There are several theories about which studios are doing what is best for consumers.

Some would argue Sony, Fox, and Disney are doing what is best because they are trying to get a single format to market which consumers have wanted, and the sooner this happens the better for HD media on discs.

Some would say Universal helping HD DVD is good because prices are better for their hardware, and in a long-term plan discs would be slightly cheaper for studios (not that savings have been passed on to the consumer).

Others would say Warner, Paramount, and Dreamworks are doing things right by not taking sides and giving consumers choice. Not only can consumers choose their own stand-alone hardware, they are staying out of the videogame wars as much as possible, whereas Fox and Disney are now being used as weapons against the Wii and XBox 360 (and even moreso if BD becomes standard), and likewise with Universal and the 360 add-on.

All Sony has ever wanted is to completely control an entire format to maximize profits. Blu-ray is their best and most successful effort at this.

HD DVD is lead by the DVD Forum, which by itself has no financial goal, so I would consider them more consumer friendly.

Where's the "none of them option, they're all as bad as each other"

None of the above. They're all as greedy as the other. I do feel Sony is with the rest of the industry in supporting BD and Toshiba is all by itself in supporting HD DVD, but that has little to do with consumer interests. I don't think any of them really care so much about "putting the consumers first." If they did, there wouldn't be a format war at all. Honestly.

eric.exe:

All Sony has ever wanted is to receive royalty payments for a given format. Toshiba is the same way. Sony/Phillips designed the CD format and received the royalties for it. Madly succesful. Sony/Phillips wanted to do the same for the video disc format to replace VHS, but Toshiba wanted its format instead. Sony/Phillips conceded and let Toshiba have its way. Toshiba made mad royalties off DVD.

Sony/Phillips and other companies collaborated to create Blu-ray to replace DVD. Toshiba again protested and created a rival format to secure the royalties for themselves again rather than let Sony have it this time. Sony and the BDA, most of whom were DVD forum members, decided not to budge this time.

Begun, the format war has.

Today, the only major backers for HD DVD are a traditional Sony-hater movie studio (Universal who still holds Sony responsible for allowing recordable media to be sold in the first place, a very anti-consumer sentiment) and Microsoft whose anti-Sony bent is at least based in real competition-al sense. If Blu-ray wins, the PS3 looks better. If Blu-ray fails, it makes the PS3 look overly expensive. Truth is, it still looks overly expensive, but one can't fault MS for hedging its bets just in case.

In addition, comparing the two formats, HD DVD looks to be the one more easily matched by 1080p downloads that may eventually come given how low they are pushing their encoder to go on VC1 HD DVD encodes now. Bitrates are going so low they seem to be pushing for levels where they can replicate on downloadable content. When you can download movies as nice looking as the discs, what's the point in the disc? Microsoft desperately doesn't want to see Blu-ray discs with really high bitrate encodes with AVC and lossless audio to become the norm. Hence, down with Blu-ray. Easier to replace HD DVD with downloads than BD with downloads. And if the format war stalls both formats, then ...downloads win by default. Same as the war between SACD and DVDA stalled both so that the iPod crushed them both.

So you can say this is about Sony being greedy, but the BDA has a lot more companies and support than just Sony. One can't really say the same about HD DVD where just one CE company supports it by developing new players (Toshiba), one studio supports it exclusively (Universal), and one PC company supports it exclusively (Microsoft). BD is the market. HD DVD is fighting against the industries. So it's not Sony vs the World, but it most certainly appears to be Toshiba vs the World.

Where's the "none of them option, they're all as bad as each other"

mega-dittos. . .

Sony, Disney by far. Lossless audio, high bitrate, top quality. Find anything as good looking/sounding as: Pirates 1/2, Apocalypto, Casino Royale, Ghost Rider and more. Fox at least has lossless audio on pretty much every release. These are taking care of your customers. Universal had a good start, but their last releases have been MINOR improvements over the DVD counterpart in audio and video. Sad state of affairs.

Which are putting consumers first?

NONE!!! (you forgot none as an option on your poll)

They chose to be one format exclusive or neutral for one thing: money.

These guys are not int he business of charity. Their in the business of making money.

