My Humble Take.

The price of hardware while a minimal cost of ownership in the format conflict, represents a significant hurdle that most people will have to overcome.

A lot of HD-DVD folks have 30 or so titles (est $700.00) yet they fret about the cost of a BD player (est $500) because of the initial investment.

Many people have more than one location in the house with HDTVs, if you have to buy more than one player, the cost adds up.

Myself as an example, I have 2 HDTVs (bedroom, family room). I had a 360 so my initial entry was the add on, followed by a PS3. When the time came for another player (bedroom) I went with an A2 mainly because of cost. The PS3 is an excellent BD player with the remote. It is still unwieldy moving a player from room to room. I plan to get a BD player for my bedroom when the price is right.

I believe both formats are here to stay, and distribute my title purchases evenly.

why do people who buy the 360 add on say their initial entry into the format war is only the price of the add on...unless you got your 360 for free, that statement is just not true (if you are using it on your PC, how much was the software used for HD DVD playback - you are using legal software, right??)

If you think not being able to buy blu ray exclusive movies doesn't matter, than I guess the OP is correct...unless you factor in the increased cost of Imported disks or even the $5 difference for combo disks....

this pretty sounds a like broken record....

Most logical reasoning behind the 360, is the gaming, online and media streaming capabilities the console has more than justifies the price people have paid or will pay for the console itself.

Thus, they consider the actual price of the Add On HD DVD drive to be the only investment cost they acually have to make to play HD DVDs.

There are a lot of people who don't feel the same way about the PS3 at this point.

I've been finding out that price matters but cost matters even more. The distinction being is that people are happy by-and-large with DVD, perhaps more happy than they were with VHS, and as happy has they have been with CD. So from the informal surveys I've conducted, I get a folded arm, "what's this going to cost me response"

That's a lot different than someone eager to buy in once a format is affordable to them, many are expressing that they see no reason to upgrade, HDM could cost the same as DVD and they would still be a hard-sell, because they have no interest in re-buying anything already on DVD. I often hear "when I'm forced to" responses.

Some of this will change, people like new things and don't want to be left out forever, but packaged HD media is going to come in "hat-in-hand" if it comes in at all. However, when they do concede, price will matter both on hardware and software.

Most logical reasoning behind the 360, is the gaming, online and media streaming capabilities the console has more than justifies the price people have paid or will pay for the console itself.

Thus, they consider the actual price of the Add On HD DVD drive to be the only investment cost they acually have to make to play HD DVDs.

There are a lot of people who don't feel the same way about the PS3 at this point.

That's how I look at it. For instance, I don't consider my "entry cost" the cost of the 360, plus the TV, plus cables, plus electricity. My entry cost is what I bought specifically for HD DVD playback ($199 for the add-on).

Now, if I'd have bought the 360 for the sole purpose of watching HD DVDs, then my entry cost would be the 360 + the AO.

On the other hand, if I buy the PS3 for the sole purpose of BD Playback, my entry cost is $499.

But that's just my opinion.

I don't think anyone can seriously claim that price "doesn't matter". The question is, how much does it matter? In 2006 it mattered to me in the sense that I would have only bought a BD player if the A1 hadn't been so cheap. Instead of going BD only, I've owned an HD DVD player for twice as long as my Panny.

But to most customers (so far) it's obvious that price matters a lot less than the format war itself, which has scared away many traditional early adopters. This has caused HD media to stall, and will likely continue to be true until one format emerges as "the winner" in the public eye.

Price is also (obviously) important in the format war, but it's not the only thing. I bought a BD player, even though I had to save for several months (unlike the A1) to get it, because I felt it was a better investment (for me). Everyone I know personally (granted, I'm in Wyoming) either is totally ignorant of the formats' existence, or is waiting for Blu-Ray to move into their price range (a few gamers have bought PS3s and started buying BD disks).

Just as no one runs out to buy $30 laserdisk players off of ebay, people are not automatically going to run out and buy sub-$300 HD DVD players (or BD players) if they don't feel it's a good investment. A year from now the winner will be clear (or else their will be nothing but losers) and we can see how important price was, but considering how badly software sales are right now despite the price cuts on the HD DVD side, and with cheap Chinese Blu-Ray players coming, I don't see how price can possibly win this for HD DVD (especially since that advantage is only going to shrink as time goes on).

SLash and burn pricing was a clever strategy, but it looks just about played out to me. We'll see if they have an ace or two up their sleeves before the holiday, but I wouldn't bet on it.

Wal-Mart and Toys R Us Ads Confirm Price Drop (http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/14106/Xbox-360-WalMart-and-Toys-R-Us-Ads-Confirm-Price-Drop/)

Scans and pictures of a Wal-Mart brochure and a Toy "R" Us ad have revealed a yet unannounced $50 price drop for the Xbox 360.

It is not clear yet if this price drop will be applicable to the Core, Premium and Elite models because the model displayed in those ads is the Premium edition, which will be available for $349 starting the week of August 12.

Will Microsoft drop the price of the Core to $249 to compete with Nintendo? If so, will Nintendo drop the price of the Wii to $199? What will Sony do?

We expect a formal announcement by Microsoft regarding the price drop any time from now.

Microsoft also recently discounted it's HD DVD add-on drive from $199 to $179.

So counting all, the XBox360 Premium with a add-on will be $50+$20=$70 less expensive than before.

No official word from Microsoft yet about the XBox360 price drops.

No official word from Microsoft yet about the XBox360 price drops.

Um...the thread is about whether price matters (the OP thinking it does); I'm not really sure why a rumored price drop is relevant to the issue of whether price matters.

A year from now the winner will be clear (or else their will be nothing but losers) and we can see how important price was, but considering how badly software sales are right now despite the price cuts on the HD DVD side, and with cheap Chinese Blu-Ray players coming, I don't see how price can possibly win this for HD DVD (especially since that advantage is only going to shrink as time goes on).
BD Myth No. 16: Price doesn't matter because the supply/demand curve is reversed for BD. The higher the price, the higher the sales.

BD Myth No. 5: The war will end soon. OTOH, Sony declared the war was over in January.

BD Myth No. 11: You have to add on the cost of the XBOX 360 you bought for games when you buy the add-on. OTOH the cost of playing movies is free when you buy a PS3.
Believe it or not I'm, pretty much with you on this one Wayne. The 360 add-on, like the PS3 for BD playback is a bit difficult to quantify. At this point I would figure that most add-on buyers already have their 360 and would've had it regardless of HD DVD.

However 360s are still selling. Just as a wild guess, I would add maybe a hundred bucks or two to the add-on and call it an HD DVD player. Of course the audio situation is a complete deal breaker for me, but I'm sure it's not for many. I'm also sure that many add-on buyers are unaware of the audio limitations.

I have a friend with a new Sammy 50" and a 360. He's not quite ready for the PS3 since there are so few exclusive titles that he can't get on his 360. He doesn't have 5.1 so I told him to pick up an add-on, rent some discs and start enjoying HD DVD, especially since the added cost is so minimal. He's not biting. He doesn't want to get stuck with obsolete hardware. Of course this was before I realized that it was still selling for close to 200 bucks. For some reason I thought it had come down near a hundred.

Um...the thread is about whether price matters (the OP thinking it does); I'm not really sure why a rumored price drop is relevant to the issue of whether price matters.
Aha, I posted too fast before reading OP's post. Sorry I would have posted this into the Format Battle General Discussion Thread but it's closed... :o

BD Myth No. 16: Price doesn't matter because the supply/demand curve is reversed for BD. The higher the price, the higher the sales.

Did you even read my post??? Like, the part where I said: "I don't think anyone can seriously claim that price 'doesn't matter' "!!!

BD Myth No. 5: The war will end soon. OTOH, Sony declared the war was over in January.

I didn't say the war will end soon, I said it will end before another calender year goes by, or else no one will win it. Notice the subtle but important difference?

Maybe you should explore the myth of your objectivity...


