalHD thread, but as far as people not wanting 2 formats, those discs are a good example of why. They will start out as 15/25s, with 30/25s coming later and no word on when 30/50s would hit. But even if they do the encodes are likely to be done to the lowest common denominator between the two formats. And all to basically achieve what one format would achieve, but without getting charged extra for the privilege of getting a disc that will work in all blue laser players and without art on one side.

--Darin

I personally HATE disk that have no art on them. The first waves of BD are so ugly ( Underworld , BHD). I wont be buying THD disk unless its only on THD disk.
I still dont see anything wrong with both. I mean what do we as men like? Choice , am I wrong?

I'll use an analogy.

Imagine in the past the govt said you can pick what you are going to broadcast TV in. CBS and ABC go NTSC, NBC go PAL. cluster****

Its the same thing. People want a single solution and everything on that solution. It doesn't lessen competition but it does reduce the costs to the suppliers and therefore ultimately us, the consumers. See DVD, its cheap, the competition is fierce and you as a consumer win.

We need a winner, at this point i'd be betting on Blu-ray, seems to have way more support from both the content provider and HW provider side. I'm waiting tho until it's a bit clearer.

Ok, suppose we ignore all the history of competitive CE formats and just pretend somehow past forces that demand a unified standard or the death of both don't work. Lets say we pretend that by waving some magic wand, those things don't apply anymore.

The Retailers
The retailer side of the reason is understood. Other than the inventory control issues dealing with returns for multiple disks, given there are a lot of movies released every year, just walk down the aisles of dvds. You cannot have 3x the displays of movies as the DVDs and so, less titles will be stocked. Unless of course, replacing DVDs was never the goal of either camps and that being a niche product forever was the goal.

The studios
The studios themselves repeatedly say they don't want two SKUs, Warner tries to address this with the flippie TotalHD, other methods tried include combo DVD+ HD DVD (though that itself is a SKU as they can't do away with the DVDs SKU for economic reasons).

Studios that publish in both formats penalize the stronger format by coding to the lowest common denominator. For example, on a TotalHD, if HD15+BD25 was used, the movie and extras would have to be encoded to fit on 15GB and peaks cannot exceed 28Mbps, meaning BD25 was penalized and 40Mbps peak cannot be used. If HD30+BD25, then the movie has to fit in 25GB and HD30 would be penalized. If HD30+BD50, then the movie has to fit in 30GB and BD50 would be penalized. Note in all cases, the peaks have to be below 29Mbps. In cases where that pip IME is used, the peaks have to lowered by the bitrate of that pip stream, meaning the main feature's peak bitrates is further compromised.

The End User
That's mostly us (well not us, since we're early adopters and we buy everything right?). But for some people, they insist on seeing all the content, yet they do not have the means to buy all the hardware to play them, for those people (which is the majority), they should be waiting until it is clear that one format will win. Some people do buy into one format and gets upset with not having enough content to play.

IMO, those of us who feel anguish over the possibility of being stuck with the wrong format are the wrong people to be early adopters. IE: if it is not clear who is going to win, only true early adopters can play in this game as being wrong then is an accepted consequence of the game.

What if there is no clear winner?
Each passing day causes me to think this is more and more unlikely. If there was a scenario where there is no clear winner. For example, Gates could decide to divert his charity work and buy Fox. Unlikely, but still within the limits of possibility. I suppose that will level the playing field. But dragging this out really means that the early majority phase CANNOT START, meaning if the two formats were any where close in sales numbers, both are still niche products. Sales cannot take off as long as there is no clear winner.

My opinion.
The game is not mathematically over, but the writing is on the wall for people who want to look at this dispassionately. Pretty much all the pieces are in play, we are running out of plausible scenarios for the tide to be turned. In sports parlance, this is like a penant race, where your team is 5 games behind with 5 games left, and while being eliminated is not a mathematical certainty, the odds are not in your favor. Yet, like any drama in life, the true fans will root of the team and never give up until that very last inning. And for the sake of civility, we have to play nice and pretend that everything is just peachy, so we don't upset the good people here.

I believe MSFT will focus on winning the console war first and then win the format war. That they are now an influential group within the DVD Forum will work in their favor as well.

The deep pockets of MSFT as well their traditional long term outlook on markets they target means that a long drawn battle is almost assured at this point. There is no way that HD DVD will fold shop, irrespective of how low market share dips in the short term. Both Warner and Universal have very close working relationship with MSFT - much closer than they have with Sony.

