*Warning: Opinion Ahead*

On numerous occasions, I have seen a number of different variations of the following statement:

Why don't the studios release titles on both formats, and let the consumers decide?

After seeing this statement way too many times, it now makes me cringe every time I read it. Clearly, two formats can not successfully co-exists, and one must dominate in order to reach mass adoption. DVD-A and SACD both collapsed as consumers opted for the lower quality of CDs and digital downloads. We are again threatened by the same fate for Blu-ray and HD DVD, but should consumers be the ones to make ultimate decision on which survives?

First off, consumers are generally stupid. Corporations spend millions of dollars trying to figure out what consumers want, but at the end of the day they'll still spend twice that telling consumers what they want via advertising. Sure, a really bad idea will never take off, but plenty of mediocre ideas have been huge financial winners because of successful advertising. Leaving the decision up to the consumer will never resolve the issue. In general, they will simply give up and stick with the very successful DVD platform.

Second, why should consumers be burdened with cleaning up a mess that studios and CE manufacturers started? It was never the desire of consumers to have two competing high definition formats; it was the greed of corporations which caused the divide. As the cause of the war, they should ultimately be responsible for solving it. As much as "voting with your dollar" means for successful PR, it won't even show up as a blip on the radar of most corporate financial statements because it is a very small piece of business right now.

Some have already chosen sides, and have planted their flags. Other, remain neutral hoping that someone with make the decision for them. For those corporations who are neutral, I say to them, for lack of a better term, grow a pair! Chose a side and be done with it, because the current situation is satisfactory to no party.

One of two things will happen, if neutral corporations take sides. Either the war will become even more divided or it will be over. If it becomes more divided, both sides will eventually fail. I would not be happy with this outcome, but at least there would be only one party to blame, the corporations. You can't blame consumers for not selecting a single format if the corporations can't do the same. If they truly want HD to prevail, then they will come together and unite.

I'm talking to you, Warner Brothers, Paramount, LG, and Samsung! Pick a side and be done with it! The war will end either way, but the results will be determined strictly on your decisions, and not consumers. You were part of the problem. Now, become the solution so that HD can thrive instead of remaining and niche format.

Warner Brothers, Paramount, LG, and Samsung are hedging their bets. Actually, LG and Samsung probably did it to make their otherwise non-competitive Blu-ray players attractive with HD-DVD playback capabilities.

I think there will eventually be one format because the retailers will demand it. Maintaining space for dual inventories is just not a good thing. If the stalemate continues for too much longer, I half-expect the B&M stores to pick their own sides and drop one (or both) formats.

Ugh...

Letting people have a choice makes you cringe?

Competition is always best for the customer in a free market.

"Clearly, two formats can not successfully co-exists, and one must dominate in order to reach mass adoption."

Clearly? In what way is it not possible for two formats to successfully co-exist? Multiple competing formats successfully co-exist all the time. Xbox/PS/Wii; dvd+r -r; Mac/Windows; Plasma/LCD; Sirius/XM (though they are trying to merge); Cable/Satellite. The list goes on.

I hate to break it to you, but you're one example of DVD-A/SACD did not fail because of being competing formats.

The valid argument is DVD-A/SACD, because, like Blu-ray and HD DVD, it is the high definition derivative of a successful format.
SACD and DVD-a didn't die because of the "battle", they died because the masses didn't want HD audio-any HD audio.
.
J
Sidenote: They still make SACDs, and they have been embraced by the hardcore classical fans.

Clearly, two formats can not successfully co-exists, and one must dominate in order to reach mass adoption.

Funny thing is the above is the only "proof" you present - saying saomething is "clearly" true is not a proof, BTW. Got anything more logical ?

BTW, I do agree with you. Warner & Paramount should have only supported HD DVD. It would have been lot more fun :D

ps : WRT Audio ... there wer 4 competing formats - CD, SACD, DVD-A and MP3. CD & MP3 won - SACD/DVD-A lost.

BTW, I do agree with you. Warner & Paramount should have only supported HD DVD.

They used to - before they went format neutral in October 2005.

With videogame console war between the 360/PS3/Wii, the current champion is still the PS2 (last generation triumphs over the new formats - sound familiar?).

Is that why the impossible-to-find Wii is outselling the PS2 by 30% this year (EDIT: May's sales figures released today, this number is now 34%)? The same PS2 that's half the price of the Wii and is available everywhere, with a library of 1400 games? Yes, it has a higher installed base. Being 7 years old and the undisputed winner of last generation will do that. But it is NOT outselling ALL of the nex-gen consoles, despite all its advantages.

Established standards always continue to sell well for a while, even when a superior replacement hits the market. They just stop ruling that market on a monthly basis at some point, usually sooner rather than later in the gaming world (it happened in January 2007 this time). The GBA is still making great sales (better than the PS3 most months) despite the fact that the newer (and backwards-compatible) DS was released 3 years ago and is dominating the handlheld market.

The same thing happens in the home video market, but slower. It took a while for DVD to pick up enough steam to start outselling VHS on a hardware basis, and an even longer time for software sales. I suspect the HDM rollout will take even longer. This slower adoption rate is due to both the larger total installed base of home video, as well as the general conservatism of that market as compared to the VG market.

But the common thread is old standards slowly die out. It takes a long time for their sales to drop to insignificant levels, but it eventually does happen. It'll be a long time before the PS2 and GBA make as few sales as the GC and Xbox do now, but it will happen eventually. The home video market is no different. DVD has only just begun its long decline. If VHS is an accurate model, it'll probably be 7+ years before the market cuts in half.

DVD-A/SACD is not a good model because no one (outside of enthusiasts) cared, and very few had equipment that would show much, if any improvement. Whatever the installed base of HDTVs is (my guess is 30-35%), that's the level of people who have equipment capable of showing off the differences that HDM can deliver. Whatever percentage currently receives HD content (I'd guess around 15%) is the level of people who are ACTIVELY SEEKING that difference. Both of these numbers are growing on a monthly basis.

Another reason it's a faulty comparison is the method of taking in entertainment. For the most part, people don't sit on their couch listening to music, where the advantages of high definition are readily apparent (assuming, as above, the equipment is up to task). They listen in their cars, at work, while they workout, on the train, etc. That is the established dominant market for audio-only programming. Listening at home is the niche market. Video is the exact opposite. The established standard IS sitting on the couch in your living room. Viewing on the go is the niche. And of course, the quality equipment is at home, not in the car.

It's the paradox of conflicting equipment capability and listening environment that killed DVD-A/SACD. HDM has a correlation between capable equipment and viewing environment that makes it a wholly different animal from HDA.

I will definitely agree that multiple formats is NOT IN THE INTEREST OF CONSUMERS. Plain and simple, we should not have to buy 2 pieces of equipment. We should not have to worry about which format will eventually die. When someone invests money in a brand new HD format player, they shouldnt have to experience the "oh crap....that movie is only for the other format..." feeling.

This war is bad for the industry in general. Since many consumers are afraid of buying a player and seeing it become obsolete, they simply arent buying them. (Yes I can hear people saying how popular the toshiba players are...but get real, dvd and upconverting dvd players are still slaughtering them in total sales) This is stopping the players and the disks from being mainstream, and this keeps the prices up. Also its obvious many studios are hesitant in releasing their classic collections because they're worried the time/money required to remaster and re-release them isnt worth the money they will get back from sales.

Thats why this format war is bad for everyone.

PS: I want bluray to win, because ive already invested in it :)

PS: I want bluray to win, because ive already invested in it

The most honest post I have seen lately....

Without the competition of two formats, prices would be higher, and quality would be lower, on both sides. That is NOT good for consumers. Consumers definitely benefit form the competition. The truth is, that the masses really don't care about HD, and aren't going to replace their DVDs, or pay more for it, even if there was only one format.
J

HD DVD and BD were introduced too soon (not for us, but for everyone else)! How would DVD or VHS have fared if only 1/3 of North American households owned TVs? When the marketplace is saturated with HDTVs then it's time for HD formats. In the meantime these formats will struggle. Having the technology perfected doesn't mean consumers are ready for it.

I will say that the argument that one format has to die (HD DVD) so we can have an HD format (BD) is really, really getting tiresome and I along with a lot of other folks just won't buy into it. If you really think this must happen then you'd better get used to the idea of no HD formats. This is another application of the politics of fear. I just bought 3 new HD DVD movies! :D

Cheers,

Grant

It's the paradox of conflicting equipment capability and listening environment that killed DVD-A/SACD

This war is bad for the industry in general. Since many consumers are afraid of buying a player and seeing it become obsolete, they simply arent buying them.
Disagree, to both. DVD-A/SACD is a niche product for the very same reason that HD media - nobody gives a damn. The avg consumer simply can't tell the difference, or if they can tell the difference it's not nearly great enough to be bothered.

It's estimated that 40% or more of HDTV owners have ZERO HD feeds - none.

How many even have 5.1 systems?

To 90% of people DVDs look fine - why change? They simply don't care.

How DARE consumers have a choice!! They clearly cannot handle it. That is why monopoly's are setup, to make it easier for those "idiot" consumers. Choice is BAD mmk


Hint: They aren't idiots and they can handle choices. They just don't care about HDM as much as you do.

Disagree, to both. DVD-A/SACD is a niche product for the very same reason that HD media - nobody gives a damn. The avg consumer simply can't tell the difference, or if they can tell the difference it's not nearly great enough to be bothered.Exactly. While the format war may be keeping some home theater enthusiasts away, even a best-case scenario would be a rounding error compared to where DVD is and would barely amount to much more than a dent for years to come. I'd imagine that a hefty percentage of the people griping about the format war wouldn't buy in -- not for two or three years, at least -- even if there were only one format. The format war isn't a reason so much as an excuse.

How many even have 5.1 systems?This is admittedly anecdotal, but I've had several co-workers and family members ask me to help them pick up high-def displays. The first two questions are always image quality and price, but the third -- without fail -- is how the built-in speakers sound.

I dunno. I'd be happy with a Laserdisc sized niche. As long as there's a steady stream of titles, as long as the quality's high, and as long as the discs aren't outrageously expensive, I'll be happy. I don't care who "wins". I don't care if either format dominates DVD. I don't care if my neighbors buy in. There are advantages to widespread adoption, but as long as I can watch movies I love in the highest quality possible, all other concerns are secondary.

Disagree, to both. DVD-A/SACD is a niche product for the very same reason that HD media - nobody gives a damn. The avg consumer simply can't tell the difference, or if they can tell the difference it's not nearly great enough to be bothered.
If they can't tell the difference, why do many of them ALREADY have HD sources? It doesn't look any different, so they should have just stuck with SD.