Edit: I should note that I agree with your (and Sketcha's) take on the 360 buy-in price, although it's worth noting that this limits the pool of possible addon purchases to people with 360s and HDTVs (and computer-savvy consumers).

Aha, I posted too fast before reading OP's post. Sorry I would have posted this into the Format Battle General Discussion Thread but it's closed... :o


It's all good, I just didn't want to see the thread get too hijacked. :)

BD Myth No. 16: Price doesn't matter because the supply/demand curve is reversed for BD. The higher the price, the higher the sales.

BD Myth No. 5: The war will end soon. OTOH, Sony declared the war was over in January.
WWII was long over before the Germans quit shooting. ;)

Disclaimer: I don't think the war is over, but my money is certainly on BD for the win, more than ever before. Perception is everything and from what I gather, everywhere but AVS, the perception is blu.

BD Myth No. 11: You have to add on the cost of the XBOX 360 you bought for games when you buy the add-on. OTOH the cost of playing movies is free when you buy a PS3.

For someone planning on both gaming and movies, I'd split the cost. $250 for getting into HD gaming, $250 for BD movies. For someone who gets the the machine just for the games, yes, they are getting a free BD player, if they ever decide to use it as such. The reverse is true for someone who buys it as a BD player and later gets into gaming.

SLash and burn pricing was a clever strategy, but it looks just about played out to me. We'll see if they have an ace or two up their sleeves before the holiday, but I wouldn't bet on it.I think it has just started. Toshiba wants to retain the royalties from DVD far more than make money on players. The third gen players will make it easier for another price cut.

I think the average person would be happy with SDTV but you can hardly find them anymore. I think player prices are going down until SD DVD is pushed out of the market. It is the only way to get out of the niche market both formats are in and win the war.

I don't get any perception at all.

Most people I know don't follow the daily trials and tribulations of HD formats. They'll investigate HD player options when they buy a HDTV is what I'm gathering. YMMV.

I don't get any perception at all.

You may find some people a little too eager to agree with you on that statement ;)

Most people? I'd say 99.9% of people. Even those aware of the formats, heck even those somewhat interested in buying into them are not following this.

All the press releases in the world don't matter. The CE's and the studios will follow the money.

Toshiba and Microsoft will keep cutting prices as long as it makes sense to their business model - while Toshiba stands to make some money on HD-DVD royalties, they won't make enough to ship a free player to every home on the planet, so there is a break point somewhere. On the blu side, the CE's will lower prices as long as they stand to make some cash.

The studios will increase their releases, go neutral or go solo, if they sell discs to justify this. The only one I've never been able to understand based on public statements is Universal; they claimed hybrids are a big part of their model so they are staying exclusive, but from sales data those are not popular - so why the exclusivity?

Most logical reasoning behind the 360, is the gaming, online and media streaming capabilities the console has more than justifies the price people have paid or will pay for the console itself.

Thus, they consider the actual price of the Add On HD DVD drive to be the only investment cost they acually have to make to play HD DVDs.

There are a lot of people who don't feel the same way about the PS3 at this point.

you cannot use the add-on unless pony up the money for the 360. End of story...it doesn't not matter what purpose the machine was intended for...this is same BS HD DVD supporter spew about the PS3...why is it different for HD DVD now...

and why would anyone bring up HDTV"s and cables and crap??? why is that even being brought into the discussion? We are simply talking about the add-on which must be used with a 360...

Unless you got the 360 for free, it was money out of your pocked to be able to use the add-on...what is so difficult to understand about that???

I think it has just started. Toshiba wants to retain the royalties from DVD far more than make money on players. The third gen players will make it easier for another price cut.

I agree with you about Toshiba's goals, and they have a large financial incentive to stay in this race even if they can only play spoiler. That said, retailers understandably have a large financial interest in seeing a replacement to DVD, and will probably move to look after their own interests, even if it doesn't make Toshiba happy.

As for third gen and price drops...maybe. They've already cut their 2nd gen players to the point of probably 3rd gen MSRP. How much money do you think they are willing to forgo?

For someone planning on both gaming and movies, I'd split the cost. $250 for getting into HD gaming, $250 for BD movies. For someone who gets the the machine just for the games, yes, they are getting a free BD player, if they ever decide to use it as such. The reverse is true for someone who buys it as a BD player and later gets into gaming.

it doesn't matter what the purpose was... the total out of pocket cost is $499 (previously $599) for a 60 GB model...

why is there even a debate about this??? you paying for the capility to do either..it doesn't matter what the intent of the purchase was...

I don't get any perception at all.

Most people I know don't follow the daily trials and tribulations of HD formats. They'll investigate HD player options when they buy a HDTV is what I'm gathering. YMMV.

Of course you don't get that perception, you don't want to but it is there. We often reject any perception that doesn't fit our personal agenda.

In the last two weeks I have had five of my closest friends who are deep into DVD collecting take the blu-ray plunge. Before this time, there was nothing I could say that would make them take the plunge whether it was HD DVD or Blu-ray. But recent announcements have convince them all that Blu-ray is going to win this race, and each went out and bought their blu-ray player of choice. You can say anything you want about the BDA, but they have been VERY effective with their marketing strategy. They have been pretty sucessful in creating a blu wave that gives the impression that HD DVD is effectively a "interim transitional" product that has no sustainability. This may or may not be true, but they have certainly left that impression on some folks.

For me, it was all about price. I have a PS3 and an Xbox HD DVD attachment. When I got ready to spread high-def throughout the rest of my house, I could buy two HD DVD players for the price of one Blu-ray player. Needless to say, my money goes 100% to HD DVD at the moment.

you cannot use the add-on unless pony up the money for the 360. End of story...it doesn't not matter what purpose the machine was intended for...this is same BS HD DVD supporter spew about the PS3...why is it different for HD DVD now...

and why would anyone bring up HDTV"s and cables and crap??? why is that even being brought into the discussion? We are simply talking about the add-on which must be used with a 360...

Unless you got the 360 for free, it was money out of your pocked to be able to use the add-on...what is so difficult to understand about that???

Looks like you better also add in the cost of the HDTV. After all you need that to right? And the 5.1 surround sound system? Ohh and the cost of electricity used for a 2 hour movie! OHHH And the monthly mortgage per month of HD use! And the surge protector used for multiple home theater plugs!

That brings the total cost of the XBox 360 HD DVD to $37,375 + Tax :eek:

Seriously it is a stupid argument to say add the price of the 360 to the HD DVD add-on. I owned my 360 before I knew a HD DVD add-on was in the works. When I purchased the add-on I paid $199.99 + Tax (excluding game credit, etc).

I already owned the 360, the HDTV, I already had a place to live, had a 5.1 surround system, a surge protector, etc

I paid $199.99 for my HD DVD player whether the Blu-Ray fanboys like it or not.

As for third gen and price drops...maybe. They've already cut their 2nd gen players to the point of probably 3rd gen MSRP. How much money do you think they are willing to forgo?
Third gen players likely will be based on the new Broadcom/Windows CE one chip solution. Likely will be the first player to be cost efficient. I would expect a $199 MSRP by year end. Toshiba will likely use increased sales to push down costs. They have to cut into SD DVD player sales.

Toshiba predicts one million HD DVD players by the end of the year. They know that this will not win the war. Thus they must have planned for at least another year of aggressive pricing. I'd guess at least several years.

I have 3 HDTVs in my house. The first I one got an HD DVD player.. the XA2 because it was not only an HD player, but a near world class SD upscaler, and that justified the higher than entry level price.

Even if I had an interest in BD it was cost probihitive to buy BD players for the other sets. 4 months later I bought the next two HD DVD players.

HD DVD 2 was $249
HD DVD 3 was 199

If you can provide some BD players at sub $200 prices I will buy 3 to augment my current HD players.... otherwise forget about it.

My lifestyle requires I have 3 players... which place BD out of the question.

Does anyone else find the ramblings of these HD DVD guys to be somewhat childish? Now we have numbered myths and others suggesting that we add in the price of the TVs? Yeah thats a great idea might as well add in what I paid for the house to store it all in as well as electricity as well. sheesh

:) ha,
the title of the thread just made me remember closing line in the movie SFW, "EVERYTHING MATTERS!" can't wait until movies like that make it onto HD media.