Even Apple is doing much more with HD DVD and it's a matter of time before Steve Jobs influence will come to bear on Disney. However, I wonder if his opinion carries any weight in Disney any more. We can safely assume that Apples active work with HD DVD is with support from Steve Jobs.

Steve Jobs + Bill Gates agree on one thing - HD DVD is better ;)

I'll go with them v. thebland, P-Man or beatboys opinion about long term success :)

My opinion.
The game is not mathematically over, but the writing is on the wall for people who want to look at this dispassionately. Pretty much all the pieces are in play, we are running out of plausible scenarios for the tide to be turned. In sports parlance, this is like a penant race, where your team is 5 games behind with 5 games left, and while being eliminated is not a mathematical certainty, the odds are not in your favor. Yet, like any drama in life, the true fans will root of the team and never give up until that very last inning. And for the sake of civility, we have to play nice and pretend that everything is just peachy, so we don't upset the good people here.


I think people who look at it dispassionately will see that BD only managed to get to 67% of the market share when the PS3 came on the market. The PS3 was supposed to close the deal, but it couldn't. And from the February sales numbers, it looks like the PS3 may have even less effect in the months to come.

The BDA has tried to convince people that a 67% market share means they have won, and the format war is all over. Obviously, they have convinced some people that is true. But I don't think most dispassionate observers feel that way.

I think a lot of people see that it is still way to close to tell how this is all going to turn out.

I believe MSFT will focus on winning the console war first and then win the format war. That they are now an influential group within the DVD Forum will work in their favor as well.

The deep pockets of MSFT as well their traditional long term outlook on markets they target means that a long drawn battle is almost assured at this point. There is no way that HD DVD will fold shop, irrespective of how low market share dips in the short term. Both Warner and Universal have very close working relationship with MSFT - much closer than they have with Sony.

Even Apple is doing much more with HD DVD and it's a matter of time before Steve Jobs influence will come to bear on Disney. However, I wonder if his opinion carries any weight in Disney any more. We can safely assume that Apples active work with HD DVD is with support from Steve Jobs.

Steve Jobs + Bill Gates agree on one thing - HD DVD is better ;)

I'll go with them v. thebland, P-Man or beatboys opinion about long term success :)

Gates essentially retired. I assume you mean Ballmer. I don't really know how commited MSFT is to HD DVD. A token effort would have been to introduce a SKU of X360 (perhaps 10K units) with a HD DVD-rom built in. Since all the software's been done, there is no engineering effort to move the external addon into a X360, yet they didn't do that. I mean there is no diverting of valuable resources, no new engineering or industrial design work, just replacing one DVD-ROM drive with a HD DVD-rom drive. Maybe a HDDVD red faceplates to differentiate the unit.

As MSFT has a real business to run, I wonder if this highdef movie on shiny disk is of any interest to the real senior management team there. Perhaps XBOX has enough revenue to make it worthwhile, but if so, where is the x360 with the built in hd dvd drive?

As for Steve Jobs, who knows? He could have a change of heart. Supposedly in MacWorld, the Apple machines with built-in BD burners will be unveiled. What's working against HD DVD for Apple? (1) Where are the burners? (2) Where are the 30GB dual layer RW media?
http://www.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2006/12/appleblu-ray.jpg

Gates essentially retired. I assume you mean Ballmer. I don't really know how commited MSFT is to HD DVD. A token effort would have been to introduce a SKU of X360 (perhaps 10K units) with a HD DVD-rom built in. Since all the software's been done, there is no engineering effort to move the external addon into a X360, yet they didn't do that. I mean there is no diverting of valuable resources, no new engineering or industrial design work, just replacing one DVD-ROM drive with a HD DVD-rom drive. Maybe a HDDVD red faceplates to differentiate the unit.

As MSFT has a real business to run, I wonder if this highdef movie on shiny disk is of any interest to the real senior management team there. Perhaps XBOX has enough revenue to make it worthwhile, but if so, where is the x360 with the built in hd dvd drive?

As for Steve Jobs, who knows? He could have a change of heart. Supposedly in MacWorld, the Apple machines with built-in BD burners will be unveiled. What's working against HD DVD for Apple? (1) Where are the burners? (2) Where are the 30GB dual layer RW media?
http://www.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2006/12/appleblu-ray.jpg

I think it has been mentioned before that it's time to call a spade a spade. While Apple is listed on the BDA list of companies. A lot of their work seems to be on the HD DVD side. Interesting no?