It's estimated that 40% or more of HDTV owners have ZERO HD feeds - none.
Proving my point, though with better numbers than I used to make it. if 40% don't have HD sources, that means 60% DO. Thus the 15% level of consumers ACTIVELY SEEKING HD content that I used in my argument is actually more like 18-21%. This means a little over 20 million households (based on 2002 census numbers) have committed to HD content. And this number increases every month.

How many even have 5.1 systems?
Thanks for proving my point AGAIN on why people didn't care about multichannel high-definition audio. Contrast this with the above, where you have vast numbers of people (many of whom don't have surround sound) who find the superior picture of HD worthwhile, even if the sound isn't better because they don't have the equipment.

If they can't tell the difference, why do many of them ALREADY have HD sources? It doesn't look any different, so they should have just stuck with SD.
And many say just that - I bought this expensive piece of equipment why again? Also quite a few are annoyed when they find out to get HD they need to buy/get additional services or devices.

Proving my point, though with better numbers than I used to make it. if 40% don't have HD sources, that means 60% DO. Thus the 15% level of consumers ACTIVELY SEEKING HD content that I used in my argument is actually more like 18-21%. This means a little over 20 million households (based on 2002 census numbers) have committed to HD content. And this number increases every month.
Nice try, but that's not the real picture. Last time I heard there were 30 million HDTVs in the US - that's a whopping 10% of the total number of TVs. Now lets once again look at the 60% - that's now 60% of the total 10% (6% of the total market) = still a niche market.

Contrast this with the above, where you have vast numbers of people (many of whom don't have surround sound) who find the superior picture of HD worthwhile, even if the sound isn't better because they don't have the equipment.
That's been my experience with HD TV, it's a huge improvement over SD & very noticable. HD media over DVD? Not so much, & that's the real issue. Going from VHS to DVD was a massive jump, from DVD to HD media? Not so much - & that's why the consumer doesn't care, DVDs look fine. They're better than the SD broadcasts they're used to & there's not a huge change in PQ from HDTV signals.

This is admittedly anecdotal, but I've had several co-workers and family members ask me to help them pick up high-def displays. The first two questions are always image quality and price, but the third -- without fail -- is how the built-in speakers sound.
This is why I never understood so many think that AQ will pull in the masses towards HD video. Most don't have 5.1, hell, most don't even have good 2.0. There's a reason why most HDTVs come with speakers.
J

If they can't tell the difference, why do many of them ALREADY have HD sources? It doesn't look any different, so they should have just stuck with SD.


Proving my point, though with better numbers than I used to make it. if 40% don't have HD sources, that means 60% DO. Thus the 15% level of consumers ACTIVELY SEEKING HD content that I used in my argument is actually more like 18-21%. This means a little over 20 million households (based on 2002 census numbers) have committed to HD content. And this number increases every month.


Thanks for proving my point AGAIN on why people didn't care about multichannel high-definition audio. Contrast this with the above, where you have vast numbers of people (many of whom don't have surround sound) who find the superior picture of HD worthwhile, even if the sound isn't better because they don't have the equipment.

I agree completely. Trying to draw parallels between DVDA/SACD and HDDVD/BD is a waste of time as its apples to oranges.

Not many people but audiophiles just sit there and listen to hi-fi multi channel audio. Those same people are the only ones who critically listen to stereo also. mOst consumers just want music for background noise. Radio and mp3 is just fine. Most don't have systems capable of letting them actually hear the difference.

People can see a difference with HDTV and HD sources. They like what they see in the store. That's why HDTV sales are so hot. They already have a display capable of showing the difference between HDM and DVD. The only problem right now is the cost of that improvement. To some its not worth the cost, bring it to DVD costs and you won't have to worry about HDM dieing, especially if studios all went neutral.

...because consumers wouldn't stand for it.

I'm wary of people pretending to speak for a large segment of population :rolleyes:

I guess you could say there are four competing formats now, too. DVD, VOD, Blu-ray, and HD DVD. Eerie.

VOD is a mis-nomer. Let us just say digital deliveries - it could be VOD, rental download or EST.

I'm excited about rental downloads - if someone comes up with good 1080p rental plans, I'd be all over it.

I don't think digital delivaries would ever replace optical media. There is clearly a segment of population that wants to "own" movies on discs - just as there is a group that buys CDs. I don't look at that as a either / or situation.

Only problem is HiDef DVD can get crushed between the established leader DVD and the "dark horse" - digital downloads. Just the way it happened with SACD/DVD-A. I don't think HiFi audio format was ever going to be successful - given changes in lifestyles from "sit down and listen" to "take the music with you".

Nice try, but that's not the real picture. Last time I heard there were 30 million HDTVs in the US - that's a whopping 10% of the total number of TVs. Now lets once again look at the 60% - that's now 60% of the total 10% (6% of the total market) = still a niche market.

Nice attempt at spin. HDTV penetration was 13% in 2005. (http://hdtvmagazine.com/articles/2005/10/2005_hdtv_repor_1.php) It's currently at 28% (http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:f6jKhgLYC_gJ:www.tvweek.com/page.cms%3FpageId%3D680+CEA+HDTV+Penetration+2007&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a). The 13" TV in the garage doesn't have to be HD for people to be enjoying HD content in their living room. Ergo, the percentage of total TVs in existence that are HD does not matter with respect to HD penetration and acceptance.

Aside from that, even your stated numbers and percentages are incorrect. There are about 35 million HDTVs in use in the US, out of a total of 247 million sets (111.4 million households (http://www.dmwmedia.com/news/2007/02/08/report-number-of-u-s-tv-households-to-rise-40-by-2050) x 2.24 TVs per household (http://www.csun.edu/science/health/docs/tv&health.html) x 99% of homes with at least 1 TV). This means that 14.2% of all televisions are HDTVs. This jibes just fine with the 28% household penetration when you consider that not ALL sets in a particular home are HD at this point. So if we go from these more accurate figures, 17% (three times your figure, and slightly more than my initial guess) of all US households are watching HD content already, or about 19 million homes. Again, this number expands on a monthly basis.

Kind of ironic to see a thread like this even started by one supporting Blu-ray.

These companies belong to the DVD Forum for all intent and purposes to agree on industry standards for technology to avoid having format wars exactly like this. The DVD Forum voted for and approved supporting HD DVD and the high definition standard!

Now whether or not Sony, Fox etc abstained from voting should make little difference. If they had voted they would expect the other members to follow what was passed. To be part of an organazation like this, not support what is agreed upon and then go and privately support and found a format that goes directly against this is not good for the consumers.

Add this all up and I wouldnt say it is the neutral companies fault in this format war for not supporting a single format exclusively...

This of course is my own opinion on it

Without the competition of two formats, prices would be higher, and quality would be lower, on both sides. That is NOT good for consumers. Consumers definitely benefit form the competition. The truth is, that the masses really don't care about HD, and aren't going to replace their DVDs, or pay more for it, even if there was only one format.
J

Wrong
Your confusing a "format" with an "industry". If in an industry, there is only 1 company, then that company has a monopoly, prices are high and yes thats bad for consumers.

But the case is entirely difference with a media format. First, advertising the differences between HDDVD and Bluray would cease, lowering marketing costs. Secondly if only 1 format exists, then many more hardware companies will jump in, and hardware costs will go down. These are the companies that havent already invest in either format, and that are not capable of taking the risk on a potentially dead format. Disks will be massed produced at a larger and more efficient scale, as with players. Movie studios will no longer have to worry about which format to support. With a much larger potential user base (as upposed to roughly half when there are 2 formats) studios will release more titeles and with higher sales volumes will thus lower prices. With only 1 HD format, they will have to compete more directly with SD-DVDs and thus disk prices will have to come down.

This is all about economies of scale, efficiency and a defined user base. Prices WILL GO DOWN IF THERE IS ONLY 1 HD FORMAT. I think someone else has stated something along the lines of, the "format war" should not be between 2 HD formats, but between HD and SD.

Shouldn't we be protesting against DTS and Dolby too? And widescreen and fullscreen formats? DVD and online downloads? PS3 and 360? PC's and Macs? Itunes and Zune?

We only need one format, because that will guarantee success, just like it did with DVHS. It would be a terrible thing for companies to support all these different formats, because consumers will go into a blind mania panic when they become overwhelmed by the choices.

Wrong


But the case is entirely difference with a media format. First, advertising the differences between HDDVD and Bluray would cease, lowering marketing costs. Secondly if only 1 format exists, then many more hardware companies will jump in, and hardware costs will go down. These are the companies that havent already invest in either format, and that are not capable of taking the risk on a potentially dead format. Disks will be massed produced at a larger and more efficient scale, as with players. Movie studios will no longer have to worry about which format to support. With a much larger potential user base (as upposed to roughly half when there are 2 formats) studios will release more titeles and with higher sales volumes will thus lower prices. With only 1 HD format, they will have to compete more directly with SD-DVDs and thus disk prices will have to come down.

This is all about economies of scale, efficiency and a defined user base. Prices WILL GO DOWN IF THERE IS ONLY 1 HD FORMAT. I think someone else has stated something along the lines of, the "format war" should not be between 2 HD formats, but between HD and SD.

You make a mistake by going under the assumption that if there was only one format, the masses would flock to it, like zombies to a blu light, and hence the economies of scale would kick in. I disagree. I don't think the masses would care about HD even if there was only one format. They won't jump in, therefore, you still have a niche product and the economies of scale don't have any bearing. Prices would stay high without any competition to drive them down.
I do agree that its really a fight between HD and SD-unfortunately, SD will win.
J

Shouldn't we be protesting against DTS and Dolby too? And widescreen and fullscreen formats? DVD and online downloads? PS3 and 360? PC's and Macs? Itunes and Zune?

We only need one format, because that will guarantee success, just like it did with DVHS. It would be a terrible thing for companies to support all these different formats, because consumers will go into a blind mania panic when they become overwhelmed by the choices.

Amen, brother. There should be a new thread called "A rant against people too stupid to think competition is bad".

SACD and DVD-a didn't die because of the "battle", they died because the masses didn't want HD audio-any HD audio.

Exactly. Can you say MP3? Or iPod? Funny how joshd2012 doesn't acknowledge things like that.

Competition can exist within a format. In fact, looking at the recent drop in player prices can just as easily be attributed to competition between Sony and Panasonic as it could Sony and Toshiba.

You have got to be kidding. May I please have some of what you are smoking? On second thought, no thanks!

Bradley

If both formats survive and all studios don't go neutral, as others have said, I think the HD optical disc market will forever be a niche product.