They chose their format status based on one thing: money

Don't be fooled into any other reasoning other than, you guessed it, money!!


FWIW: I fully support their reasoning. It's a business.

An honest persons can only vote for the neutral studio's.

They give you a choice.

Based on disks I've seen recently, I've been impressed only by recent BD50 AVC (& VC1) disks. Regardless of motivation (yes, money is their real motivation), the by product of the format war is that the BDA studios have to walk the walk and crank up the bitrates on their recent releases. Most of these new disks consistently stay above 30Mbps, with 35Mbps and above being quite common for tough scenes.

I don't know if people have paid attention to the level of clarity and detail of recent sony & disney releases, but Apocalypto, Ghost Rider, PotC are better than what I considered excellent movies even 6 months ago. I don't believe disney and sony would have gone to such lengths in their authoring and compression work if not for the challenge posted by the red format.

Warner otoh is doing something very strange and unexpected. While Planet Earth is nice enough with only some banding issues, they've had things like Blood Diamond, where they seem to have bought into lower bitrate is better mentatlity. This makes no sense to me. Even though they are trying to save time and resources by using the same VC-1 encode on both disks, they could have still aimed for peak bitrates closer to 28M, I'm not asking for 40, just 28, 28M peak would be very difficult to tell from 40M without frame by frame side by side, but whatever Warner reasons are for trying to keep bitrates low, it is not good for movie collectors.

At some point, they should do a re-mastered release of Blood Diamond. I hope by then, they would just do one with peaks of 40Mbps for video.

Sony, Disney and Fox.

I vote for them because Sony and Disney are there and they are the only studios consistently giving A+ picture quality AND lossless audio.

As a consumer, that's what I want.

Useless poll.
It isn't public, and it doesn't have none of the above.
I didn't vote.
J

I would have voted 'None' had that option existed. Since its not I went with neutral studios Warner and Paramount (and no, I don't want Universal to go neutral yet; not until a Blu-ray studio becomes neutral to minimize the damage that Universal move would cause for HD-DVD) because at least they're letting consumers decide which version of high-def optical media to support. Warner's got the lion's share of my HD-DVD dollars the hard way: they've earned it! :)

Neutral studios

"Have your choice, HD DVD or Blu-Ray"

I'd have to agree with the others, neither - if the neutral studios truly wanted the consumers to decide, then they'd release the stuff they KNOW were really waiting on, this includes the studios that haven't released anything as of yet but claim to be neutral.

Warner only.

Neutral studios

"Have your choice, HD DVD or Blu-Ray"

Agree.

Notice that HD DVD supporters think Warner as a neutral studio is putting consumers first. While Blu-ray supporters don't...

Hmm, Batman Begins, Matrix, lesser audio quality on 'neutral' releases?

Sony and to a lesser extent Disney are putting out some quality releases now, but absolutely none of the studios are putting the consumer first.

I would vote none as well. The consumer does not come first. Generating revenue and profit comes first. How to reach the consumer is part of the equation, but there's nothing altruistic going on here to favor the consumer. The studios and the CE manufacturer's make all decisions for their own good. That's why I'm puzzled by many here taking the format wars personally. It's not personal, and it never was. It's business.

Which HDTV manufacturer puts the consumer first?

Which PC manufacturer puts the consumer first?

Which Speaker manufacturer puts the consumer first?

Which cable comapany puts the consumer first?

Which satellite company puts the consumer first?

Which game console manufacturer puts the consumer first?

Which oil company puts the consumer first?

Shall I go on?

Which HDTV manufacturer puts the consumer first?

Which PC manufacturer puts the consumer first?

Which Speaker manufacturer puts the consumer first?

Which cable comapany puts the consumer first?

Which satellite company puts the consumer first?

Which game console manufacturer puts the consumer first?

Which oil company puts the consumer first?

Shall I go on?

Probably not.

The real answer is none. If did, we would not be stuck in the middle of this ridiculous format war.

None of the above - they damn well better put the stockholders 1st or some heads are going to role.

A corporations #1 priority is to give the investors (i.e. stockholders) a solid return on their investment. Everything else is a distant 2nd.

I voted for Blu-ray studios but I'd take out Fox if I had the option. ;)

Studios put shareholders first.