See what comes up when you click on this link...

http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/dvdstudiopro/quicktours/

As for Bill Gates and Steve Balmer. You're right. But I'd say as the single largest shareholder, Bill has some clout and Steve was handpicked by Bill...if that means anything :)

Like I said (repeating myself), MSFT is focusing on winning the console war first and then the video format one. They are going about it one and a half at a time ;)

Was that a BDA sponsored chart, it shows HD DVD as 1080i only...could be a Best Buy chart too

I think people who look at it dispassionately will see that BD only managed to get to 67% of the market share when the PS3 came on the market. The PS3 was supposed to close the deal, but it couldn't. And from the February sales numbers, it looks like the PS3 may have even less effect in the months to come.

The BDA has tried to convince people that a 67% market share means they have won, and the format war is all over. Obviously, they have convinced some people that is true. But I don't think most dispassionate observers feel that way.

I think a lot of people see that it is still way to close to tell how this is all going to turn out.

Well yes, there is that forever 2:1 or 3:1 ratio or even 4:1 for months and months. If the purpose is to keep both formats as niche, then dragging out the war is the best way to do it, as people who don't see a clear winner will stay away from buying in.

But even to keep this close in mkt share, essentially, the message that the studios have to believe is that both formats are not viable beyond that niche segment. That's what keeping both formats alive really means.

I think it has been mentioned before that it's time to call a spade a spade. While Apple is listed on the BDA list of companies. A lot of their work seems to be on the HD DVD side. Interesting no?

No. Not even remotely interesting. Apple is locked into several vary different market battles here. While it's of little consequence to AVphiles, Apple's Final Cut Pro is in a pitched battle with the NLEs of Avid (www.avid.com) the proverbial 800lb gorilla of the video editing world. Niether of them can afford to not suppoort authoring the media of both formats, because prooduct cycles take a long time and they didn't know a year ago which (if either) would win. If Apple had left HD DVD authoring out of FCP, Avid would have jumped on them, extolling how Apple products don't support as many formats as Avid Express products. This is the only "support" Apple has ever shown HD DVD, and it obviously serves their needs in a professional graphics market.

Apple has never, EVER announced a shred of support for HD DVD in terms of common end-user products, while they are widely expected to release products with Blu Ray drives in the first half of this year. Anyone who thnks that Apple's professional NLE product development portends their support of HD DVD in a larger sense is engaging in FUD and wishful thinking (and clearly does not understand the NLE market).

This is not the first time this has been pointed out to you Plaz, please stop spreading this inane rumor.

Blu-rays and HD DVDs will coexist until downloadable movies are ready to roll, i.e. when sufficient amount of consumers have high-speed internet connections etc.

Blu-rays will have nothing against downloadable movies, these cards will be played when the blu-ray side thinks it's victorious :eek: , but that's when they'll get trumped by high-speed movie downloads.

Up until then, the war will be fought courageously by the legions of HD DVD :D

Blu-rays and HD DVDs will coexist until downloadable movies are ready to roll, i.e. when sufficient amount of consumers have high-speed internet connections etc.

That's exactly what Microsoft wants, and exactly what consumers should not want. Even though I think Blu Ray is more likely to win, and a better format to last the next 10-15 years, I'd much rather have either HD format wina clean battle so it can work on supplanting DVD, rather than see downloaded media become the norm sooner rather than later.

I personally HATE disk that have no art on them. The first waves of BD are so ugly ( Underworld , BHD). I wont be buying THD disk unless its only on THD disk.
I still dont see anything wrong with both. I mean what do we as men like? Choice , am I wrong?

Yeah I know just what you mean. When I am shopping for a car, I refuse to buy a car that doesn't have an engine that is really pleasant to look at. :rolleyes:

On another note, folks.... I haven't seen it brought up yet that MSFT is about to shake things up in May. Everyone knows they are dropping the price of the premium at least $100, canceling the core and releasing a new SKU for Xbox. Now even though this SKU probably doesn't have a built in HD DVD drive, I have a sneaky suspicion that MSFT will offer some new combo incentive deals to buy the HD DVD drive.