I just can't see the downside of all studios going neutral. Two formats competing drives hardware pricing down and all studios going neutral assures everyone their player won't be obsolete or will definitively not play movies from "the other format's" studio(s). Low prices and the ability to watch any movie you want (when it's released in HD) will be the only way HD discs will hit the masses. If you can pick up a HD player for more or less the same price as a good SD DVD player, but can watch HD media, it's a no-brainer, even for AJ.

So the fact that Sony lowered the price of their $600 player when faced against Panasonic's $600 player + movies was all about Toshiba?

Sony cares way more about winning the format war than selling a few more players vs. Panasonic. There's is little Sony would like more than for a Panasonic stand alone player to become widely popular. Based on that, I would say yes.

If Warner and Paramount want to revert to only supporting HD DVD, I would be fine with it. The war would be over in the matter of months, because consumers wouldn't stand for it. I would collect what I could and then start buying DVDs again (*cringe*).

What exactly are you saying here? If that happened, you would collect whatever ________ you could? Fill in the blank, please. Has Blu Ray satisfied your needs for content to the point you not buying currently buying any DVDs? If the "war" was over, wouldn't Disney and Fox and everyone other than Sony Pictures start quickly releasing titles on HD-DVD?

I don't get the mentality of people that would blame companies for supporting both formats (unless this was nothing more than flame-bait). Bashing Microsoft I can understand, but this really takes the cake.

Bradley

This is why I never understood so many think that AQ will pull in the masses towards HD video. Most don't have 5.1, hell, most don't even have good 2.0. There's a reason why most HDTVs come with speakers.
J

The AQ argument never held much water for me either for the masses. For a movie going experience in the home high def for most (not just AV junkies on this forum) is fundamentally a VISUAL experience. I certainly appreciate a wonderful audio experience (as the price for my B & W speakers can attest) but for most folks that I know - the speakers in the monitor is how AQ will be provided.

So the fact that Sony lowered the price of their $600 player when faced against Panasonic's $600 player + movies was all about Toshiba?

You mean the recent $100 drop in the price of the BDP-S300? It probably wasn't ALL about Toshiba, but to ignore or disregard the effects of the Toshiba price cuts and promotional discounts would truly be sticking your head in the sand. Sony's standalone BD players already have to compete with the PS3 to a certain extent. Why don't you mention that as a significant factor as well? After all, the PS3 is one of the best, most upgradable BD players out there.

Bradley

Nice attempt at spin. HDTV penetration was 13% in 2005. It's currently at 28%. The 13" TV in the garage doesn't have to be HD for people to be enjoying HD content in their living room. Ergo, the percentage of total TVs in existence that are HD does not matter with respect to HD penetration and acceptance.
Number can be spun however you want - the bottom line is they simply don't give a damn about HD media. HDTV is a significant improvement, HD media over DVD is not - until it's the same price (player & media) it's on a bullet train to nowhere.

Competition can exist within a format. In fact, looking at the recent drop in player prices can just as easily be attributed to competition between Sony and Panasonic as it could Sony and Toshiba.
You're kidding right? Both companies pretty much came out & said out intent is to rape the customer for as long as possible - as they've done @ every turn. It happened with tape media, DVD, and they tried it again with HD media. They ONLY thing different is the relative value of currency.

1) Get as many customers as you can @ $1,000....watch sales, when they flatline ->
2) Sell as many as you can @ 750....watch sales, when they flatline ->
3) Sell as many as you can @ 500....watch sales, when they flatline ->
4) Sell as many as you can @ 300....watch sales, when they flatline ->
5) hit the mass adoption point of under $250 & the competition begins in earnest.

They wanted the exact same game plan only this time Toshiba screwed them & jumped right to step 4.

I do agree that its really a fight between HD and SD-unfortunately, SD will win.
Unless it changes I agree 100% - more & more it looks like both will go the way of the do-do bird.

Unless the avg consumer can walk into the store & pick the new Slappy 6000 HiDef disc player AND the movies for the exact same price as a DVD player & DVDs there is no interest.

This is really an epic rant!


*Warning: Opinion Ahead*

On numerous occasions, I have seen a number of different variations of the following statement:

Why don't the studios release titles on both formats, and let the consumers decide?

After seeing this statement way too many times, it now makes me cringe every time I read it. Clearly, two formats can not successfully co-exists, and one must dominate in order to reach mass adoption. DVD-A and SACD both collapsed as consumers opted for the lower quality of CDs and digital downloads. We are again threatened by the same fate for Blu-ray and HD DVD, but should consumers be the ones to make ultimate decision on which survives?

As has been stated, there is a BIG difference in an audio format of higher quality versus a video format of higher quality. The adoption of HDTV just proves this out.

Oh and the consumer ALWAYS makes the final decision as to who survives and who fails. They are the vaulted holder of "The Wallet" - you know, the thing that holds the money and the credit cards.

First off, consumers are generally stupid. Corporations spend millions of dollars trying to figure out what consumers want, but at the end of the day they'll still spend twice that telling consumers what they want via advertising. Sure, a really bad idea will never take off, but plenty of mediocre ideas have been huge financial winners because of successful advertising. Leaving the decision up to the consumer will never resolve the issue. In general, they will simply give up and stick with the very successful DVD platform.

I can't believe you typed that (in red). Did you read what you wrote before pressing the "submit" button? I don't think you did. You just called me and EVERYONE here (including yourself) STUPID because we are ALL consumers.

They are already "giving up and sticking with DVD." Your faith in big business is amazing!

Second, why should consumers be burdened with cleaning up a mess that studios and CE manufacturers started? It was never the desire of consumers to have two competing high definition formats; it was the greed of corporations which caused the divide. As the cause of the war, they should ultimately be responsible for solving it. As much as "voting with your dollar" means for successful PR, it won't even show up as a blip on the radar of most corporate financial statements because it is a very small piece of business right now.

You should talk to Sony about that "blip" as you call it. What is their loss up to? Oh yea . . . $1.7 billion . . . . that's $1,700,000,000.00.

Some have already chosen sides, and have planted their flags. Other, remain neutral hoping that someone with make the decision for them. For those corporations who are neutral, I say to them, for lack of a better term, grow a pair! Chose a side and be done with it, because the current situation is satisfactory to no party.

What happened to your esteemed regard for big corporations? Did you forget that the main concern of a business . . . ANY business is to make money? For WB and Paramount, they made a great decision. Sell both and reap the revenue from both. I believe WB just announced that their highest grossing revenue title was Planet Earth which was $5.2 million. If they "choose a side" they would have 1/2 of that!

Here is an eye opener for you - the current situation is great! The Stupid Consumer is reaping the benefits of the format war with lower player prices.

Duh . . . you do need a player to watch HD movies.

One of two things will happen, if neutral corporations take sides. Either the war will become even more divided or it will be over. If it becomes more divided, both sides will eventually fail. I would not be happy with this outcome, but at least there would be only one party to blame, the corporations. You can't blame consumers for not selecting a single format if the corporations can't do the same. If they truly want HD to prevail, then they will come together and unite.

"When you wish upon a star . . ." I will have to agree with one of your rants, oh, excuse me, statements . . . both may fail. That is a definite possibility. Blame - of course it's always important to find someone to blame. That is why we have so many lawyers here in the USA.

This "unite" idea. Sounds great except it's time has come and gone. But a new time may arise in the not too distant future. We will have to wait and see won't we?

I'm talking to you, Warner Brothers, Paramount, LG, and Samsung! Pick a side and be done with it! The war will end either way, but the results will be determined strictly on your decisions, and not consumers. You were part of the problem. Now, become the solution so that HD can thrive instead of remaining and niche format.

And i am talking to you, the OP of this "rant thread" that you started. YOU knew this was going to happen from day one. YOU knew there were two formats with BIG corporations behind them. So why didn't you just sit out the war and wait for a winner to emerge.

Are you a Stupid Consumer like us? :D

until it's the same price (player & media) it's on a bullet train to nowhere.

Like that one, I lol'd.

It's easiest for me just to copy and paste my HTF post on this subject:

More and more people are comparing this format war to SACD vs DVD-A. The Bits just posted similar thoughts, and it scares me that this mindset is starting to reach critical mass. Maybe my memory is foggy regarding the SACD/DVD-A war, but I don't seem to remember there being any real level of commitment from the content providers of either. How many big albums were released day and date on SACD or DVD-A? If I remember right, you could count the number on your hands and have fingers to spare. How many big gun catalog albums were released on DVD-A or SACD? Sony released a lot of Dylan, if I recall, and DVD-A had just about the entire R.E.M. catalog, as well as Metallica's black album, but the pickins' got pretty slim from there. The people behind SACD and DVD-A never made a solid attempt to gain acceptance. I don't recall seeing ads before the movies touting them, I never saw a commercial for an upcoming album saying "coming soon to CD and SACD" like I do with just about every DVD that is released day and date with Blu or HD.

HD Optical is going nowhere - this war won't last forever, as too much money has been invested in optical HD's future for it to be given up on. While I have little doubt that Microsoft's involvement in this war is motivated by their desire to see streaming/downloadable media take the crown, I don't know if I an swallow the conspiracy that they are behind Universal's neutrality. Wouldn't Universal have some actual movie content on Xbox Live if they were in cahoots? Anyway, this idea that supporters of one format over another is going to kill HD optical likely found its genesis from folks who have a vested interest in one format beating the other, and they know that there are still too many variables to truly declare a victor. It saddens me that people who were around when SACD/DVD-A had their little skirmish are comparing that apple to this orange - when you look at the variety and price of players available, and the variety of titles, both of those formats went into battle waiving white flags from the get-go.

Competition is always best for the customer in a free market.

Agreed, the competition from both sides have been good for the consumer on both sides in terms of quality and price. The $249 HD DVD player, the $499 Blu-Ray player, VC-1, 50 GB discs, 5 free HD DVDs, buy 2 get 1 free Blu-Rays

It seems to me that the neutral approach works well in gaming why not home video? Let the marketplace decide.

Why don't the studios release titles on both formats, and let the consumers decide?

After seeing this statement way too many times, it now makes me cringe every time I read it....There is comedy, there is high comedy, and then there is this post... :D

Thanks for the smile, Josh; I do believe you speak for many BD posters on this board...

consumers are generally stupid. Corporations spend millions of dollars trying to figure out what consumers want, but at the end of the day they'll still spend twice that telling consumers what they want via advertising. Sure, a really bad idea will never take off, but plenty of mediocre ideas have been huge financial winners because of successful advertising. Leaving the decision up to the consumer will never resolve the issue.

Consumers are NOT stupid. There are so many fantastic things that our culture has generated in the past couple of hundred years that exist PRECISELY because the general consumer public accepted them. For example, why do you think we have great TV's if it wasn't because consumers liked them and were willing to pay more for them? This is an arrogant elitist statement and nothing more.