Where's the "none of them option, they're all as bad as each other"

How is a neutral studio bad? They are letting you decide what hardware you want to play back their movies on.

How is a neutral studio bad? They are letting you decide what hardware you want to play back their movies on.

Well you could consider Paramount a neutral studio but IMO Warner clearly favors HD DVD. They've gotten some lossless audio tracks that the BD counterparts didn't have, not to mention how many HD DVD exclusives they've put out.

IMO it's Universal that has the least interest in putting consumers first. If they did they'd support Blu-ray and HD DVD could finally take a dirt nap.

need an option for "None: studios are putting themselves first"

Well you could consider Paramount a neutral studio but IMO Warner clearly favors HD DVD. They've gotten some lossless audio tracks that the BD counterparts didn't have, not to mention how many HD DVD exclusives they've put out.

IMO it's Universal that has the least interest in putting consumers first. If they did they'd support Blu-ray and HD DVD could finally take a dirt nap.

which Warner movies did HD-DVD get lossless and BD didn't? i'm only aware that HD-DVD got the 1.5 DD+ instead of the 640 DD for BD.

warner's bd is improving at a better pace than paramount is, that says a lot considering they have a stake in HD-DVD succeeding over blu-ray.

which Warner movies did HD-DVD get lossless and BD didn't? i'm only aware that HD-DVD got the 1.5 DD+ instead of the 640 DD for BD.

Happy Feet
Superman Returns (new version with TrueHD and PCM out on Blu-ray before Christmas)
Lady in the Water
We Are Marshall

Yup...let's kill the format with the least amount of DRM, no region control and the most full featured players...all at the lowest cost.

American education at work :confused:

or..

Lets kill the format with the most possible chances of studios giving up on HD on disc due to rampant piracy, the one where they cant control their own content across the borders so that the box office suffers overseas and the studios lose even more money which leads to less films being made and more chances of no more HD Discs, and features like 2.0 true hd which is utterly meaningless and just a bulletpoint on a spec sheet, and mandatory internet which already has discs that LOCK OUT CONTENT unless you go online to get the key to unlock them.. All with the buggiest players/discs that are being sold in beta software form and using the consumers as guinea pigs.

Thats not even mentioning lower space, lower bitrate headroom, lower hardware support, lower CE support, lower visibility in stores, etc etc.

American education at work indeed.

HD content is coming regardless of piracy. Companies need new revenue streams which is why HD content is available from Xbox live. I fail to see how the FUD you've unleashed here means anything to a consumer.

The region control rant is equally absurd. Splitting the markets up means that excellent foreign films don't hit the US because studios are too cheap/lazy to deliver the movie in the proper version. Lately the worlwide take of big movies has exceeded the North American. This portends a better strategy in which simulataneous releases are probably better overall with a massive DVD/HD release worldwide afterwards when fitting. You seem to tote the company line like an employee of a studio.

Ah hell I just read the last of your post..I'm bleeping offended you even had the gall to try to rebutt my post. I don't argue with children. Good day

every disc format will be pirated, so that is a non-issue. The studios think otherwise and sided with Bluray, but they're wrong.

or..

Lets kill the format with the most possible chances of studios giving up on HD on disc due to rampant piracy, the one where they cant control their own content across the borders so that the box office suffers overseas and the studios lose even more money which leads to less films being made and more chances of no more HD Discs, and features like 2.0 true hd which is utterly meaningless and just a bulletpoint on a spec sheet, and mandatory internet which already has discs that LOCK OUT CONTENT unless you go online to get the key to unlock them.. All with the buggiest players/discs that are being sold in beta software form and using the consumers as guinea pigs.

Thats not even mentioning lower space, lower bitrate headroom, lower hardware support, lower CE support, lower visibility in stores, etc etc.

American education at work indeed.

Ahh yes, let's all shed tears for those po' po' studios losing so much money on alleged rampant piracy. Sounds to me like WMD in Iraq.

Ahh yes, let's all shed tears for those po' po' studios losing so much money on alleged rampant piracy. Sounds to me like WMD in Iraq.

i was watching an extra on one of my hd dvds today and they were talking about the decline of the movie industry due to pirate video tapes. - 1983

How can anyone honestly vote for anything other than the Neutral Studios. They are doing twice the work to promote HD media to consumers faced with a tough decision.