I already paid for the 360, the HDTV, I already had a place to live, had a 5.1 surround system, a surge protector, etc


Fixed your statement there...

I have 3 HDTVs in my house. The first I one got an HD DVD player.. the XA2 because it was not only an HD player, but a near world class SD upscaler, and that justified the higher than entry level price.

Even if I had an interest in BD it was cost probihitive to buy BD players for the other sets. 4 months later I bought the next two HD DVD players.

HD DVD 2 was $249
HD DVD 3 was 199

If you can provide some BD players at sub $200 prices I will buy 3 to augment my current HD players.... otherwise forget about it.

My lifestyle requires I have 3 players... which place BD out of the question.

i guess blu ray exclusive content is out of the question as well...


and WTH???

My lifestyle requires I have 3 players

Cheap crap is still crap. See?

BD Myth No. 11: You have to add on the cost of the XBOX 360 you bought for games when you buy the add-on. OTOH the cost of playing movies is free when you buy a PS3.Are you willing to have a rational discussion by telling us how much of the PS3's cost you think should be attributed to the movie playing part? Do you or would you use 100% (the full $499), or some smaller amount?

Since you seem to be pointing out that some people on the Blu-ray side are inconsistent on this issue (which I agree with), I'm wondering if you are being hypocritical where you would be inconsistent in just the opposite direction, or are you willing to apply some consistency yourself?

--Darin

Fixed your statement there...

See how you had to avoid the facts and move into grammar? You also had to pay for a HDTV and surge protectors and your House or monthly rent etc etc etc.

The fact is I purchased my HD DVD add-on for $199.99 whether you like it or not.

Looks like you better also add in the cost of the HDTV. After all you need that to right? And the 5.1 surround sound system? Ohh and the cost of electricity used for a 2 hour movie! OHHH And the monthly mortgage per month of HD use! And the surge protector used for multiple home theater plugs!

That brings the total cost of the XBox 360 HD DVD to $37,375 + Tax :eek:

Seriously it is a stupid argument to say add the price of the 360 to the HD DVD add-on. I owned my 360 before I knew a HD DVD add-on was in the works. When I purchased the add-on I paid $199.99 + Tax (excluding game credit, etc).

I already owned the 360, the HDTV, I already had a place to live, had a 5.1 surround system, a surge protector, etc

I paid $199.99 for my HD DVD player whether the Blu-Ray fanboys like it or not.
By your logic I got my Blu-ray player FOR FREE with my PS3 purchase.

A free Blu-ray player is definitely the final nail in the HD DVD coffin.

See?

When we arbitrarily use different sets of rules to analyze the two formats, it's amazing the kind of conclusions we can arrive at! :rolleyes: And let's not forget the bickering that WILL NEVER END.

See how you had to avoid the facts and move into grammar? You also had to pay for a HDTV and surge protectors and your House or monthly rent etc etc etc.

The fact is I purchased my HD DVD add-on for $199.99 whether you like it or not.

Is there some magical way you can use your add-on with your HDTV without using the 360???

Maybe that is what I am not understanding on why you don't want to factor the cost of it when determining how much it cost to you watch a high def movie on your HDTV?

it doesn't matter what the purpose was... the total out of pocket cost is $499 (previously $599) for a 60 GB model...

why is there even a debate about this??? you paying for the capility to do either..it doesn't matter what the intent of the purchase was...

You have to think about it because people may have $500 to spend and want both a gaming machine and a HD movie player They are getting both or neither. If this is the case, their options are a PS3 or a Wii and the Toshiba A2 HD DVD player.

If someone has an Xbox 360 since launch and now wants to get into HD DVD, the price for entry is $180 for the add on. They already paid the money for the 360, just like they, presumably, already paid the money for a HDTV. If they lack an HDTV, that needs to be added into the cost of getting into HD movies or gaming.

However, if someone bought the 360 with the intent of buying the HD DVD add on, then you do need to figure that in to their cost of entry.

It is a simple economic reality. People have limited resources and need to budget how they use them. There are papers written on the subject. This is a major field of study.

Is there some magical way you can use your add-on with your HDTV without using the 360???A PC and some pixie dust. :D

Is there some magical way you can use your add-on with your HDTV without using the 360???

Maybe that is what I am not understanding on why you don't want to factor the cost of it when determining how much it cost to you watch a high def movie on your HDTV?

The "magical" way I could of hooked up my 360 to my PC and run it to my HDTV via DVI-->HDMI cable, and no the cost of the PC doesn't count because I already owned the PC.

I don't factor it in for the same reason I (and you) don't factor in the HDTV or electric bill into the player, because even though it is needed to enjoy HDM it isn't on the receipt at check out. I paid $199.99 for my 360 HD DVD add-on and I already owned all my other HT equipment.

maybe a better way to phrase this is:

Assume 2 people have the same priced house, A/V equipment, electricity, utility, etc, etc. but neither of them have a game console to play high def movies.

One wants the XBOX 360 with the add-on option and the other wants a PS3.

What is the difference in price that will be paid of the pockets of these two individuals??? For the purpose of this exercise, please use the pre-PS3 price drop prices...(XBOX360 core $299, premium $399, Elite $479, add-on $199 and PS3 60GB $599).

Does anyone else find the ramblings of these HD DVD guys to be somewhat childish? Now we have numbered myths and others suggesting that we add in the price of the TVs? Yeah thats a great idea might as well add in what I paid for the house to store it all in as well as electricity as well. sheesh

It's called reductio de absurdum. You may want to google it to see why they are using that device.

maybe a better way to phrase this is:

Assume 2 people have the same priced house, A/V equipment, electricity, utility, etc, etc. but neither of them have a game console to play high def movies.

One wants the XBOX 360 with the add-on option and the other wants a PS3.

What is the difference in price that will be paid of the pockets of these two individuals??? For the purpose of this exercise, please use the pre-PS3 price drop prices...(XBOX360 core $299, premium $399, Elite $479, add-on $199 and PS3 60GB $599).

Fair enough, now do the same excercise for someone who already has a 360.

The fact is I purchased my HD DVD add-on for $199.99 whether you like it or not.

I really think Mike is correct guys; clearly the advantage of the addon is that it becomes an impulse buy for (some) people with a 360 (and an HDTV) if they are interested in HD movies. Otoh, HD DVD fans need to be realistic in that the 360 addon is only the "cost of getting in" for a very small fraction of the overall HT enthusiast market. There may be 10+ million 360 owners, but not nearly that many have them hooked up to HDTVs. And of the ones that do, it's clear that fears over the format war, price, and/or lack of interest in HT are still making the addon not as large of an impact as, say, the PS3, who's market positioning seems to avoid at least some of these pitfalls.

The "magical" way I could of hooked up my 360 to my PC and run it to my HDTV via DVI-->HDMI cable, and no the cost of the PC doesn't count because I already owned the PC.

I don't factor it in for the same reason I (and you) don't factor in the HDTV or electric bill into the player, because even though it is needed to enjoy HDM it isn't on the receipt at check out. I paid $199.99 for my 360 HD DVD add-on and I already owned all my other HT equipment.

so how much for legal HD DVD playback software? Power DVD Ultra is $99...what other options are there?

Fair enough, now do the same excercise for someone who already has a 360.

at some point, the person did not have a 360, right???

They had to pay for it to 'already have it'...

at some point, the person did not have a 360, right???

They had to pay for it to 'already have it'...
They also didn't have all that other stuff you listed as well, why do you give them a free pass on that? Oh well, there's no point in going on about this.

The "magical" way I could of hooked up my 360 to my PC and run it to my HDTV via DVI-->HDMI cable, and no the cost of the PC doesn't count because I already owned the PC.