...
First off, consumers are generally stupid. ...
It's rather astonishing to see such blatant anti-consumer statement, the really scary part is that this guy truly believes it. So consumers are stupid, and who should make decisions for them and their hard earned money, perhaps profit-minded companies :rolleyes:

Since they are so stupid and don't really know anything, why stop there, why let them vote, somebody should think for them and make decisions for them too.

Since you are such a movie fan, perhaps you should watch StarWars III again, I am sure Anakin will share you view :)

Welcome to my ignore list.

It's rather astonishing to see such blatant anti-consumer statement, the really scary part is that this guy truly believes it. So consumers are stupid, and who should make decisions for them and their hard earned money, perhaps profit-minded companies
I'd not go with stupid, maybe malleable might be a better term - you have to admit there are a lot of products sold that are for more marketing than substance.

" and think they have all the answers (like we do here)."

The best line of this whole thread!

Josh . . . . you don't have the right questions . . . . let alone the answers!

...... Prices would stay high without any competition to drive them down.
I do agree that its really a fight between HD and SD-unfortunately, SD will win.
J

Competition between HD DVD and Blu-ray will have a minimal impact on prices compared to the more logical battle of HD vs SD. My point stands. Having 1 HD format will result in lower prices.

"I Would Rather Kiss My Sister . . . Than Buy BD!"

Me on the otherhand I'd rather buy HD DVD than commit any form of incest whatsoever. You sick, sick bastard you! :eek:

Competition between HD DVD and Blu-ray will have a minimal impact on prices compared to the more logical battle of HD vs SD.My point stands. Having 1 HD format will result in lower prices.

Yep . . . right on it's head!

You misread that. What I actually said was, I don't think consumers will think they have all the answers, were as here we think we have all the answers. It was a good line, though. :D

Sure was!

Got me laughing! And I ALWAYS love a good laugh!

Even at someone else's expense because as has been noted:

I am a sick, sick bastard!


But wait a minute!

As I would never . . . ever . . . in a thousand lifetimes, "kiss" my sister . . .

Guess I will have to be happy with HD DVD! :D

As of right now, I buy no DVDs anymore. Just Blu-ray. If I can't have it on Blu-ray, then I'm just going to have to wait until it is.



I find this comment not only odd, but disturbing as well.
It redefines fanboyism, extremism.
I still buy DVDs. I'm in it for the movies, not the media.
J

Competition between HD DVD and Blu-ray will have a minimal impact on prices compared to the more logical battle of HD vs SD. My point stands. Having 1 HD format will result in lower prices.

That makes no sense. Prices have already dropped due to HD DVD Vs. BD. The HD Vs. SD battle won't even start for a couple of years.
J

You must have been one of those millions of people who wrote Microsoft saying, "I wish I could know on a weekly basis if my version of Windows was legal," and then they developed Windows Genuine Advantage for you.

I wasn't. But they, the studio's like to be sure that piracy is minimized. Did you mail the BDA to beg them fore more DRM than HD-DVD? Is the BDA just as bad as MS because they go out of their way to keep it product from being pirated???


Ever here of Electoral Colleges? Oh, and btw, the US is a representational government, which mean you vote for the person who runs the electoral college to vote for the person who will eventual make decisions for you.

Ever hear of a free market? You know, a market where people vote with their wallet which format is better for themselves.

Or is having a choice only beneficial when the results are in your favor?

That makes no sense. Prices have already dropped due to HD DVD Vs. BD. The HD Vs. SD battle won't even start for a couple of years.
J

Totally unacceptable post!

1. It is too truthful
2. It is too intelligent
3. It's logic is undeniable

Doomed for failure here! :rolleyes:

This posts is what is wrong with AVS. The automatic assumption that any statement which does not fit the readers mindset is automatically fanboyism.

Did you ever stop to think that I stop buy DVDs because the picture quality has become unbearable compared to Blu-ray? Its hard for me to even was SD TV, does that make me a fanboy of whatever channels my cable provider chooses to carry in HD?

I understood your post perfectly. My comment stands.
J

I'd not go with stupid, maybe malleable might be a better term - you have to admit there are a lot of products sold that are for more marketing than substance.
Oh, no doubt about it, crappy products all over the place. It's not about consumer being smart or informed, it is their decisions to make, not the other way around.

Actually I purchased under the understanding that Fox was supposed to be releasing specifically named titles every month of this year....

If BD+ gets me Fox movies on Blu-ray, that is something I can live with. And I purchase into Blu-ray with full understanding of this. I wasn't, however, made aware of WGA until way after I bought Windows XP. So, no, MS is much worse.

...

And thus, my rant.

If you truthfully purchased the Windows XP copy, why would WGA be a problem to you? Before installing an update or a Microsoft software, having to press "Verify Genuine Windows Software" or some such button is an invasion of privacy for you? :rolleyes: The fact that you go through such authentication every time you pop in a Blu-Ray disc seems to be lost on you.. maybe because it is silent authentication, instead of an "in your face prompt"? Do you always balk at having to insert a product key every time you install a new software because it is an insult to your integrity being asked for verification?

How exactly is it different from AACS or HDCP? Do you use iPod with iTMS purchased content or Zune with .. (I guess I don't need to ask this given your incessant rants against anything Microsoft makes).

Do you balk at bartenders or sales clerks when they card you when you buy beer or smokes (if you do smoke)?

I find this comment not only odd, but disturbing as well.
It redefines fanboyism, extremism.
I still buy DVDs. I'm in it for the movies, not the media.
J


I stopped buying regular ol' DVD as well. It's not extremism. It's me wanting to make the most of my setup and not wasting money on inferior products. I'm in the hobby for movies as well, but if I can have HD media, why would I want to throw money away on SD, unless that's how the movie/tv show/etc was filmed? I not going to set myself up for a double dip later by buying SD now.

If Warner and Paramount want to revert to only supporting HD DVD, I would be fine with it. The war would be over in the matter of months, because consumers wouldn't stand for it. I would collect what I could and then start buying DVDs again (*cringe*).


Why is that you think consumers wouldn't stand for it if Warner and Paramount went HDDVD only? You seem to have no problem with Disney/Fox/Sony being one format only. Why should it be any different if the tables are turned the other way? Since Warner/Universal/Paramount equate to ~80% of the entire movie market (for toatal catalog if I remember the #s correctly) I would think that consumers would be more than willing to "go along with it". Or is the fact that it is HD DVD that would make you go back to "buying DVDs again (*cringe)" . I am format neutral only in that I have both sides players and I honestly don't care who "wins" I am just enjoying HD however I can get it. In truthfulness I buy the HD DVD when the option is either/or simply because I have more HD DVD players available to me due to price and can play the content in more places (and with combos can play it anywhere)

Ugh...

Letting people have a choice makes you cringe?

Competition is always best for the customer in a free market.

Yeah I wished there was only GM so I would be "forced" to buy their crappy cars. :p

As stated early on in the thread the reason sacd/dvd-audio didn't take off is because most simply do not notice the diff between high res audio and CD nor woudl they acre even if they could. Sooooooooo many people do not give a crap about high quality audio as seen by the millions of people who use $2.99 cheap sounding headphones/earbuds.

Why is that you think consumers wouldn't stand for it if Warner and Paramount went HDDVD only? You seem to have no problem with Disney/Fox/Sony being one format only. Why should it be any different if the tables are turned the other way? Since Warner/Universal/Paramount equate to ~80% of the entire movie market (for toatal catalog if I remember the #s correctly) I would think that consumers would be more than willing to "go along with it". Or is the fact that it is HD DVD that would make you go back to "buying DVDs again (*cringe)" . I am format neutral only in that I have both sides players and I honestly don't care who "wins" I am just enjoying HD however I can get it. In truthfulness I buy the HD DVD when the option is either/or simply because I have more HD DVD players available to me due to price and can play the content in more places (and with combos can play it anywhere)

Yeah I think it is simply because Josh is a big blu ray supporter so if other studios went hd dvd exclusive then it would be bad and everyone would be in an uproar. If they went blu ray exclusive then they'd be praised. :p

I just do not get how people can have such a double standard/bias. heh

Like you though as a format neutral person I really do not care which format "wins" if one does at all. They both do the same thing which is provide me with HD movie goodness.

If BD+ gets me Fox movies on Blu-ray, that is something I can live with. And I purchase into Blu-ray with full understanding of this. I wasn't, however, made aware of WGA until way after I bought Windows XP. So, no, MS is much worse.

If you're buying your OS like you say you are... WTF is the problem with them trying to protect their bottom line? It's OK for FOX to look out for it's own ass, but not MS? You're not making sense here.


In my favor? Consumers are overwhelming voting with their wallet, and they are screaming at the top of their lungs "DVD"! If anyone wants either Blu-ray or HD DVD to succeed, they need the studios/CE corporations to make a choice and migrate that direction, because consumers won't do it on their own, even if they gain from doing so.

And thus, my rant.

If the studio's want this to be successful(and you know damn well they do, so they can resell all those movies they just sold you on DVD and whatever new releases come out). They need to bring prices a bit closer to DVD. Otherwise no other format will succeed. They need to please us. They're after our money, not the other way around.

And thus, an unwarranted and baseless rant.

united we stand, divided we fall.

the war is against SD DVD, not BD against HD. It is much better to have a united front to overthrow SD than to have 2 battling parties causing dissention in the ranks.

competition is not beneficial in this context, particularly with the larger monster of DVD hanging over both their heads.

I can't even convince my dad to get either player even if it was $200 when he is getting a 5-disc CD/DVD player for $129, He says he wont buy one until the format war is decided. This is a view shared by many people.
If Universal announces its going neutral in the next 2 months He would spend $500 for the new Sony Blu-ray player and buy a separate CD changer.



I would rather have a Blu-ray player there are currently only 15 Universal titles that I want to see and about 15 more that have been announced, there is currently 65 Blu-ray movies that I want to see (and 7 from WB that are on HD-DVD that will be on Blu-ray) and about 42 that have been announced (those don't include Evan Almighty or Spiderman 3 that have simultaneous DVD releases) It just doesn't make sense for me to get HD-DVD when currently 75% of the movies I want I can get on Blu-ray.

If all studio's went neutral, your dad would only have to spend $250 on HD-DVD.

If all studio's went neutral, your dad would only have to spend $250 on HD-DVD.


That still wouldn't guarantee that HD-DVD would win. It would give them a leg up though.

That still wouldn't guarantee that HD-DVD would win. It would give them a leg up though.

There are no guarantees anyway. Period. Winning over the other HD format would not guarantee success against the well entrenched DVD market, and the upcoming download services.

That still wouldn't guarantee that HD-DVD would win. It would give them a leg up though.

Interesting statement.