And for those that think MSFT should have released a 360 with built in HD DVD: One of the insiders already stated why - Part of the copy protection for it's games is built into the physical DVD drive itself. I'm sure they could have a special HD DVD Drive made that could do it, but the cost of implementing that copy protection with QA etc wouldn't be worth it. And it would likely cost too for the consumer, ultimately not being worth the $ and effort, especially for a "limited run" as was suggested.

Well yes, there is that forever 2:1 or 3:1 ratio or even 4:1 for months and months. If the purpose is to keep both formats as niche, then dragging out the war is the best way to do it, as people who don't see a clear winner will stay away from buying in.

But even to keep this close in mkt share, essentially, the message that the studios have to believe is that both formats are not viable beyond that niche segment. That's what keeping both formats alive really means.


I think to assess if and when HD will pull out of niche status and give DVD a run for it's money, for have to be realistic about what is in the offering.

So far I think the format war is putting some off, but it's also a convenient excuse to feel good about a medium they are already happy with (DVD). Many probably still think of HD as a measure of planned obsolescence that they will have to accept one day, rather than a bold new frontier they can't wait to be part of. It's like having someone insult your wardrobe before you've noticed your out of fashion, you may buy new clothes, or you may just resent messanger.

It's part of the reason I think the HD DVD approach of soft conversion. Had Sony not cut some shrewd deals with studios, and content support were even, I think HD DVDs approach would be just as affective if not more so, even with PS3.

I think it has been mentioned before that it's time to call a spade a spade. While Apple is listed on the BDA list of companies. A lot of their work seems to be on the HD DVD side. Interesting no?

See what comes up when you click on this link...

http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/dvdstudiopro/quicktours/

As for Bill Gates and Steve Balmer. You're right. But I'd say as the single largest shareholder, Bill has some clout and Steve was handpicked by Bill...if that means anything :)

Like I said (repeating myself), MSFT is focusing on winning the console war first and then the video format one. They are going about it one and a half at a time ;)

Was that a BDA sponsored chart, it shows HD DVD as 1080i only...could be a Best Buy chart too

I actually don't know what Apple is doing, and the chart showed up in google but reflects correctly that Apple in on the BD board of directors. Why I think Apple Macs will show up with BD burners? Well, I still have not found a HD DVD burner and I doubt a DL HD30 R/RW exists anywhere. HD-RW at 15GB alone will not win Apple over.

MSFT has little direct gain from either BD or HD DVD succeeding. In fact, based on the rest of their business, I would say they have more to gain from both failing.

This is fundamentally why I doubt MSFT will do everything it can to make HD DVD win. It is possible however if the stakes were high enough and the XBOX group have enough of a business case, the entire company could work very hard to try to make BD fail. Whether they succeed or not is up to discussion. In spite of all efforts so far, MSFT has not succeeded in destroying google (which would be a much bigger fish for ballmer to fry), so MSFT powers do have limits.

See, playing armchair CEO is so much fun. Someone should make a sim-CEO game. ;)

I think to assess if and when HD will pull out of niche status and give DVD a run for it's money, for have to be realistic about what is in the offering.

So far I think the format war is putting some off, but it's also a convenient excuse to feel good about a medium they are already happy with (DVD). Many probably still think of HD as a measure of planned obsolescence that they will have to accept one day, rather than a bold new frontier they can't wait to be part of. It's like having someone insult your wardrobe before you've noticed your out of fashion, you may buy new clothes, or you may just resent messanger.

It's part of the reason I think the HD DVD approach of soft conversion. Had Sony not cut some shrewd deals with studios, and content support were even, I think HD DVDs approach would be just as affective if not more so, even with PS3.

That's pretty much the way it's always unfolded. When DVD came on, the VHS crowd didn't really feel threatened, they just took their time and upgraded when they felt like it. At some point, the rentals cleared out their VHS stock and it just sort of snowballed quickly after that.

I don't know if DVD owners would be offended by the highdef BD, I think framing the question in inflamatory terms can certainly incite hatred in some viewers, but there's no fundamental reason to do so. That's like the class warfare argument, when people who shop in walmart resent the armani-clad crowd, it's underneath the surface, but it is very low in the list of priorities to get mad about. Most people won't care. We've certainly seen a lot of topics here that framed the discussion in inflamatory terms didn't we?

(FWIW, I also shop at walmart, so that's not meant to incite displeasure either).