I don't factor it in for the same reason I (and you) don't factor in the HDTV or electric bill into the player, because even though it is needed to enjoy HDM it isn't on the receipt at check out. I paid $199.99 for my 360 HD DVD add-on and I already owned all my other HT equipment.If a person purchased a PS3 on launch day with out knowing or caring about the movie playing part and now decides that they want to start watching BDs with say 300, how much should we say that they paid to watch BDs?

As I see it, this is somewhat complicated with the different scenarios (some people already having the game system, etc.) and it creates opportunities for people to apply rules that are inconsistent.

If the Blu-ray remote was required to enable the Blu-ray capability of the PS3, what would people then say it cost PS3 owners for BD playback? $525? $25? Something else?

--Darin

at some point, the person did not have a 360, right???

They had to pay for it to 'already have it'...

Yes, but once they paid for it, they do not need to pay for it again. it becomes an asset and begins the long, slow, painful process of depreciation. You do not have to pay for it again if you later choose to get into HD DVD movies. Buy buying the add on, you are adding value to an already owned asset. An asset which may have, and likely was, bought for the purpose of playing games, not watching movies.

They also didn't have all that other stuff you listed as well, why do you give them a free pass on that? Oh well, there's no point in going on about this.

in the example I provided, it was a wash so it doesnt matter...

Wow, so if I bought my PS3 last year Nov, I can consider my self getting into blu ray for free this year since I already had it last year???

Yes, but once they paid for it, they do not need to pay for it again. it becomes an asset and begins the long, slow, painful process of depreciation. You do not have to pay for it again if you later choose to get into HD DVD movies. Buy buying the add on, you are adding value to an already owned asset. An asset which may have, and likely was, bought for the purpose of playing games, not watching movies.

Then where is this initial cost factored into the equation? You can't simply ignore the fact that you paid $299/$399 at some point to acquire the 360 which is needed to use the add-on (for most users anyway)...

in the example I provided, it was a wash so it doesnt matter...

Wow, so if I bought my PS3 last year Nov, I can consider my self getting into blu ray for free this year since I already had it last year???

If you purchased it with no knowledge or care for the BD movies, yes, you may. You purchased it for the game playing capabilities and the movie playing capabilities is, in essence, a free feature. If the movie playing capabilities were a factor in your decision, no, you may not count it as a free player since the value of that was part of your decision making process.

Confusing, isn't it?

so how much for legal HD DVD playback software? Power DVD Ultra is $99...what other options are there?Yes, some of us already had PowerDVD -- but did need to upgrade to PowerDVD Ultra -- depending on previous version an extra $60 to $80.

If you purchased it with no knowledge or care for the BD movies, yes, you may. You purchased it for the game playing capabilities and the movie playing capabilities is, in essence, a free feature. If the movie playing capabilities were a factor in your decision, no, you may not count it as a free player since the value of that was part of your decision making process.

Confusing, isn't it?

No I am not confused because I knew I was paying for both game and blu ray functionality...you either pay for both or pay for none...It seems pretty black and white. You cannot have one without the other...

My primary reason for getting a PS3 was for games but have since ended using it more for movies...

either way, I still paid $599...

in the example I provided, it was a wash so it doesnt matter...

Wow, so if I bought my PS3 last year Nov, I can consider my self getting into blu ray for free this year since I already had it last year???

It would be a wash if they already owned 360's too.


For these purposes, yes, a person who bought a PS3 for gaming and then decided to play BD disc really didn't spend any money on a BD player. They just used the one they already had.

This is an old and stupid argument. We all know what we mean - on both sides. We should just let it die instead of arguing for arguments sake.

It would be a wash if they already owned 360's too.


For these purposes, yes, a person who bought a PS3 for gaming and then decided to play BD disc really didn't spend any money on a BD player. They just used the one they already had.

This is an old and stupid argument. We all know what we mean - on both sides. We should just let it die instead of arguing for arguments sake.

Actually, I honestly don't understand on the reasoning of why the initial cost fo the 360 should not be counted...it was paid for at some point so that cost needs to be considered...

IMO, it seems like an excuse to make HD DVD add-on look like a cheaper option when in fact it is not. (it is cheaper if you already have the 360 - when you say it like that, it proves my point that the cost of the 360 should be considered)...

Anyway, as you suggested, I will let it die...

I have 3 HDTVs in my house. The first I one got an HD DVD player.. the XA2 because it was not only an HD player, but a near world class SD upscaler, and that justified the higher than entry level price.

Even if I had an interest in BD it was cost probihitive to buy BD players for the other sets. 4 months later I bought the next two HD DVD players.

HD DVD 2 was $249
HD DVD 3 was 199

If you can provide some BD players at sub $200 prices I will buy 3 to augment my current HD players.... otherwise forget about it.

My lifestyle requires I have 3 players... which place BD out of the question.

I bought my PS3 as an SD card reader so it was free for BD AND games!!!

I am thinking about buying a new one for games so I will have 2 FREE BD players!!!!

I may decide to pay for the 3rd one....maybe not...

WWII was long over before the Germans quit shooting. ;)

Disclaimer: I don't think the war is over, but my money is certainly on BD for the win, more than ever before. Perception is everything and from what I gather, everywhere but AVS, the perception is blu.


Depends on the length on the campaign, I think there is still plenty time for perceptions to veer, maybe not 180, but to the degree that those who think only in terms of "war and victory" may find that the analogy isn't all that apt anymore.

There gets to be a point when analogy just becomes lazy thinking.

IMO, it seems like an excuse to make HD DVD add-on look like a cheaper option when in fact it is not.I'm with Michael on this one. I purchased a Xbox360 at launch, before HD-DVD or BluRay were even *born*. Neither format even existed on the market. So how can it make sense to factor in the cost of a purchase that was not contingent on future upgrades not available at the time? If you upgrade the video card in your PC, do you factoring in the cost of the motherboard you already own? Do you factor the cost of a PS3 into every BluRay movie you purchase? Because, you do need the PS3s to play it, no?

The HD-DVD AO is an accessory marketed at a specific demographic (the 10m+ Xbox360 owners). If we are factoring in the cost of the console, that is no different from including the cost of the HDTV, stereo system, cables, etc. because you also need those to experience the movie in HD. For an existing Xbox360 owner, the cost of entry into the HD-DVD market is $180. Also, the fact that the Xbox360 HD-DVD player works on computers pretty much negates the cost of the Xbox360. But I guess you would include the cost of the PC too? And Power DVD? Why not just include the cost of the Vista Ultimate while you're at it? You do need an operating system in order to use PowerDVD, right?

Note: The fact that we are here bickering tooth and nail over less than a $50 price difference between the 2 consoles (with matching options) just proves that, in fact, price does matter.

Actually, I honestly don't understand on the reasoning of why the initial cost fo the 360 should not be counted...it was paid for at some point so that cost needs to be considered...

IMO, it seems like an excuse to make HD DVD add-on look like a cheaper option when in fact it is not. (it is cheaper if you already have the 360 - when you say it like that, it proves my point that the cost of the 360 should be considered)...

Anyway, as you suggested, I will let it die...

Can't see why you don't get it... it's plain and simple.

Nobody said that all Addon owners had the same admission cost... get it yet?

Let me break it down for you:

Anything that is factored in the decision making process has a cost. Understand this and then the examples will make sense.

Person A bought the Xbox360 before the announcement of the Addon, it was bought solely to play games, the cost of the console justified the features, games lineup, online services etc. basically everything available at launch.

Person A now hears about HD and wants to get into HD movie playback. He can go with a BD player when they came out ($999 for the Samsung) or he can pay $199 for the 360 Addon, or he could have paid $499/$999 for a Toshiba standalone player. Those are his options. His choice comes down to what he wants knowing that whatever he pays for is solely used for the playback of movies. Hence if he goes for the Samsung the cost of entry is $999, if he goes for the Toshiba it's $499/$999, knowing that he has already got an existing 360, the cost of entry on the Addon is only $199.