So what you are saying is if all the studios went neutral tomorrow - no more exclusives.

You would rather spend $499 for a player as opposed to $299.

I thought money was an issue?

I have to say this is an entertaining thread. I really don't think it would make a big difference in the outcome of this so called war if sides were selected. Both formats more or less offer the same thing improved video and audio quality. Unfortunately this is not enough to sway the average consumer and I will explain why I feel this way.

HD disc does not offer the distinct advantage that DVD offered over VHS back in the day. The biggest thing that DVD offered over VHS was conveinence, durability and the ability to function as a CD player. Video stores gravitated to the format due to its compact size (takes up less space and is infinitely more durable than tape. The fact that the format had better picture and sound was just gravy on top of the roast beef.

Fast forward to today. HD-DVD and Blu-ray hit the scene and offer superior picture and improved sound over DVD but thats it. It isn't more convenient isn't any more durable and in fact when you look at it in the store it does not look any different (physically that is) than a DVD. In addition to this it now has to compete not only with DVD but it is in competition with downloadable content.

This also brings up HDTV's and why they are selling and guess what the main reason is not HD its the fact that the TV is only a couple of inches deep and can be hung on the wall and has become a sort of status symbol. Big fat tube based HD TVs sell terrible when compared to there sexy LCD and plasma brethren. Of course once people see that they can get HD on cable they view that as gravy. But since the HD content is limited its not such a big deal.

Bottom line is you can rant all you want and call the public a bunch of morons because they aren't buying enough HD discs thus threatening your hidef worlds future but it wont change anything. So just pop in a hidef disc and enjoy it while it lasts. Hey you might get lucky and it will hang long enough for the next great idea. There is always a corporation looking to come up with the next best thing.

Interesting statement.

So what you are saying is if all the studios went neutral tomorrow - no more exclusives.

You would rather spend $499 for a player as opposed to $299.

I thought money was an issue?


Didn't VHS and BETA have neutral support (except porn), one eventually died. That could still happen if all the studios went neutral tomorrow.

Money wasn't the main issue, it was a chance of being stuck with the loosing format, and all studio neutrality would still (most likely) lead to an end of one format. Don't want to spend money on movies that if the player breaks and the other format won would have to buy the movies again and would to buy the other player because they stopped selling movies on the format that I bought.

(Obviously if they were all neutral Blu-ray would have to reduce their player cost to at least within $50 to still compete, which I think they would.)

...
HD disc does not offer the distinct advantage that DVD offered over VHS back in the day. The biggest thing that DVD offered over VHS was conveinence, durability and the ability to function as a CD player. Video stores gravitated to the format due to its compact size (takes up less space and is infinitely more durable than tape. The fact that the format had better picture and sound was just gravy on top of the roast beef...
Many good points. Another advantage of DVD over VHS is the PQ difference was very obvious on all TVs already in consumers' households. This is hardly the case for HDM, even if one can argue adoption of HDTV is increasing, most of these HD/ED TVs are simply too small to show similar PQ improvement.

Another point, I think many here are well aware but wouldn't admit, is the fact that HDTVs for the first time actually make it possible for DVDs to truly shine, SDTVs simply are not good enough to show DVDs real potential. Many of my friends are financially well set and have large HDTVs, they are pretty happy with PQ improvement they got switching to HDTV, and they can continue to use their DVD players on DVDs they already own. It's very hard to convince them to jump into HDM, most people simply do not feel some small (or large, whatever you feel) PQ improvement is worth the significant extra cost.

HDM faces an uphill battle, it's a real possibility it will be limited to a niche market for quite a while.

Interesting statement.

So what you are saying is if all the studios went neutral tomorrow - no more exclusives.

You would rather spend $499 for a player as opposed to $299.

I thought money was an issue?

If the blu-ray movies are all high bitrate AVC and lossless audio, and the hd-dvd ones are all low bitrate vc-1 and lossy audio, you're DAMN strait i'd spend more for the superior product.

If the blu-ray movies are all high bitrate AVC and lossless audio, and the hd-dvd ones are all low bitrate vc-1 and lossy audio, you're DAMN strait i'd spend more for the superior product.

There is that pesky word . . . ."IF."

I stopped buying regular ol' DVD as well. It's not extremism. It's me wanting to make the most of my setup and not wasting money on inferior products. I'm in the hobby for movies as well, but if I can have HD media, why would I want to throw money away on SD, unless that's how the movie/tv show/etc was filmed? I not going to set myself up for a double dip later by buying SD now.
Its not a question of double dipping. Many, no, make that most movies will never make it to HD. I have about 1000 DVDs at this point, and I would be greatly surprised if 1/2 of them ever made it to HD. Hell, I'm still waiting for some movies to come to DVD. I enjoy HD too, but I'm first and formost a movie lover, and to watch HD only, would severely limit my choices. According to Amazon, there are anywhere from 250-400 new DVDs put out every week. That doesn't even count imports. That's alot of choices. Let me know when HD gets to that level.
J

Didn't VHS and BETA have neutral support (except porn), one eventually died. That could still happen if all the studios went neutral tomorrow.



Thats fine. Then people could pick depending on what is better for them. Not what is "perceived" to be better by what a select group of studio's and CE on either side tell you is better for you.

Throw the chips up and let them land where they may.

Competition between HD DVD and Blu-ray will have a minimal impact on prices compared to the more logical battle of HD vs SD. My point stands. Having 1 HD format will result in lower prices.
Don't think so, that's certainly not been my experience.

Tape wars? I don't remember how long it was but I remember feeling like a late adopter by the time VCR's got to my entry point - $500

DVD - I wasn't early, I'd guess about 18 months to 2 years before they hit my buy in point - same $500

HD media - less than a year AND it was down to under $300

Nah, sorry I'm not going to buy the "single format = price drop" myth, not given the CE's past history.

I agree with Josh about the intelligence level of "consumers" as a whole. I do not think this "war" has anything in common with dvd-a/sacd though. High rez audio requires gear and ears better than what I have to tell much difference from regular cd's. Also, the whole high-rez audio section in BB is much smaller than the HD movie section, and how much longer has it been around? I think the complexity of modern electronics actually helps hd media to be accepted. Many people will think that HD DVD (or BD) is needed or goes better with the new HDTV they just bought. Several people I know got HDTV's because they are 16:9 and most new shows are 16:9, and a few i know got them just to be able to see the subchannels (like 4.2 being all weather for example).
I don't think either format will win. I think universal players will become the norm, and then everyone except Sony will only put out HD DVD's because they are cheaper to make. This will take 2-3 years though, so the only solution is to buy both formats.

If Blu-ray was Sony, Disney, Fox, and Lionsgate... and HD DVD was Universal, Paramount, and Warner... then consumers would be forced to buy two formats, something they would not stand for. It would lead to imminent failure.

I see that you have not touched upon why Microsoft's WGA is more offensive to you than any one of the myriad authentication routines you go through everyday, albeit passively. HDCP, AACS, BD+ (when it eventually comes to life), product keys for software, proof of age etc. etc.

If you had genuine Microsoft XP software, why is it more offensive for you to go through the WGA authentication anymore than the others? Is it because it's from Microsoft - a company that you seem to despise?

I see that you have not touched upon why Microsoft's WGA is more offensive to you than any one of the myriad authentication routines you go through everyday, albeit passively. HDCP, AACS, BD+ (when it eventually comes to life), product keys for software, proof of age etc. etc.

If you had genuine Microsoft XP software, why is it more offensive for you to go through the WGA authentication anymore than the others? Is it because it's from Microsoft - a company that you seem to despise?

WGA is offensive because its making you, nay, FORCING you to verify after the install of the OS, if it is authentic or not. They are trying to check if you are a criminal or not. Thats not good practice. BD+, AACS, HDCP, etc are all seemless and were there DAY 1. You dont boot up your BD player then have to do a authenticity check. That is as shoddy as it gets. And before anyone questions it, BD+ is already installed on every single BD player, the discs just dont have them... yet.

WGA is offensive because its making you, nay, FORCING you to verify after the install of the OS, if it is authentic or not. They are trying to check if you are a criminal or not. Thats not good practice. BD+, AACS, HDCP, etc are all seemless and were there DAY 1. You dont boot up your BD player then have to do a authenticity check. That is as shoddy as it gets. And before anyone questions it, BD+ is already installed on every single BD player, the discs just dont have them... yet.


Damn my bank for FORCING me to verify my identity when I want to make a deposit.

Damn my gym for FORCING me to verify myself and my account when I want to work out.

Damn the email that FORCES me to verify myself when I want to log-in.

Damn the movie rental businesses that FORCE me to verify who I am and where I live every time I walk out with a movie.

Damn the whole industry that wants to be sure you're actually paying for the services you get and trying to protect you and their best interests.

Warner Brothers, Paramount, LG, and Samsung are hedging their bets. Actually, LG and Samsung probably did it to make their otherwise non-competitive Blu-ray players attractive with HD-DVD playback capabilities.

I think there will eventually be one format because the retailers will demand it. Maintaining space for dual inventories is just not a good thing. If the stalemate continues for too much longer, I half-expect the B&M stores to pick their own sides and drop one (or both) formats.
For CE how can you compete on one side with the PS3 and on the other side with A2/A20/XA2 prices? Their only hope to sell in large volume standalone player is to provide real added value and there is currently only one which is being dual format capable.

WGA is offensive because its making you, nay, FORCING you to verify after the install of the OS, if it is authentic or not. They are trying to check if you are a criminal or not. Thats not good practice. BD+, AACS, HDCP, etc are all seemless and were there DAY 1. You dont boot up your BD player then have to do a authenticity check. That is as shoddy as it gets. And before anyone questions it, BD+ is already installed on every single BD player, the discs just dont have them... yet.

Are you Josh's doppleganger? I asked for his reason for finding WGA offensive, while welcoming BD+ or AACS or HDCP. In any case, your objection to WGA is hypocritical at best. You only have to authenticate with WGA when you are installing a Windows update or a Microsoft software. They are free to limit their updates to legally purchased software, which if you did, you should not have any problem with.

AACS or HDCP or BD+ are all similar. How dare they make you pass an authentication (albeit passive) even after you insert a movie disc you have lawfully purchased with your hard earned money? The fact that you have to pass a silent authentication again should offend you just the same as WGA.

Just like you claim BD+ is already on all players (I call BS on this one) but only just missing it on the discs, the default software code required for WGA was already in Windows. They just had to enable authentication functions that use it.

*Warning: Opinion Ahead*

On numerous occasions, I have seen a number of different variations of the following statement:

Why don't the studios release titles on both formats, and let the consumers decide?