Winston Churchill has said many wise things about war, one such thing is: "When the war of the giants is over the wars of the pygmies will begin."

What would happen if the "giant" Microsoft would withdraw from the war scene? Where would the quality-check be?

HD DVD existed on the market before blu-ray and has shown that it can exist and deliver new next-gen features without blu-ray. Blu-ray, however, has not shown that it can exist without HD DVD and it has not shown any new next-gen features that HD DVD doesn't already have.

It's questionable if blu-ray supporters really want to live without HD DVD, since HD DVD has proven itself to be an excellent quality bar.

Besides, there is no need for movie studios to end this war prematurely, and also, this war has been the most fun since Dallas vs Falcon Crest.

That's pretty much the way it's always unfolded. When DVD came on, the VHS crowd didn't really feel threatened, they just took their time and upgraded when they felt like it. At some point, the rentals cleared out their VHS stock and it just sort of snowballed quickly after that.

Sure, but that's why I said you have to realistically look at what is in the offering. It has been said many times in this forum that HD is an upgrade. If I were putting myself in the average consumers shoes, I'm guessing they think it's just for getting better PQ. They probably don't notice audio enough to care, they also probably don't find all the "new features" a big draw; A, because they haven't all shown up, and B, because you have to own or play with them to even truly appreciate them. Some will even perceive them as carrying a learning curve, and sell-through appeal to many has to = drop it in the player and hit play ease-of-use.

Given these factors it would'nt surprise me a all, war or no war, if this medium would be in many peoples entertainment budget, especially at current price-points.

The HDTV side is certainly a concern since many people don't even hook up cables correctly. It's not surprising to walk into a home and see DVDs hooked up to expensive huge TVs via the rca composite video jack.

But that's just part of the landscape of HDTV in general, and things like HDMI was supposed to make it easier to avoid problems, though I wonder what happens to the audio side (but people who really want good audio are going to have to learn to do it, or pay someone to do it for them).

Besides the "drop in player and hit play" issues, do you mean that without HTDV adoption, all of these things are moot? I agree with that.

I'm just saying that I don't know how much people really want hd. I think they will take HD if it easy for them and doesn't cost an arm and a leg. I'm guessing it's almost got to come in the back door with hat-in-hand rather than with a bang.

I'll also agree about the HDTV thing. I live on the cusp of a well-to-do neighborhood, and when I'm out walking the dog, I see many $4000-$5000 monster HD sets glowing through the windows. However their owners have the color and contrast cranked so high that live-action looks like animation. People really have some skewed criteria about what constitutes a quality image.

HD DVD existed on the market before blu-ray and has shown that it can exist and deliver new next-gen features without blu-ray. Blu-ray, however, has not shown that it can exist without HD DVD and it has not shown any new next-gen features that HD DVD doesn't already have.

This is another myth that shows up again and again on these boards. The quality of DVD releases has increased fairly steadily since 1997. Don't take my word for it, go watch one of your 10 year old disks. Early DVDs didn't have DTS at all, and a number of them did not have 5.1 surround at all. Now they all do. DVDs were encoded at lower bit rates a decade ago, from lower quality masters. Even crummy modern movie releases look better than the best DVDs from 10 years ago. It isn't format competition that drives quality, it's competition between studios. As encoding gets better and studios strive to make their releases (and especially rereleases) stand out from the pack, the quality will continue to improve regardless of how many formats there are.

The disaster is if we don't have a clear winner, so there isn't a single format to allow mass adoption to occur, which will cause the HD opitical disk market to die, and then we will never get to see the majority of content in HD, nor will the market have adecade or more to perfect encoding movies.

The best possible outcome for consumers is for one format to close shop this very afternoon, and allow the slow but steady replacement of DVD by an HD optical media to begin.

I'll agree that It's a myth that DVD isn't head and shoulders above what it once was, but I think two formats will kill HD is another myth.

If people could play them all in one machine and the media didn't act as the delivery system for all the war FUD, adoption would increase to just about whatever degree people were interested in HD.

Even if what you say is true, HD DVD won't lay down and die for the simple reason that slow growth via affordable hardware has been part of their plan all along. They won't stop until they have played it for all it's worth, and we can only speculate as to what it's impact will be.

We all have to just wait this one out.