Anyone that thinks Sony or Universal has the consumers best interests in mind is seriously lacking any cognitive reasoning. It's sick to see two major corporations in what digresses to a kindergarten schoolyard fight of egos.

i was watching an extra on one of my hd dvds today and they were talking about the decline of the movie industry due to pirate video tapes. - 1983

Yeah, instead of making a trillion dollars they made 990 billion LOL. (Obviously made-up numbers for the sake of hyperbole.) :)

every disc format will be pirated, so that is a non-issue. The studios think otherwise and sided with Bluray, but they're wrong.
yep, that's very unfortunate, as is region coding. but the bottom line is studios think otherwise and went with blu-ray. when the format wars started i wanted to support hd-dvd, but when most of the studios went blu us consumers dont really have much of a choice. toshiba catered to the consumers and sony catered to the studios.

fortunately, blu-ray is imo the superior format with 20 extra gigs available. it's already been said hd-dvd's capacity has caused studios to compromise and what can and cannot be included on disc. this is shown by the number of bluray discs with lossless audio vs that of hd-dvd. say what you will about how bitrates don't matter, hd-dvd is capacity constrained and it is showing.

another thing that is unfortunate was the lackluster launch of blu-ray. instead of pq like potc and apocalypto, we get the likes of 5th element and house of flying daggers to show the powers of blu. there wouldnt be as many ppl in the red camp as there are if the launch titles had top notch pq/aq like king kong did with hd-dvd.

Yup...let's kill the format with the least amount of DRM, no region control and the most full featured players...all at the lowest cost.

American education at work :confused:

Get a clue! Without DRM and region coding you're left with a format with limited support. I'd much prefer a format with the backing of the entire industry over a pathetic attempt by two companies.

As for your education comment, I thought you were better than that. :rolleyes:

I can't believe anyone would support the use of region coding.

fortunately, blu-ray is imo the superior format with 20 extra gigs available. it's already been said hd-dvd's capacity has caused studios to compromise and what can and cannot be included on disc. this is shown by the number of bluray discs with lossless audio vs that of hd-dvd. say what you will about how bitrates don't matter, hd-dvd is capacity constrained and it is showing.
That's at the moment - different plans of attack. HD-DVD has from the beginning been about putting the movie on disc & the extras online - downloaded when needed/wanted. BD has been put it all on disc. Now my question is the number of people who will have the HD-DVD player connected to the internet?

Lossless is nothing, means less than nothing everywhere but the niche that is AVS.

I can't believe anyone would support the use of region coding.

The vast majority of DVD owners have never purchased an import DVD. Get the point? Region coding matters to a mere few. If it's use means more movies out in high def then why wouldn't I be for it? I remember a lot of DVD titles that came out worldwide before the they were released in the USA but you know what? We just had to wait a little longer. Eventually we get practically everything. Those who live in Europe, Asia, and Australia may have a more valid reason for hating region coding but for Americans IMO it's not that big of a deal. Don't get me wrong though, I'd rather not have it but it doesn't make me upset with we do have it.

Lossless is nothing, means less than nothing everywhere but the niche that is AVS.

I would argue that lossless audio is important to far more people than lack of region coding is. Remember few consumers cared about dts when DVD first came out but more people cared as they learned about dts and became familiar with it. ;)

That's at the moment - different plans of attack. HD-DVD has from the beginning been about putting the movie on disc & the extras online - downloaded when needed/wanted. BD has been put it all on disc. Now my question is the number of people who will have the HD-DVD player connected to the internet?

Lossless is nothing, means less than nothing everywhere but the niche that is AVS.

I don't have an internet connection near my A/V setup, but wireless would work. However, I would rather not have to connect the player to the internet to access all content. Having it all on disc seems like a better plan of attack for the future. At least we'll know that what is supposed to be available will always be there and accessible, right on the media.

As for lossless meaning nothing, I have to disagree. Compressed audio has become the norm for many modern applications, but a high definition, high quality format is not where we should be compromising on audio.