Imagine Person B is interested in HD-DVD today. He can buy a Toshiba (what is it now, $299?) or the higher end model, or he can get the Addon and attach it to an existing HTPC if he has one already in use that is powerful enough and pays for the playback software. He can also buy an Xbox360 and an Addon. What is his admission then? $299 in the case of the Toshiba, $199 + cost of Software in the case he has an HTPC, $299/$399 + $179 for the Xbox/AO combo. Now given that the Xbox/AO combo is pricier, has limited audio capabilities, and is clunkier and not to mention 2 separate boxes... most would agree that the typical consumer would not choose that combo solely as a means to get into HD-DVD playback. Especially since they can do that and more a lot more elegantly for less money. So if Person B looks at his choices and decides that despite the additional cost of the Xbox/AO combo... the value is inherent in it's ability to play games, then you have two scenarios:

You could say that if he doesn't get into gaming straight away, then the movie playback admission cost is the full cost of the Xbox/AO combo. If he decides to game later on, then gaming is free. Even then you could split the costs, its up to you. Just be consistent.

If he plans on dual purposes for the machine to game and watch movies straight away or in the foreseeable future, then the cost of admission can be looked at in many ways... sure you could say that it still costs him $478/$578 to watch movies, but you could also rationalise it based on how much gaming vs movie watching is intended for the device (no one can accurately predict). It's easier to just say that since the alternative for gaming ONLY is $299/$399 then the movie component is $179.

In the same way then, someone looking into BD playback and considers the PS3 vs the Standalones, they too can be placed under the exact same circumstances as Person B (should he choose the Xbox/AO combo). Lets say for arguments sake that the Xbox360 and PS3 are comparable gaming consoles (since there is no PS3 without Movie playback), they have many titles in common and each has their fair share of exclusives. This makes it easier to cost the gaming component of the PS3 should you want to.

Now lets add another person, Person C.

Person C's DVD player just died. They were looking at a replacement, say a nice brand name unit with decent build for say $79. If the salesman talks them into stepping up to the entry level Toshiba, then the cost of admission to HD-DVD is $220. Then again, if the step up results in their no longer being satisfied with SD thus snubbing it altogether, they can later revise it to being a $299 cost to get into HD.

At the end of the day it's all about perspective, each person's situation may be different so you can't blanket statement anything.

If you read back, the disagreement only happens when you treat one console one way and another console differently even if the circumstances are the same. If you change the circumstances then it's different. I think the major offense came with people who claim BD playback is free with the PS3 but it costs the full cost of the Xbox/AO combo for HD-DVD. It's comparing apples with oranges. It's only free on the PS3 if you intended to buy the PS3 anyway even if it didn't have the movie capabilities built in (because we all know the PS3 costs more than comparable gaming consoles). Just as the admission cost for HD-DVD is only $179 if you already bought your 360 for gaming purposes. Clearly there are people here who use their PS3s exclusively for movie playback, they would say the cost of admission was the cost of the console and that gaming would be free.

Cheers...
Duy-Khang Hoang

BD Myth No. 11: You have to add on the cost of the XBOX 360 you bought for games when you buy the add-on. OTOH the cost of playing movies is free when you buy a PS3.

HD DVD Myth No. 11: When talking about the cost of the add-on, pretend that the other essential hardware such as a 360 or PC with capable hardware is free because the "price advantage" is nil if it isn't.

spacejamz,

Originally Posted by spacejamz
Actually, I honestly don't understand on the reasoning of why the initial cost fo the 360 should not be counted...it was paid for at some point so that cost needs to be considered...

This is an old argument. Let us see if we can make it clearer. Do you figure in the initial cost of the BD player when you buy a Movie - The BD player was paid for at some point, and by your logic that cost needs to be considered.

Did you figure in the cost of your TV, that was paid for also, and by your logic that cost should also be considered.

Did you figure in the cost of your speakers
Preamp
Amp
Cabling,

So by your logic, if all costs need to be factored in, each BD movie you buy costs several thousand dollars.

Etc

spacejamz,



This is an old argument. Let us see if we can make it clearer. Do you figure in the initial cost of the BD player when you buy a Movie - The BD player was paid for at some point, and by your logic that cost needs to be considered.

Did you figure in the cost of your TV, that was paid for also, and by your logic that cost should also be considered.

Did you figure in the cost of your speakers
Preamp
Amp
Cabling,

So by your logic, if all costs need to be factored in, each BD movie you buy costs several thousand dollars.

Etc

...except that it would also apply to HD DVD, so I don't know how you even think that comes remotely close to explaining how the price of the 360 doesn't count.

Lets start with some preconditions:
You have a TV, and a stereo system with all available cabling and the power bill has been paid.

You now buy the 360 add-on, but you don't have a 360 or PC capable of decoding the movie (pretending that the software doesn't cost $60-100).

How do you watch a movie with your $180 add-on in this case?

Obviously you can't. You'll need to buy something to hook the add-on to. If you buy it before you buy the add-on, or after you still had to spend money, and that money is counted as part of the necessary hardware to watch a movie.

I mean if you want to look at it like this, the reason a TV and sound system aren't added into the equation (even though I know you are just being obstinate) is because they are essentially equal. You need the TV or the sound system for both Blu-ray and HD DVD. Since they are the same, they are removed from discussion because it is mind numbingly obvious they are required. So instead we talk about the price to be able to actually watch an HD DVD, and that includes the 360 price or a capable PC.

By your logic the cheapest combo player is a $400 PC drive because you can pretend the PC was free or you "needed it anyways" or somesuch.

By your logic the cheapest combo player is a $400 PC drive because you can pretend the PC was free or you "needed it anyways" or somesuch.

Excellent analogy!

spacejamz,
This is an old argument. Let us see if we can make it clearer. Do you figure in the initial cost of the BD player when you buy a Movie - The BD player was paid for at some point, and by your logic that cost needs to be considered.

Did you figure in the cost of your TV, that was paid for also, and by your logic that cost should also be considered.

Did you figure in the cost of your speakers
Preamp
Amp
Cabling,

So by your logic, if all costs need to be factored in, each BD movie you buy costs several thousand dollars.

Etc

let me try and make this as simple as possible.

to use the 360 add on, you need to BUY an XBOX360...it doesnt matter if you bought the 360 last year or if you only bought to play games, you still had to BUY it. Once you BOUGHT it, you can connect the add-on so it can now play HD DVD disks.

You cannot use the add-on without a 360. Please don't complicate this any further any bringing up the HTPC BS as what are percentage of add-on owners who do not use a 360? I am not sure but I would be willing to be it is a very small percentage...

It is really that simple...you don't need to complicate the equation by calculating the depreciating value or how much electricity it needs...

your BD example is not an accurate comparison because you can play the blu ray disk out of the box. You cannot do that with the add-on because you have to had purchased a 360 prior to using the add-on...

I can see that the HD DVD supporters will not understand this because they really want to believe that using a 360 add-on is cheaper, but ultimately, by the time you pay for a 360 premium and an add-on, you get a bunch less functionality that does not have access the exclusive content of a PS3...

Edit: and let me add that you only need to buy the XBOX360 once...you do not need to buy one everytime you watch an HD DVD disk. The same applies to blu ray...you do not need to buy a new player each time you watch a blu ray disk...

You need the TV or the sound system for both Blu-ray and HD DVD. Since they are the same, they are removed from discussion because it is mind numbingly obvious they are requiredAnd it is mind numbingly obvious that the Xbox360 HD-DVD add-on requires an Xbox360 prior to purchase.

Some very stubborn people in this thread.

The argument was never about requirements. It was about the opportunity cost.

Please do read before posting, because a lot of you guys would have clearly failed any form of comprehension exercise.

If you ask: "what good is an HD-DVD Addon if you don't have an Xbox360?"
It's no different to someone asking: "what good is an xbox360 if you don't have a TV?"

If by arguing the above you conclude that the cost of the Addon must include the cost of the Xbox then by definition you've also claimed the cost of the Xbox360 must also include the cost of the TV.