I completely agree with you that HD DVD isn't just going to lie down and quit. Toshiba will work to recoup costs as long as possible, and MS has goals that don't even require an outright win, so there will be money to fund the format for a long time. Otoh, if BD manages to maintain a large enough lead to convince Universal to go neutral, the war will be over anyways because consumers will no longer have much concern about the endof the format war. In much the same way that the VHS/Beta was was over for years and years before the last Beta player was made.

But there is not a shred of historical data or economic theory to support the idea that there can be two competing formats that will result in the release of as many titles as we saw on VHS and then DVD. For that to happen we must have a single winning format. Coexistence will almost certainly doom HD optical media to a niche market.

Another insight by Winston Churchill on the ongoing format war:
"War is a game that is played with a smile :) . If you can't smile, grin :D . If you can't grin, keep out of the way till you can :eek: ."

I'll agree that It's a myth that DVD isn't head and shoulders above what it once was, but I think two formats will kill HD is another myth.

If people could play them all in one machine and the media didn't act as the delivery system for all the war FUD, adoption would increase to just about whatever degree people were interested in HD.

Even if what you say is true, HD DVD won't lay down and die for the simple reason that slow growth via affordable hardware has been part of their plan all along. They won't stop until they have played it for all it's worth, and we can only speculate as to what it's impact will be.

We all have to just wait this one out.


People wouldn't have to buy an all in one machine if Universal would make BD. Universal could do everything on BD that they do on HD DVD, with lossless audio and more disc space.

The only reason to buy a dual-format player is that some huge corporation can't admit it chose the wrong side and is now in the smaller market.

I personally HATE disk that have no art on them. The first waves of BD are so ugly ( Underworld , BHD). I wont be buying THD disk unless its only on THD disk.
I still dont see anything wrong with both. I mean what do we as men like? Choice , am I wrong?
You want fur on one side too? :p

People wouldn't have to buy an all in one machine if Universal would make BD. Universal could do everything on BD that they do on HD DVD, with lossless audio and more disc space.

The only reason to buy a dual-format player is that some huge corporation can't admit it chose the wrong side and is now in the smaller market.


Since in supporting HD DVD I think Universal is the only one that made the "right choice" I disagree. If Warner had stuck to their guns I might be chiding Disney for their foolishness. Fox is dumb as stump and always will be, I never expect them to do anything that benefits the consumer and in turn themselves.

Really, I think all that chose BD over HD DVD did so when promised the PS3 would fly off the shelves, they wanted a big, fast, win but they aren't getting it.

Where does this perception that if everyone doesn't HD media by the end of the year it's all over stem from? I support HD DVD, I think it's a better format than BD, and I think it still has a shot at being the dominant format.

So trolls and fan-boys I just gave ya an easy target, fire at will. :p

In the long term (which starts in the late adopter phase, or even earlier) it doesn't matter if both exist, as all studios will sell in both formats, or miss half a serious market. The battle on this forum is heated by some who fear their choice is the wrong one, who want to end their fear as quickly as possible. If the battle continues tho', prices will continue to drop faster than without the competition, and early adopters can have both players. It is unlikely to end unless one format obliterates the other, and there's no sign of that.

For myself, I dislike the BS and FUD from multiple BDA sources, and react accordingly

In the long term (which starts in the late adopter phase, or even earlier) it doesn't matter if both exist, as all studios will sell in both formats, or miss half a serious market. The battle on this forum is heated by some who fear their choice is the wrong one, who want to end their fear as quickly as possible. If the battle continues tho', prices will continue to drop faster than without the competition, and early adopters can have both players. It is unlikely to end unless one format obliterates the other, and there's no sign of that.

For myself, I dislike the BS and FUD from multiple BDA sources, and react accordingly

Prices would drop faster if everybody was directly competing rather than indirectly competing. A $400 Toshiba Blu-ray player will get the BDA guys to drop prices faster than a $400 HD DVD player.

The total market size with one settled format will be bigger than the size of two formats put together. That is why coexistence will suck for everybody involved. If studios are forced to sell to two formats rather than one, they lose money (decreased total sales, added production cost)

Plus, the mass market is scared to death of competing formats. Why buy DVD-A or SACD when plain 'ol CD is safe and works everywhere?

Prices would drop faster if everybody was directly competing rather than indirectly competing. A $400 Toshiba Blu-ray player will get the BDA guys to drop prices faster than a $400 HD DVD player.