I would argue that lossless audio is important to far more people than lack of region coding is. Remember few consumers cared about dts when DVD first came out but more people cared as they learned about dts and became familiar with it.
And yet DTS is on what % of DVDs? Not having DTS has impacted a disc's sales when? I can't even name a person who (outside of an enthusiast) who knows the difference. And no player has DTS-MA decoding yet why? Simply because Dolby dominates the market. I prefer DTS tracks & always cheer a bit when they're present.....but I don't think avg consumer even cares.

Compressed audio has become the norm for many modern applications, but a high definition, high quality format is not where we should be compromising on audio.
I'm not offering a personal opinion on yea or nay to lossless, simply don't think the general public cares. If you had a better picture - which they can see w/ DD5.1 it would sell fine, they simply can't tell the difference nor do they care.

I don't have an internet connection near my A/V setup, but wireless would work. However, I would rather not have to connect the player to the internet to access all content. Having it all on disc seems like a better plan of attack for the future. At least we'll know that what is supposed to be available will always be there and accessible, right on the media.
Only time will tell - folks are getting used to having net connected devices. If my cable tv was 1/10th as reliable as my cable internet I'd be happy...................but how many can even hook the box up to the internet to get the content?

None

The vast majority of DVD owners have never purchased an import DVD. Get the point? Region coding matters to a mere few. If it's use means more movies out in high def then why wouldn't I be for it? I remember a lot of DVD titles that came out worldwide before the they were released in the USA but you know what? We just had to wait a little longer. Eventually we get practically everything. Those who live in Europe, Asia, and Australia may have a more valid reason for hating region coding but for Americans IMO it's not that big of a deal. Don't get me wrong though, I'd rather not have it but it doesn't make me upset with we do have it.

There is NO reason for region lockout except to pad the pockets of the corporations involved. It offers no real advantages to consumers.

I'll get more movies in HD, but I won't get any foreign titles. That's a trade-off I really shouldn't have to endure. And no, we don't eventually get everything, and what we do get is typically altered anyway.

I agree that region coding matters to very few- but it matters to enough. There are many things about DVD/HDM that doesn't matter to many people at all- multichannel sound, 1080p/24, etc., but companies don't ignore those things, do they? Simply put, studios cheat consumers globally with region coding, and there is no reason for it.

or..

Lets kill the format with the most possible chances of studios giving up on HD on disc due to rampant piracy, the one where they cant control their own content across the borders so that the box office suffers overseas and the studios lose even more money which leads to less films being made and more chances of no more HD Discs, and features like 2.0 true hd which is utterly meaningless and just a bulletpoint on a spec sheet, and mandatory internet which already has discs that LOCK OUT CONTENT unless you go online to get the key to unlock them.. All with the buggiest players/discs that are being sold in beta software form and using the consumers as guinea pigs.

Thats not even mentioning lower space, lower bitrate headroom, lower hardware support, lower CE support, lower visibility in stores, etc etc.

American education at work indeed.

Please... if you think Blu-Ray is never going to be pirated then you're insane. Made by man, cracked by man, burnt to a cheap Blu-Ray-R and resdtributed illegaly by man

Considering the choices I am honestly surprised that some voted for the non neutral studios.

What the hate towards choice? Is it a fear that you might end up having wasted a few hundred dollars? It is only money.

Having the luxury of choice is good, remember that. To vote against choice is to let the t'rists win.

Horrible poll

with that said... I voted for Warner. not because they are neutral, but simply for the fact that they release movies I actually want to see.

Sony, Disney and Fox are the only studios giving us both 1080p as well as HD audio on every single release.
At this point, I have to go with them as core DD/DTS are not cutting it on most of the releases from any other studio.

There is NO reason for region lockout except to pad the pockets of the corporations involved. It offers no real advantages to consumers.


The simple truth is though, it offers no disadvantages to the large majority of consumers either. And if region coding encourages studio releases and support...then by all means, one might even infer it offers advantages. I can understand why some don't like it...but generally speaking, most people not only don't care, but probably don't even know what region coding is in the first place. Of course it's there to "pad" the pockets of the corporations...I mean, hello, that's the entire point behind releasing these films in the first place. And when something helps the studio, and doesn't bother 99% of consumers...it's hard to make a compelling argument to the studio not to do it.