If I wish to listen to music in my car (which only came with say a tape deck) and am eyeing an MP3 capable CD headunit costing say $199, I don't then say that the MP3 deck is useless without the car and therefore must include the cost of the car in the equation... let's not get into without fuel, without roads, without land, without the planet earth shall we.

let me try and make this as simple as possible.

to use the 360 add on, you need to BUY an XBOX360...it doesnt matter if you bought the 360 last year or if you only bought to play games, you still had to BUY it. Once you BOUGHT it, you can connect the add-on so it can now play HD DVD disks.

You cannot use the add-on without a 360. Please don't complicate this any further any bringing up the HTPC BS as what are percentage of add-on owners who do not use a 360? I am not sure but I would be willing to be it is a very small percentage...

It is really that simple...you don't need to complicate the equation by calculating the depreciating value or how much electricity it needs...

your BD example is not an accurate comparison because you can play the blu ray disk out of the box. You cannot do that with the add-on because you have to had purchased a 360 prior to using the add-on...

I can see that the HD DVD supporters will not understand this because they really want to believe that using a 360 add-on is cheaper, but ultimately, by the time you pay for a 360 premium and an add-on, you get a bunch less functionality that does not have access the exclusive content of a PS3...

Edit: and let me add that you only need to buy the XBOX360 once...you do not need to buy one everytime you watch an HD DVD disk. The same applies to blu ray...you do not need to buy a new player each time you watch a blu ray disk...

You are so special that I decided to break it down further for you.

People in this thread are not arguing for the HD-DVD option to be cheaper. They are arguing that depending on how your circumstances came to be, the cost "MAY" have been cheaper.

The last sentence you added clearly shows why you haven't grasped the concept. The point made was not about multiple purchases being required, you really contradict yourself with this counterargument.

And also, why are you discussing the Addon as if it was only usable with the Premium Xbox? If your sole purpose was to watch movies, you'd get by with just the Core system. Secondly you make mention of the value equation whereby nobody has even gone there yet: Why point out the Addon being incapable of playing back BD exclusives if you don't also point out the PS3 is also incapable of playing HD-DVD exclusives? If not being able to playback exclusives renders something severely reduced in value, then by definition the PS3 is a horrible value proposition as well.

Is this the new format wars thread?? Any bets on how long it takes till this is closed??

By your logic the cheapest combo player is a $400 PC drive because you can pretend the PC was free or you "needed it anyways" or somesuch.

If I already have a HTPC in place playing back DVDs, and "IF" the PC was capable of playing back HD media, then YES, the cost of admission for "ME" would be the cost of the two optical drives and the playback software.

If however I have a HTPC and needed to upgrade some parts in order to make it HD capable, then clearly you need to add in the cost of those parts as well.

If however I don't have a HTPC but wish to build a HTPC combo player for myself, then yeah the cost of the entire PC is included in the price of admission.

Is this the new format wars thread?? Any bets on how long it takes till this is closed??

I'm betting very soon...

The argument was never about requirements. It was about the opportunity cost.
It was an argument over simply wanting the two formats analyzed using the same set of rules for each. Why is xbox's HD DVD capabilities $199 while PS3's Blu-ray capabilities is $599? That's all it was. But now with the HD-A2 dipping as low as $199, the whole argument doesn't even matter anymore.

It was an argument over simply wanting the two formats analyzed using the same set of rules for each. Why is xbox's HD DVD capabilities $199 while PS3's Blu-ray capabilities is $599? That's all it was. But now with the HD-A2 dipping as low as $199, the whole argument doesn't even matter anymore.

I think the problem is people who are arguing against the addon don't realise that nobody has ever claimed that the cost of entry for HD-DVD is $179... everyone so far has stated that it was "CONTINGENT" on the buyer already having an Xbox360 for gaming/media purposes. For those that don't have the 360, you have to add the cost.

I have an Xbox360, it doesn't sit in the home theatre, hence for me if I wanted to get into HD-DVD for my home theatre, the entry cost would include the cost of the 360 as well as the Addon "IF" I chose that combo as my playback method of choice. Which I wouldn't due to my not having a receiver in the HT and thus requiring Analog outs. This would put my cost of entry into HD-DVD as the cost of the top of the line Toshiba unit. If I wanted to get into BD, it would be similar because once again, I don't have an HDMI/SPDIF receiver (just a power amp) and as such if I wanted to get into BD I would have to get a unit which has inbuilt decoding out to analog outputs. Since I already have a HTPC for DVD playback however, I can reduce the cost of entry by buying the optical drives and the software - but my HTPC does not have HDCP compliant video output so I'd have to also factor in the cost of say an 8600GT - Still making it the cheapest option.

I "HAVE" an Xbox360, but in my case the cost of entry is still different because of the circumstances I am in.

If I decide later on to add HD-DVD playback capability to my other set which the Xbox360 is hooked up to, then yes I can then claim that it cost me $179 admission to play HD-DVDs on that set.

Cheers...
Duy-Khang Hoang

EDIT: Of course being in Australia the costs are different. Hence I am pretending to be a US citizen for the sake of the comparison and to avoid any further confusion.

Well anyway you slice it, HD-DVD is still cheaper at the moment. Pulling hairs on the 360 AO pricing changes nothing.

In all honesty, I wish this format war was over. I'm at the point now, that I don't care which side win. I just know that by me picking a side (HD DVD) that I am missing out on a lot of movies. I just really wish the studios would have let us the consumers decide what format prevails. As time goes along, I have noticed it is not us who will determine this war. So with that I wish these companies would come on already, I have money to spend and i want ALL my movies in HD.

In all honesty, I wish this format war was over. I'm at the point now, that I don't care which side win. I just know that by me picking a side (HD DVD) that I am missing out on a lot of movies. I just really wish the studios would have let us the consumers decide what format prevails. As time goes along, I have noticed it is not us who will determine this war. So with that I wish these companies would come on already, I have money to spend and i want ALL my movies in HD.

Consumers have always had the choice to buy either HD DVD or Blu ray (and right now they are buying more blu) so I guess I am not understanding your point about consumers deciding what format prevails.

No one has stuck a gun to their head. Based on these sales trends, companies such as blockbuster, target and BJ as well as smaller studios are basing their direction on the sales trends they have observed so far.

IMO, since the vast majority of consumers have preferred blu ray to date, these organizations are reacting accordingly. Is it just because your preferred format was not selected by these companies that prompt you to say the consumer is not deciding who wins???

Is it the fact that each side has exclusive studios? These companies are in this to make money...wanting every studio to release in both formats is right up there with wanting world peace and ending global starvation...

Ok, lets call it like it is.... If all studios were neutral, which format do you think would be ahead?? When DVD came out I never had to worry about which studio made which movie. The only decision I had was trying to pick out the best player. That's the way this war should be. And again, we as consumers have no choice in this war. The studios are deciding it for us. So I place the blame on them, not us here bickering like little kids in school again. So again, I wish these companies would go ahead and stop all this so we can get back to normal. I don't care BR or HD DVD, cause they are both great technologies. I want ALL my movies in HD!!!!!


I honestly cannot go with the people chose BR. Sony did a great thing by making the PS3 a BR player. If not for the PS3 how do u think the sales would be. Honestly we all know that standalone vs standalone which player sales the most. I'm not hating on Sony, it was a great move, but is does screw up the real numbers of players. In a sad way, I kind of wish MS would have put an HD DVD player in the 360. Then they could tout there are 9-10mill HD DVD players in people's home. How do u think that would affect this war.............

And it is mind numbingly obvious that the Xbox360 HD-DVD add-on requires an Xbox360 prior to purchase.

So you had to BUY the 360 didn't you? SO it is mind numbingly obvious that its cost should be included because the "Xbox360 HD-DVD add-on requires an Xbox360 prior to purchase."

Consumers have always had the choice to buy either HD DVD or Blu ray
Or neither. Guess which most have chosen.

IMO, since the vast majority of consumers have preferred blu ray to date, these organizations are reacting accordingly.
The vast majority of consumers have preferred to skip both formats completely. They don't think its worth the price. Of the 1% of the video market that these formats have, BD has less than a 2:1 lead overall.