The total market size with one settled format will be bigger than the size of two formats put together. That is why coexistence will suck for everybody involved. If studios are forced to sell to two formats rather than one, they lose money (decreased total sales, added production cost)

Plus, the mass market is scared to death of competing formats. Why buy DVD-A or SACD when plain 'ol CD is safe and works everywhere?

100% correct. It isn't whether BD and HD DVD could coexist, it's about what we lose if they do, and why anyone would want that.

Prices would drop faster if everybody was directly competing rather than indirectly competing. A $400 Toshiba Blu-ray player will get the BDA guys to drop prices faster than a $400 HD DVD player.
Nope. This is a potential life-and-death competition. Not between the-good-old-boys, as would be one format only.

The total market size with one settled format will be bigger than the size of two formats put together. That is why coexistence will suck for everybody involved. If studios are forced to sell to two formats rather than one, they lose money (decreased total sales, added production cost)?
The cost of reproduction is minor. You are paying for content. They will produce content in any format that sells.

Plus, the mass market is scared to death of competing formats. Why buy DVD-A or SACD when plain 'ol CD is safe and works everywhere? DVD-A and SACD were not mass market products, they were audiophile. Raises the same questions here about audio formats in hidef. Do movie studios produce audiophile movies? :rolleyes: Then why do some insist on hi-BW for audio?

I think the completion has indeed been beneficial, the FUD, not so much, studio exclusivity, not so much.

I'm sure everyone has a fair idea of how they wish this had gone, and how they wish it would go, but they really have little bearing. No one would even be here arguing if the path were cut and dry.

From a 2005 article, http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050810-5194.html

Personally, I don't believe anything Amir says.
Am I missing something? ROM Mark and region coding aren't the same thing. If anything, you helped prove Amir's claim. He said that Fox didn't go BD because of region coding and the link you posted says they chose BD because of the ROM Mark. So where's the discrepancy?

The cost of reproduction is minor. You are paying for content. They will produce content in any format that sells.
it has nothing to do with the cost of reproduction. it's a question of shelf space in stores, and public distrust of split standards. if both format survive* neither will be of any great significance.

*and by survive that doesn't mean just putting out a new movie every other month...

Neither one is going to "win". Take the most mythical of straw men around these parts - The "Joe 6 pack" of lore, who is swept in to any given debate depending on what point the author is trying to make - he/she in reality could care less. They really don't. HD DVD and BD are dead formats doomed to shuffle along for a few more years while studios squeeze the faithful a few more times for the same exact titles, and then downloadable services will replace just about everything.

Physical media is on the way out, just look at what's happened to music.

Nope. This is a potential life-and-death competition. Not between the-good-old-boys, as would be one format only.

Saying "nope" doesn't make you right. It's all about making money. You can make money with either format... The format is irrelevant. There ARE some business politics going on here, and that is in fact what started this war, but if Toshiba and Universal went Blu-ray tomorrow, they would make no less money. In fact, they would end up making more.

The format competition is helping NOTHING at this point. It is a pointless inconvenience for all involved. Competition works best when both teams are playing the same game against each other. Right now it's like the American League vs. the National Legue... two sets of teams doing the same thing but never directly playing each other. Only when they get to the World Series and the two teams play head-to-head is there any real competition between them.

Let's get all the teams playing directly against each other for some REAL competition that will significantly reduce prices and improve quality.

Physical media is on the way out, just look at what's happened to music.
music files are tiny and are listened to predominantly while on the move. movies don't fit either of these criteria, which leads to two important differences - movies don't need to be stored in such a way as to be easily transportable, and movie files (particularly HD) take a long time to download. since most of the world doesn't even have internet connections approaching those in the US (and have to pay for usage, local or otherwise) this situation is exacerbated outside the USofA.

nah. physical media doesn't look likely to disappear anytime soon, just as books are more popular than ever despite endless postulation of their imminent demise.

physical media doesn't look likely to disappear anytime soon, just as books are more popular than ever despite endless postulation of their imminent demise.Actually, I think reading is losing out to videos and CDs.

But I agree. E-books haven't replaced books even with all the PDAs out in the wild. My library lends out e-books and there are free e-books online but I'd rather have an actual printed page to read. What's the sense of buying e-books if I have to print out the book myself? It's cheaper to just buy the book. And I'd rather collect a physical book than digital bits.

Several years from now, downloading might replace renting or PPV but I seriously doubt it'll be the main distribution channel for people who want their own copies of movies, HD or otherwise.