After seeing this statement way too many times, it now makes me cringe every time I read it. Clearly, two formats can not successfully co-exists, and one must dominate in order to reach mass adoption. DVD-A and SACD both collapsed as consumers opted for the lower quality of CDs and digital downloads. We are again threatened by the same fate for Blu-ray and HD DVD, but should consumers be the ones to make ultimate decision on which survives?

First off, consumers are generally stupid. Corporations spend millions of dollars trying to figure out what consumers want, but at the end of the day they'll still spend twice that telling consumers what they want via advertising. Sure, a really bad idea will never take off, but plenty of mediocre ideas have been huge financial winners because of successful advertising. Leaving the decision up to the consumer will never resolve the issue. In general, they will simply give up and stick with the very successful DVD platform.

Second, why should consumers be burdened with cleaning up a mess that studios and CE manufacturers started? It was never the desire of consumers to have two competing high definition formats; it was the greed of corporations which caused the divide. As the cause of the war, they should ultimately be responsible for solving it. As much as "voting with your dollar" means for successful PR, it won't even show up as a blip on the radar of most corporate financial statements because it is a very small piece of business right now.

Some have already chosen sides, and have planted their flags. Other, remain neutral hoping that someone with make the decision for them. For those corporations who are neutral, I say to them, for lack of a better term, grow a pair! Chose a side and be done with it, because the current situation is satisfactory to no party.

One of two things will happen, if neutral corporations take sides. Either the war will become even more divided or it will be over. If it becomes more divided, both sides will eventually fail. I would not be happy with this outcome, but at least there would be only one party to blame, the corporations. You can't blame consumers for not selecting a single format if the corporations can't do the same. If they truly want HD to prevail, then they will come together and unite.

I'm talking to you, Warner Brothers, Paramount, LG, and Samsung! Pick a side and be done with it! The war will end either way, but the results will be determined strictly on your decisions, and not consumers. You were part of the problem. Now, become the solution so that HD can thrive instead of remaining and niche format.

I totally disagree with you.

I have the impression sometime that peoples here considerer the average consumer as total moron. This is really not the case.

The reality is that the consumer is already easily dealing with having to choose between two types of DVD (full screen or Wide Screen).

Why can’t he be smart enough to pick the right HD version between Blu-Ray and HD DVD? In fact it is even easier with the HD type of disk selection due to the casing physical differences and color differences while to choose between full screen or Wide Screen the consumer need to decipher and remember that 1:1.33 is a full screen and 1:2.35 is the black but wait what is this 1:1.77 don’t remember.

I strongly believe that what will kill one or both formats are the B&M stores. They don’t what to allocate all the space and inventory $$$ to carry numerous version of the same movies.

Are you Josh's doppleganger? I asked for his reason for finding WGA offensive, while welcoming BD+ or AACS or HDCP. In any case, your objection to WGA is hypocritical at best. You only have to authenticate with WGA when you are installing a Windows update or a Microsoft software. They are free to limit their updates to legally purchased software, which if you did, you should not have any problem with.

AACS or HDCP or BD+ are all similar. How dare they make you pass an authentication (albeit passive) even after you insert a movie disc you have lawfully purchased with your hard earned money? The fact that you have to pass a silent authentication again should offend you just the same as WGA.

Just like you claim BD+ is already on all players (I call BS on this one) but only just missing it on the discs, the default software code required for WGA was already in Windows. They just had to enable authentication functions that use it.

Not to mention Adobe, Nero, Symantec or any other software manufacturer who makes you verify it is a legitimate copy after installation. Damn them ALL. Right? No, lets do the care bear stare at the only EVIL corporation, MS. Never mind Sony and the rootkit fiasco.

I can't believe when I get pulled over in my car the police officer has to check to make sure I am who I say I am and I'm the car's rightful owner. Of course I am! I'm driving the car, so one should automatically assume it is mine and I am who I say I am!!! Who would ever lie about such things?!

Their comments have hypocrisy written all over them.

Sorry, thought I had earlier. Guess I started replying yesterday and got pulled away (or maybe it got deleted?).

When I purchased my Blu-ray player, I knew exactly which security features it would utilize to protect discs from Piracy. I knew exactly what I was signing up for.

With Windows Genuine Advantage, there was no indication, when Windows XP was released, that they would include such anti-piracy software as mandatory. It was only years later that it was forcibly added to my computer. One day the program just showed up and if I didn't install it, I couldn't update the product I purchased anymore. One day I have support, and the next day I don't (if I refuse to download a piece of software) leaving my computer susceptible to virus or malicious attacks.

There is a distinct difference between stating publicly your intentions and backdooring your customers. If you can't make that distinction, then I can explain it any better.

Now that's more like it. As they say "The devil is in the details".

So, you would trust and install a software (WinXP) from the company, but you would not install a related software from the same company just because you were asked to verify if you had a legal copy to receive security support?

Do you have similar objections when some discs don't play on your Blu-Ray players (PS3 for example), if you don't install a firmware update? This is the same with WGA. When BD+ officially gets implemented, I bet that you would be required to update your firmware, without which you would not be able to play BD+ enabled discs. You choose not to update the firmware, you will fail BD+ authentication, and your "lawfully bought" movie will not play. Are you going to proclaim "OMG !! They treat me like I am a sleazy criminal !!"

So how about those Yankee's?

:D

You still don't get it. One was stated upfront and one was delivered through the backdoor. I would have no problem if Microsoft included WGA when I purchased it and told me it was included. But they didn't. Instead it just showed up one day forcing me to comply to something I had not agreed upon when I first purchased it.

Blu-ray has had BD+ since way before it was launched. Its not a new surprise, its something that I am expecting.

Microsoft is deceiving customers. BDA is upfront. There is a huge difference there.

I bet if you read the EULA for WindowsXP (or for any non-GPL software for that matter) you will see that "your use of the software and right to support is pursuant to the terms set forth in the license, which the licensor may revise at their discretion". You agree to the terms when you install the software. It is your burden to keep your end of the deal when they change the licensing terms such that you can't get any support unless you prove the authenticity of your software copy. Too bad, but that's the way it goes in software licensing, and not just from Microsoft either.

Though I don't condone DRM, I am not hypocritical in who I criticize and who I condone. For me, WGA is not any more offensive than HDCP, AACS, CSS, Fairplay etc. I know the reason why Microsoft had to resort to WGA, and I can live with it because it is unobtrusive to me, and I have a licensed copy anyways. I can create a backup of my Windows XP installation CD, and as long as I have a legal product key, I have a valid copy. Not so with BD+ or AACS. ;) I find THAT more offensive.

Blow for blow, Windows has a more flexible DRM than some other companies' products.

Sorry, thought I had earlier. Guess I started replying yesterday and got pulled away (or maybe it got deleted?).

When I purchased my Blu-ray player, I knew exactly which security features it would utilize to protect discs from Piracy. I knew exactly what I was signing up for.

With Windows Genuine Advantage, there was no indication, when Windows XP was released, that they would include such anti-piracy software as mandatory. It was only years later that it was forcibly added to my computer. One day the program just showed up and if I didn't install it, I couldn't update the product I purchased anymore. One day I have support, and the next day I don't (if I refuse to download a piece of software) leaving my computer susceptible to virus or malicious attacks.

There is a distinct difference between stating publicly your intentions and backdooring your customers. If you can't make that distinction, then I can explain it any better.

this is off topic but......

you're 100% wrong. not installing wga doesn't stop you from installing critical and security related updates for microsoft software. Microsoft specifically did this because they did not want pirated PC's to become zomebied machines sending out spam, viruese, keyloggers, trojans, and every other type of malware. WGA stops you from installing additional MS software, such as updates to wmp, internet explorer, office, etc. and even if you somehow manage to break wga authentication and illegally install these updates, MS still gives you security updates for free.

Microsoft as the largest software manufacturer in the world has the responisbility to make sure that all of its software, legally obtained or not, is secure.

back on topic; this thread is funny. fanboys provide good entertainment!

I'm all for dual-format players and studios, competition is a good thing and with dual-format players the consumer never loses.

(for the record, I own multiples of both format players, including standalone HD DVD and Blu-Ray players, as well as Xbox360s with HD DVD Drives and a PS3, I purchase movies based on the movie, not on the format, and would not feel 'burned' if there was a dual-format player released this year for $299-$399 that outperformed everything on the first tier of single format players on the market)

So how are dual format studios/companies to blame in all this when you have Blu-ray founding companies belonging to the DVD Forum (based on agreeing to standards to specifically avoid format wars such as this) going against what the DVD Forum has voted for and approved HD DVD as the high def standard?

Yea I want everyone to agree to use these standards (unless I dont like the results)

and I will continue to act as a voting member (and disrupt any progress)
and abstain from voting (disrupt min numbers needed)
for everything about HD DVD (while directly profiting and working against it on the outside) And will threaten law suites against any DVD Forum member who's company decides now to actually support the format the DVD Forum has approved.

I would think this is more hypocritical then Warner selling movies to both formats.

I'm not sure if you really believe you own arguement or not or just choose the wrong words in wanting to rant for Blu-ray to win.

I would think if this is what you really want then things such all of these companies voting for and approving HD DVD as the winning standard would be important and your choose for support.

WGA is offensive because its making you, nay, FORCING you to verify after the install of the OS, if it is authentic or not. They are trying to check if you are a criminal or not. Thats not good practice. BD+, AACS, HDCP, etc are all seemless and were there DAY 1. You dont boot up your BD player then have to do a authenticity check. That is as shoddy as it gets. And before anyone questions it, BD+ is already installed on every single BD player, the discs just dont have them... yet.

Nothing requires that you install WGA. Now if you want updates or OS enhancements then you must verify that you purchased the product. I see no issue with that. This is the exact same as downloading a patch or update for a game and it requires that you have a valid cd-key.

If you think HDCP is seamless then you must be the luckiest person alive. I have never struggled to get WGA working. I click validate and it does. Simple. With HDCP I have to turn 11 devices off and then turn them back on in a specific order while standing on one foot and hoping like hell that the inordinately crappy connector that they came up with for HDMI didn't get shaken loose by someone walking across the room

Nothing requires that you install WGA. Now if you want updates or OS enhancements then you must verify that you purchased the product. I see no issue with that. This is the exact same as downloading a patch or update for a game and it requires that you have a valid cd-key.

If you think HDCP is seamless then you must be the luckiest person alive. I have never struggled to get WGA working. I click validate and it does. Simple. With HDCP I have to turn 11 devices off and then turn them back on in a specific order while standing on one foot and hoping like hell that the inordinately crappy connector that they came up with for HDMI didn't get shaken loose by someone walking across the room

As josh pointed out earlier, WGA was a afterthought. What if i wouldnt have bought XP had i known about WGA? There is a difference between a set standard you know going in, and changes after you get to the check out line.