These companies are in this to make money
With only one title breaking 100,000 (both formats combined), neither format is making alot of money for the studios. The studio that seems to be making the most off of HD discs seems to be Warner, and they are (semi) neutral.
J

Edit: By now, there might be 2 titles that have broken 100,000.

the flux,

So you had to BUY the 360 didn't you? SO it is mind numbingly obvious that its cost should be included because the "Xbox360 HD-DVD add-on requires an Xbox360 prior to purchase."

So you had to BUY the HDTV didn't you? SO it is mind numbingly obvious that its cost should be included because the "BD player requires a HDTV prior to purchase."

Do you see how absurd that argument is. Hdkhang described it pretty well in his discussion of opportunity cost.

When I bought my PS3 after the price drop I paid $500 to get a BD player and a HD game machine. Did I pay $500 for each? That would mean I paid $1000! I need to go check my receipt again.

Ok, lets call it like it is.... If all studios were neutral, which format do you think would be ahead?? When DVD came out I never had to worry about which studio made which movie. The only decision I had was trying to pick out the best player. That's the way this war should be. And again, we as consumers have no choice in this war. The studios are deciding it for us. So I place the blame on them, not us here bickering like little kids in school again. So again, I wish these companies would go ahead and stop all this so we can get back to normal. I don't care BR or HD DVD, cause they are both great technologies. I want ALL my movies in HD!!!!!


I honestly cannot go with the people chose BR. Sony did a great thing by making the PS3 a BR player. If not for the PS3 how do u think the sales would be. Honestly we all know that standalone vs standalone which player sales the most. I'm not hating on Sony, it was a great move, but is does screw up the real numbers of players. In a sad way, I kind of wish MS would have put an HD DVD player in the 360. Then they could tout there are 9-10mill HD DVD players in people's home. How do u think that would affect this war.............

Your last paragraph tells me you do care who wins, please be honest with yourself and the rest of us.

Ask people who bought the iPhone is price was an issue. The people who price is a factor for don't understand the value of better technology. It's just like Beta/VHS. Beta was far superior in every aspect, but VHS wins because of adaptation of the market and price points. We live in a world where people will get it as long as their minimum payment doesn't go up too far. Erego, price is meaningless.

So you had to BUY the 360 didn't you? SO it is mind numbingly obvious that its cost should be included because the "Xbox360 HD-DVD add-on requires an Xbox360 prior to purchase."

Indeed. Unless the upper limit of their intended market is 360 owners.

"Price Matters "

Yup, and I'm glad the format I support (Blu-ray LPCM for the win :D )has the movie for less than the other format. This has happened quite a lot with my purchases :D

I have to disagree with the statement by Selder76 that "price is meaningless." There are many factors involved in making choices including price. The I-Phone and the PS3 were smash sellers in the first few days and than sales died off. Sales picked up for the PS3 when Sony lowered the price and I am sure the same will be true for the I-Phone. Toshiba needs to come out will a really low priced player that will only cost a few dollars more than a Sd player and they need to get the film companies that support HD to make dual disks at the same cost as standard Dvd's to get things going. Blu-Ray needs to lower the cost of their players and to include the promised features soon. If might also be possible for both formats to hang around for a long time. This fall will be interesting.

Ask people who bought the iPhone is price was an issue. The people who price is a factor for don't understand the value of better technology. It's just like Beta/VHS. Beta was far superior in every aspect, but VHS wins because of adaptation of the market and price points. We live in a world where people will get it as long as their minimum payment doesn't go up too far. Erego, price is meaningless.
:D

So a value conscious consumer is a dumb consumer? Beta was superior in "every" aspect? You mean except the length of recording, right?

iPhone is a great example - nothing new but a package & quite few "gotchas".........but hey, it's new AND expensive so it must be better.

I'd change the phrase to "we live in a world where you can re-badge an auto & still sell the public that it's world class by giving it a higher price"

Or neither. Guess which most have chosen.

The vast majority of consumers have preferred to skip both formats completely. They don't think its worth the price. Of the 1% of the video market that these formats have, BD has less than a 2:1 lead overall.

With only one title breaking 100,000 (both formats combined), neither format is making alot of money for the studios. The studio that seems to be making the most off of HD discs seems to be Warner, and they are (semi) neutral.
J

Edit: By now, there might be 2 titles that have broken 100,000.

I noticed that a new HD DVD response is that 1% adoption means nothing in the current war...I wonder what they would be saying if HD DVD was winning 2:1 :D

Companies are basing their decisions what has been purchased so far, not what has not been purchased. (i.e., Target, BJ's and Blockbuster)...don't you think they know that there is only 1% adoption rate so far? Obviously, the buying habits on this 1% are enough to make enough of a difference for them not place HD DVD on their store shelves ....

The steps they are taking now (to place blu ray on their shelves but not HD DVD) will further increase the gap between blu ray and HD DVD. Blu ray is winning now and HD DVD can do nothing except drop prices to stop them.

I noticed that a new HD DVD response is that 1% adoption means nothing in the current war...I wonder what they would be saying if HD DVD was winning 2:1 :D
.
I would say "sorry I doubted the intelligence of the 1% of the population"

the flux,



So you had to BUY the HDTV didn't you? SO it is mind numbingly obvious that its cost should be included because the "BD player requires a HDTV prior to purchase."

Do you see how absurd that argument is. Hdkhang described it pretty well in his discussion of opportunity cost.

Actually the BD player will play a Blu-ray without a TV just fine. You just won't be able to see anything.

The 360 add-on will do nothing without a 360 to attach it to other than spin the disk.

I noticed that a new HD DVD response is that 1% adoption means nothing in the current war...I wonder what they would be saying if HD DVD was winning 2:1 :D

1% mens there really is no format war. :rolleyes:
J

I bought the Xbox for gaming. The add-on cost me $150 some months later. (In fact I flipped my addon + Oppo on ebay for an A2).

Adding the cost of the 360 to the buy-in price is silly. I'd have one regardless of HD-DVD or not. Having a 360 is a prerequisite, like having an HDTV as someone used as an example. You can't add it all together and conclude that is the buy in price. That doesn't make sense.

Minimum buy-in for Blu-ray folks: $499 for a PS3 or $450 for a BD player

Minimum buy-in for HD-DVD is different: ~$250 for a Toshiba A2
or ~$179 for Xbox 360 owners.

I bought the Xbox for gaming. The add-on cost me $150 some months later. (In fact I flipped my addon + Oppo on ebay for an A2).

Adding the cost of the 360 to the buy-in price is silly. I'd have one regardless of HD-DVD or not. Having a 360 is a prerequisite, like having an HDTV as someone used as an example. You can't add it all together and conclude that is the buy in price. That doesn't make sense.

Minimum buy-in for Blu-ray folks: $499 for a PS3 or $450 for a BD player

Minimum buy-in for HD-DVD is different: ~$250 for a Toshiba A2
or ~$179 for Xbox 360 owners.

So by that logic, minimum buy-in price for blu-ray is $0 for PS3 owners.

I noticed that a new HD DVD response is that 1% adoption means nothing in the current war...I wonder what they would be saying if HD DVD was winning 2:1 :D

Companies are basing their decisions what has been purchased so far, not what has not been purchased. (i.e., Target, BJ's and Blockbuster)...don't you think they know that there is only 1% adoption rate so far? Obviously, the buying habits on this 1% are enough to make enough of a difference for them not place HD DVD on their store shelves ....

The steps they are taking now (to place blu ray on their shelves but not HD DVD) will further increase the gap between blu ray and HD DVD. Blu ray is winning now and HD DVD can do nothing except drop prices to stop them.

1st, The fact that the adoption rate is less than 1% is not an HD DVD argument. Its jsut a fact. There is a chance that both formats could fail or just be small niche markets. I think they will both survive an niches (burners will see to that).

2nd, a good part of the reason retailers are picking BR is because they are getting paid to do so. Sony is doing a great job marketing and buying end-caps and such.

Back to the real topic. Of course price matters! I bought an A2 because it was only $199. When the PS3 or BR player drops below $250, I plan on buying one too. Personally I do not care who wins, I just like to watch movies.