Ive never had a HDCP issue. Ever. How old is your equipment?

As josh pointed out earlier, WGA was a afterthought. What if i wouldnt have bought XP had i known about WGA? There is a difference between a set standard you know going in, and changes after you get to the check out line.

Ive never had a HDCP issue. Ever. How old is your equipment?

You completely missed my point. There is NOTHING that requires you to install WGA. Nothing, Zip, Nadda. Now if you want things that were NOT given to you the day you bought XP (IE MP11) then this is the choice you have to make. What you want here is to be able to go get the discount 2 weeks after you have already walked out of the store but not deal with any of the other "requirements" of that promotion 2 weeks later.

And my stuff isnt that old. I have a HD-A1, Several HD-A2s, a PS3, a 720P PJ and a 1080P TV..All of which (yes every single one) has caused me to have to power cycle something at some point to get them to sync properly.

You completely missed my point. There is NOTHING that requires you to install WGA. Nothing, Zip, Nadda. Now if you want things that were NOT given to you the day you bought XP (IE MP11) then this is the choice you have to make. What you want here is to be able to go get the discount 2 weeks after you have already walked out of the store but not deal with any of the other "requirements" of that promotion 2 weeks later.

And my stuff isnt that old. I have a HD-A1, Several HD-A2s, a PS3, a 720P PJ and a 1080P TV..All of which (yes every single one) has caused me to have to power cycle something at some point to get them to sync properly.

If you dont play nice with WGA, you get no more updates, and you are now open to attacks and virus's. Thats not what i bought my OS for. Regardless of the point, they should have waited for Vista to introduce WGA and let people know upfront, at this point, it just seems sneaky and underhanded. And that sucks that you have HDCP issues, ive never had anything of the sort happen to me!

If you dont play nice with WGA, you get no more updates, and you are now open to attacks and virus's. Thats not what i bought my OS for. Regardless of the point, they should have waited for Vista to introduce WGA and let people know upfront, at this point, it just seems sneaky and underhanded. And that sucks that you have HDCP issues, ive never had anything of the sort happen to me!

So if they start revoking BD+/AACS keys (due to piracy--the viruses of recorded media) and they brick your player unless you update your player with some new DRM you would be totally against updating it?

As far as HDCP with firmware updates (on everything) it has gotten better. It is just a shoddy system. But I live with it just as I live with WGA.

I totally disagree with you.

I have the impression sometime that peoples here considerer the average consumer as total moron. This is really not the case.

The reality is that the consumer is already easily dealing with having to choose between two types of DVD (full screen or Wide Screen).

Why can’t he be smart enough to pick the right HD version between Blu-Ray and HD DVD? In fact it is even easier with the HD type of disk selection due to the casing physical differences and color differences while to choose between full screen or Wide Screen the consumer need to decipher and remember that 1:1.33 is a full screen and 1:2.35 is the black but wait what is this 1:1.77 don’t remember.

I strongly believe that what will kill one or both formats are the B&M stores. They don’t what to allocate all the space and inventory $$$ to carry numerous version of the same movies.
Well, I'm not as sure as you.
I still read posts in the HD sections all the time about "why is there black bars on my 1080p TV" and "why is there so much grain".

Just reading all the comments about Planet Earth (HD DVD) on Amazon makes you think. "This didn't play at all on my DVD player" and "Why don't this play on my HDTV."
:)

So...the average person might not be stupid, but they aren't just as interested as most people here.

So if they start revoking BD+/AACS keys (due to piracy--the viruses of recorded media) and they brick your player unless you update your player with some new DRM you would be totally against updating it?

As far as HDCP with firmware updates (on everything) it has gotten better. It is just a shoddy system. But I live with it just as I live with WGA.

As far as BD+ and keys, i bought into the format knowing these things exist. I could have stuck to DVD if i wasnt happy with them, but i knew what i was getting into, so really no point in saying otherwise.

As far as BD+ and keys, i bought into the format knowing these things exist. I could have stuck to DVD if i wasnt happy with them, but i knew what i was getting into, so really no point in saying otherwise.

Let us put this issue of "Microsoft's hoodwinking and deception of the honest customer" to rest once and for all. Did you read the EULA before installing Windows XP?

For anyone interested in knowing the terms which you agreed to in order to install and continue to use Windows XP, see the user agreement at

http://download.microsoft.com/documents/useterms/Windows%20XP_Professional_English_9e8a2f82-c320-4301-869f-839a853868a1.pdf

Mind you, this is the ORIGINAL EULA of Windows XP Professional - NOT the amended EULA after SP1 and SP2. This is the Real McCoy.

If while installing the software, you clicked "I agree" to the conditions set forth in the EULA, here is what you had agreed to, among other things:

Mandatory Activation. The license rights granted under this EULA are limited to the first thirty (30) days after
you first install the Product unless you supply information required to activate your licensed copy in the
manner described during the setup sequence of the Product. You can activate the Product through the use of
the Internet or telephone; toll charges may apply. You may also need to reactivate the Product if you modify your
computer hardware or alter the Product. There are technological measures in this Product that are designed to
prevent unlicensed or illegal use of the Product. You agree that we may use those measures.

Internet-Based Services Components. The Product contains components that enable and facilitate the use of
certain Internet-based services. You acknowledge and agree that Microsoft may automatically check the version
of the Product and/or its components that you are utilizing and may provide upgrades or fixes to the Product
that will be automatically downloaded to your Workstation Computer.


As they say, know what you are getting into before you sign the dotted line (or click the radio button) saying "I do".

*Warning: Opinion Ahead*

On numerous occasions, I have seen a number of different variations of the following statement:

Why don't the studios release titles on both formats, and let the consumers decide?

After seeing this statement way too many times, it now makes me cringe every time I read it. Clearly, two formats can not successfully co-exists, and one must dominate in order to reach mass adoption. DVD-A and SACD both collapsed as consumers opted for the lower quality of CDs and digital downloads. We are again threatened by the same fate for Blu-ray and HD DVD, but should consumers be the ones to make ultimate decision on which survives?

First off, consumers are generally stupid. Corporations spend millions of dollars trying to figure out what consumers want, but at the end of the day they'll still spend twice that telling consumers what they want via advertising. Sure, a really bad idea will never take off, but plenty of mediocre ideas have been huge financial winners because of successful advertising. Leaving the decision up to the consumer will never resolve the issue. In general, they will simply give up and stick with the very successful DVD platform.

Second, why should consumers be burdened with cleaning up a mess that studios and CE manufacturers started? It was never the desire of consumers to have two competing high definition formats; it was the greed of corporations which caused the divide. As the cause of the war, they should ultimately be responsible for solving it. As much as "voting with your dollar" means for successful PR, it won't even show up as a blip on the radar of most corporate financial statements because it is a very small piece of business right now.

Some have already chosen sides, and have planted their flags. Other, remain neutral hoping that someone with make the decision for them. For those corporations who are neutral, I say to them, for lack of a better term, grow a pair! Chose a side and be done with it, because the current situation is satisfactory to no party.

One of two things will happen, if neutral corporations take sides. Either the war will become even more divided or it will be over. If it becomes more divided, both sides will eventually fail. I would not be happy with this outcome, but at least there would be only one party to blame, the corporations. You can't blame consumers for not selecting a single format if the corporations can't do the same. If they truly want HD to prevail, then they will come together and unite.

I'm talking to you, Warner Brothers, Paramount, LG, and Samsung! Pick a side and be done with it! The war will end either way, but the results will be determined strictly on your decisions, and not consumers. You were part of the problem. Now, become the solution so that HD can thrive instead of remaining and niche format.
Thanks for your opinion. I kind of agree to a certain point. However, for right now I welcome the competition as I can now see and hear for myself if one format is better than the other regardless of specs. I buy movies (both HD DVD and Blu-Ray) regularly and honestly can not definitively say one is better than the other.
As for your predicted outcome of both sides failing, I don't see it happening. One, two, three or four formats could fail if there is no demand. I think the PSP movies have shown us that one format can still fail. My biggest concern is demand from the masses. Will they embrace either format? So far they haven't.

If you dont play nice with WGA, you get no more updates, and you are now open to attacks and virus's. Thats not what i bought my OS for. Regardless of the point, they should have waited for Vista to introduce WGA and let people know upfront, at this point, it just seems sneaky and underhanded. And that sucks that you have HDCP issues, ive never had anything of the sort happen to me!

I'm guessing you're ignoring my post to prove a point (since you're argument against wga is so severly flawed its not even funny) so im going to make it very clear for you. NOT INSTALLING WGA DOES NOT STOP YOU FROM GETTING CRITICAL AND SECURITY RELATED UPDATES FOR MICROSOFT SOFTWARE.

Even after you install the validation check and get the prompt that you have pirated software, you can STILL download and install all of the security patches and you can still use the OS. the only thing you can't do is install any OS enhancements like MCE updates, WMP updates, IE updates, etc.

I hope you're not a lawyer because you're reasoning skills are pretty bad

Format neutral players will become the rule. You'll stop caring which format is better when your player stops caring.

Ya know, I never quite understood why so many believe both formats can not survive.

Who cares, why must one win.

The idea that stores don't like carrying both formats is kinda ridiculous. All they care about is sales, if both sell, they won't mind one bit carrying both formats.

In fact the only real way this can end with making everyone happy is for both to continue for years to come.

Eventually most players would be become dual players, and people will replace their HD-DVD only or Blu Ray only player for a new better dual player.

Then eventually the 2 formats could merge, or they could both go on, or one could drop out, but at that point, no one would care either way.

The idea that stores don't like carrying both formats is kinda ridiculous. All they care about is sales, if both sell, they won't mind one bit carrying both formats.The potential for consumer confusion. The shelf space required to accomodate multiple formats while they're in their early days. The perceived reluctance of consumers to buy in while there are competing formats.

I can see the possibility of both formats surviving, but I don't believe that both formats can thrive. Honestly, though, I don't see either format becoming an enormous success even in the best case scenario.

Ya know, I never quite understood why so many believe both formats can not survive.

Who cares, why must one win.



1) VHS/Betamax

2) SACD/DVD-Audio

3) The current sales figures for BD & HD-DVD.

*Warning: Opinion Ahead*

On numerous occasions, I have seen a number of different variations of the following statement:

Why don't the studios release titles on both formats, and let the consumers decide?

After seeing this statement way too many times, it now makes me cringe every time I read it. Clearly, two formats can not successfully co-exists, and one must dominate in order to reach mass adoption.

How do you know this to be true??

We are talking about 2 different things. SACD and DVD audio required everyone who had them to have at least a 5.1 system to enjoy it. That IMO was The downfall of mass consumer appeal. Most people listen to music in their car.

I think you are very wrong and biased at that. What we as consumers should want is as much competition in the marketplace as well as all studios to support any format that is out there.

The reason why we don't have any rush for mass adoption of these 2 formats is that there aren't enough HDTV's to support them and price.

The reason why some studios aren't releasing on both formats is Copy Protection[they actually think there is a drm that cant be broke lol] and price. Mostly copy protection in fact this is the main reason why we are moving to a new format anyway. The studios get to sell us numerous re-releases of everything they have and control the illegal copying as well. It is a win win for them don't believe anything else. I have watched about 100 HD DVD and 30 or so BD. I have seen some improvement in PQ and AQ But not enough for the average guy to ditch his $89 dvd player that upscales to 1080i for him to buy into any HD format. Dont get me wrong, I love all hd but we here are the minority, the philes the geeks if you will. :) :) :)

1) VHS/Betamax

2) SACD/DVD-Audio

3) The current sales figures for BD & HD-DVD.

1. Mac/PC
2. DVD R RW
3. Widescreen Fullscreen
4. Dolby DTS
5. ipod MP3
6. PS3 Xbox360
7. HBOHD and ShotimeHD
7. DVHS sales figures, (single format without competition)

getting away from the wga subthread . . .

One format would be less confusing, not because people can't tell the difference between a red and blue case. It comes when they decide to buy a player. Since we are not talking about universal players, the consumer will try to think which movies will be readily available in each format.

Not every rental store will carry triplicate of everything!

Unless every studio is universal, then there will be confusion. Your favorite movie now or in the future may come from an exclusive studio - hope it is the same format as your player!

If medium isn't that different, we need to end the war and get on with enjoying the content.

competition will be again due to content of the material, not the square vs oval shape of the disc.

1. Mac/PC

3. Widescreen Fullscreen

5. ipod MP3
)

I hate watching widescreen on a fullscreen set - yuck!


my niece has an ipod, but can't sync tunes on both her mac and her mom's pc. You have to choose one. That really sucks!

I like the idea of choice myself.

That makes no sense. Prices have already dropped due to HD DVD Vs. BD. The HD Vs. SD battle won't even start for a couple of years.
J

It's a good thing the format war is making prices drop faster, because in order to enjoy all movies out there, you need to invest in both. This really makes the "lower" prices less exciting.

The only way I see both formats surviving is with universal players and NO neutral studios. If universal is the way, there would be no need for a neutral studio, thus removing the need for all of those titles taking up extra shelf space for their two versions.

1. Mac/PC
2. DVD R RW
3. Widescreen Fullscreen
4. Dolby DTS
5. ipod MP3
6. PS3 Xbox360
7. HBOHD and ShotimeHD
7. DVHS sales figures, (single format without competition)

Mac has been getting killed for years.

Who cares about a data storage format with no prerecorded media.

Wide/fullscreen is not really a different format.

DTS is a hardly a wild success

Ipod is the only MP3 player that really matters

For some reason there has always been room for two consoles in the market. Perhaps because video game players are different from movie watchers

HBO is a channel not a format (you are really grasping at straws here).

DVHS was another one manufacturer format with flaky machines. Everyone knew it would be replaced with a HD optical format so why buy into it.

*Warning: Opinion Ahead*

On numerous occasions, I have seen a number of different variations of the following statement:

Why don't the studios release titles on both formats, and let the consumers decide?

After seeing this statement way too many times, it now makes me cringe every time I read it. Clearly, two formats can not successfully co-exists, and one must dominate in order to reach mass adoption. DVD-A and SACD both collapsed as consumers opted for the lower quality of CDs and digital downloads. We are again threatened by the same fate for Blu-ray and HD DVD, but should consumers be the ones to make ultimate decision on which survives?

First off, consumers are generally stupid. Corporations spend millions of dollars trying to figure out what consumers want, but at the end of the day they'll still spend twice that telling consumers what they want via advertising. Sure, a really bad idea will never take off, but plenty of mediocre ideas have been huge financial winners because of successful advertising. Leaving the decision up to the consumer will never resolve the issue. In general, they will simply give up and stick with the very successful DVD platform.

Second, why should consumers be burdened with cleaning up a mess that studios and CE manufacturers started? It was never the desire of consumers to have two competing high definition formats; it was the greed of corporations which caused the divide. As the cause of the war, they should ultimately be responsible for solving it. As much as "voting with your dollar" means for successful PR, it won't even show up as a blip on the radar of most corporate financial statements because it is a very small piece of business right now.

Some have already chosen sides, and have planted their flags. Other, remain neutral hoping that someone with make the decision for them. For those corporations who are neutral, I say to them, for lack of a better term, grow a pair! Chose a side and be done with it, because the current situation is satisfactory to no party.

One of two things will happen, if neutral corporations take sides. Either the war will become even more divided or it will be over. If it becomes more divided, both sides will eventually fail. I would not be happy with this outcome, but at least there would be only one party to blame, the corporations. You can't blame consumers for not selecting a single format if the corporations can't do the same. If they truly want HD to prevail, then they will come together and unite.

I'm talking to you, Warner Brothers, Paramount, LG, and Samsung! Pick a side and be done with it! The war will end either way, but the results will be determined strictly on your decisions, and not consumers. You were part of the problem. Now, become the solution so that HD can thrive instead of remaining and niche format.

Let the studios have their day, their way. There's nothing here an affordable dual format player couldn't cure.

Seriously.


The OP has pretty much nailed the problem, but going after dual-format studios and players is kinda wrong-headed. They're not the problem. The dueling formats are the problem.

Customer choice is NOT always a good thing. Too much choice doesn't save markets, it kills them. We use one gauge for rails. We don't have to buy different TVs to watch ABC and NBC shows (just their movies). We use one set of standards to make the internet work. DVD succeeded only after a period, and that was with a unified format (thanks to a Sony compromise) and a real improvement over VHS.

Open your windows, look outside, read what little coverage these discs get in the mainstream press. Or on blogs that are just tech blogs, not close enough to be partisan. In the mainstream press, you will see references to Beta. In the blogs, you get stuff like "stupid format war".

Choice isn't totally evil, though. This war has definitely driven prices down faster than in other cases, most notably DVD, but while it's good for consumers in the short run, it may have other effects. DVD paid for the investment the studio made as they were able to charge a premium price early. HD-DVD? Not the case. Yes, the investment is less, but Toshiba isn't making any money on the players. On the blu side the PS3 is pre-eminent, so we can say that no one is making money on the players. This isn't the end of the world, as long as disc prices stay high... DVD is 'too cheap' for the studios, and they want to preserve a premium price for their content. This is the incentive to release titles in the early going.

How many of you know more than a few people who buy HDOM? I know only one person in real life. And I know quite a few that are looking at it, and waiting for a winner. We're getting reduced prices instead, and it's great for us early adopters, but it's not good in the long run.

Seriously.

The OP has pretty much nailed the problem, but going after dual-format studios and players is kinda wrong-headed. They're not the problem. The dueling formats are the problem.


At this point I would argue that Universal is the problem. If they came to their senses, this war could be over by Christmas.

At this point I would argue that Universal is the problem. If they came to their senses, this war could be over by Christmas.

LOL, back to the whole "format war could be solved by Universal going Neutral"

LOL, back to the whole "format war could be solved by Universal going Neutral"

You can say it's not likely to happen, but you can hardly say it's not true. It's the biggest vote of no confidence in the format possible.
Do you think B&M stores will expand their BD racks when you can get every title on BD?

You can say it's not likely to happen, but you can hardly say it's not true. It's the biggest vote of no confidence in the format possible.
Do you think B&M stores will expand their BD racks when you can get every title on BD?


Exactly. Blockbuster will not be buying tons of HD DVD's that are also availabe on Blu. They will load up on the Blu, and Universal would be the loser. Universal doesn't really have to sit around marginalized.

For example, HD DVD pretty much dies when Universal goes universal. The scenario for Blu's death is much more complicated.

If you changed your tagline to

"Blu Ray v.s HD DVD if nobody wins we all lose!"

Then I would be in agreement

If you changed your tagline to

"Blu Ray v.s HD DVD if nobody wins we all lose!"

Then I would be in agreement

I say let them fight it out until media is 14.99 each and players are $149.00 and AQ and PQ are stellar. :p

LOL, back to the whole "format war could be solved by Universal going Neutral"

If Universal goes neutral, HD-DVD's continued existance would be pointless. Universal is the only reason to even consider buying an HD-DVD player.

I say let them fight it out until media is 14.99 each and players are $149.00 and AQ and PQ are stellar. :p


Haha yeah!!! But how about until HD DVD and Blu-Ray movies can be found in that $4.99 bin at Wal-Mart!

If Universal goes neutral, HD-DVD's continued existance would be pointless. Universal is the only reason to even consider buying an HD-DVD player.


That is such a stupid argument.

Because if Disney and Sony Pictures go neutral, then Blu Ray's existence is pointless.

After Toshiba's HD-A2 catches up with the PS3 in sales numbers, Both formats will have the same number of players sold to the public, so once again, the war will be on.

You might be in denial, and think that will never happen, but when the PS3 is $600 and a HD-DVD player is $250, it will take NO TIME AT ALL.

My Costco in California had 2 pallets of Toshiba's HD-D2 three weeks ago, but I just went there yesterday, and after selling them for $250, they only had 8 left!!!!!!!!!!!

That is such a stupid argument.

Because if Disney and Sony Pictures go neutral, then Blu Ray's existence is pointless.

My Costco in California had 2 pallets of Toshiba's HD-D2 three weeks ago, but I just went there yesterday, and after selling them for $250, they only had 8 left!!!!!!!!!!!

I almost bought a D2 at Costco a couple weeks ago - $250 is the right price point for many.

After the last couple weeks, I'm glad I didn't. Maybe I will this fall, but since my PS3 purchase I have plenty of movies to watch as I watch the end of this war (hopefully).

If Universal goes universal, Why would I ever buy HD DVD. That is a fact. If not, I may have to pick up a $99 bundle at christmas with a tosh + king Kong and Bourne included. :D

That is such a stupid argument.

Because if Disney and Sony Pictures go neutral, then Blu Ray's existence is pointless.

After Toshiba's HD-A2 catches up with the PS3 in sales numbers, Both formats will have the same number of players sold to the public, so once again, the war will be on.

You might be in denial, and think that will never happen, but when the PS3 is $600 and a HD-DVD player is $250, it will take NO TIME AT ALL.

My Costco in California had 2 pallets of Toshiba's HD-D2 three weeks ago, but I just went there yesterday, and after selling them for $250, they only had 8 left!!!!!!!!!!!

Denial. It isnt just a river!