I bought the Xbox for gaming. The add-on cost me $150 some months later. (In fact I flipped my addon + Oppo on ebay for an A2).

Adding the cost of the 360 to the buy-in price is silly. I'd have one regardless of HD-DVD or not. Having a 360 is a prerequisite, like having an HDTV as someone used as an example. You can't add it all together and conclude that is the buy in price. That doesn't make sense.

Minimum buy-in for Blu-ray folks: $499 for a PS3 or $450 for a BD player

Minimum buy-in for HD-DVD is different: ~$250 for a Toshiba A2
or ~$179 for Xbox 360 owners.

There sure are a lot of monkeys on the forum.

You forgot HTPC owners. $179 for Xbox add-on.

There sure are a lot of monkeys on the forum.

You forgot HTPC owners. $179 for Xbox add-on.

Monkeys rock, just watch Planet Earth ;)

Plus software to run it which I read on here from HD DVD fans that is is $100.

So by that logic, minimum buy-in price for blu-ray is $0 for PS3 owners.

I agree with this. The reason HD DVD has a lower market share right now is because of all the PS3 owners who realized that they can not only play games, but they can also watch BR movies too. 0 additional cost to them.

Of course they did get suckered into over paying for a game console, but that is just my opinion.

So by that logic, minimum buy-in price for blu-ray is $0 for PS3 owners.
Isn't that a large part of the adoption strategy of BD? Giving PS3 gamers a free BD player?

Isn't that a large part of the adoption strategy of BD? Giving PS3 gamers a free BD player?

Or is it a free gaming system to movie watchers. I've read people being "trojan horsed" both ways. Or SACD, lol

I agree with this. The reason HD DVD has a lower market share right now is because of all the PS3 owners who realized that they can not only play games, but they can also watch BR movies too. 0 additional cost to them.

Of course they did get suckered into over paying for a game console, but that is just my opinion.

As far as I can tell every person I know who bought a PS3 knows what they charged to their credit card. To me an many others it is an incredible value. Of course I'm not shocked we disagree on this.

Or is it a free gaming system to movie watchers. I've read people being "trojan horsed" both ways. Or SACD, lol



As far as I can tell every person I know who bought a PS3 knows what they charged to their credit card. To me an many others it is an incredible value. Of course I'm not shocked we disagree on this.

I did say it was an opinion, and I respect yours too. To me $600 for a game console is way too much, but to someone else they may think $1000 for state-of-the-art is just fine. There were tons of people willing to pay that on ebay just after the PS3 was released.

brian,

As far as I can tell every person I know who bought a PS3 knows what they charged to their credit card. To me an many others it is an incredible value. Of course I'm not shocked we disagree on this.

I would contend that you and your friends are an exception. I was at a family gathering this weekend, and my nephew (aged 18, and a PS2 owner) was very proud of his new PS3, which he saved his money for.

However, he had no clue it would play BD movies and he had it hooked up via composite video. You read that right composite.

Don't waste too much logic on these boys

BD Myth No. 16: you have to add on the cost of the XBOX 360 you bought for games when you buy the add-on even though that isn't used for games.
This comes from including the cost of BD in the PS3 http://www.playstatic.com/news/443
"I stand firmly by the decision to include BD-ROM as the physical media format. Next generation game design demands the capacity of Blu-ray. Once we’d adopted BD as a game format, there was little incremental cost to support BD as a movie format."

Sure Phil :rolleyes: Whatever

brian,



I would contend that you and your friends are an exception. I was at a family gathering this weekend, and my nephew (aged 18, and a PS2 owner) was very proud of his new PS3, which he saved his money for.

However, he had no clue it would play BD movies and he had it hooked up via composite video. You read that right composite.

Hard to say if my friends or your nephew is the exception.

When I bought my PS3 after the price drop I paid $500 to get a BD player and a HD game machine. Did I pay $500 for each? That would mean I paid $1000! I need to go check my receipt again.

Nobody has claimed what you are suggesting. Read again.

Actually the BD player will play a Blu-ray without a TV just fine. You just won't be able to see anything.

The 360 add-on will do nothing without a 360 to attach it to other than spin the disk.

The "NET" effect of which would be to achieve what? A warm and fuzzy feeling inside?

So by that logic, minimum buy-in price for blu-ray is $0 for PS3 owners.

Well you could argue that and nobody would really disagree with you. Provided the circumstances made sense.

It is a free BD player if you feel you would have paid $500/$600 for the game console anyway. It is a free BD player if you bought it solely to play games or use their online service. It is NOT a free player if you were buying it purely to watch movies on. It is also not a free player if you could not justify the buy-in price for a games console only: e.g. you wanted a games console, two choices available that suit your gaming preferences - the Xbox360 or the PS3. PS3 costs more but you justify the additional cost due to your intended use of the machine as a BD playback device. In that case the theoretical cost of the BD playback is the differential.

As we all know though, there is no NON-BD PS3s out there. The PS3 is a different business model to the Xbox360/AO combo for HD media playback... as for gaming well some feel the HDMI output, higher capacity games media, quieter running mechanism, mandatory HDD etc. make for a better console and are willing to pay more. But they are a minority, most gamers care most about the actual games themselves rather than the brand of player.

The "NET" effect of which would be to achieve what? A warm and fuzzy feeling inside?

You'd achieve more than with just the add-on alone, thats for sure.

So by that logic, minimum buy-in price for blu-ray is $0 for PS3 owners.

It is a free BD player if you feel you would have paid $500/$600 for the game console anyway. It is a free BD player if you bought it solely to play games or use their online service. It is NOT a free player if you were buying it purely to watch movies on. It is also not a free player if you could not justify the buy-in price for a games console only: e.g. you wanted a games console, two choices available that suit your gaming preferences - the Xbox360 or the PS3. PS3 costs more but you justify the additional cost due to your intended use of the machine as a BD playback device. In that case the theoretical cost of the BD playback is the differential.

Very articulate answer. The key point with regards to the XBOX add-on vis-a-vis the PS3 is that we know the price paid for the add-on to play HD DVD. However, only the PS3 owner knows the price paid for the PS3 as a Blu-ray player. If the PS3 was bought to only play BD's, then it cost that person $500/$600 for that ability. The PS3 is an exceptional value only to those who value it's dual use.

If the PS3 was bought to only play BD's, then it cost that person $500/$600 for that ability. The PS3 is an exceptional value only to those who value it's dual use.

Then would it be fair to say that if someone originally bought a PS3 to play BDs (like me), but LATER began using it to play games and access dowloadable media (as I did), that its value would INCREASE over time? Also, even before I began playing games on my PS3 I still considered the PS3's potential functionality as a media hub (something no current or announced standalone can do) into my buying decision. So even discounting its gaming capability, I felt that I was getting more value out of it than I would from any standalone player.

Or to look at it another way, the price of Blu-ray capability actually decreases the longer I own the PS3 (and I'm not talking about depreciation). I know quite a few people who bought a PS3 with the original intention of using it only as a BD player. Since then, they've all learned to use it's other capabilties as well.

The PS3 is an exceptional value only to those who value it's dual use.

Actually at launch it was an exceptional value for those who wanted it purely for BD movie watching as well given the price of standalones at the time.

Nobody has claimed what you are suggesting. Read again.

That is exactly the claim of people who say the 360 needs to be counted in full for both the games and again for the HD DVD add on. If the opportunity cost needs to be counted in full twice for that, it needs to be counted in full twice for the PS3.

Sony said the BD drive was added for gaming reasons, which I sincerely doubt. If it was truly not needed for games (since it is there it has invited bloated games - a self fulfilling prophecy) the PS3 owners who bought it for games are actually subsidizing the movie use through a higher price.

Anyway, Sony thought they could get away with the higher price due to BD as they thought it would sell high volumes anyway, but it appears it made the price too high, and they aren't getting their volume.

Sony said the BD drive was added for gaming reasons, which I sincerely doubt. If it was truly not needed for games (since it is there it has invited bloated games - a self fulfilling prophecy) the PS3 owners who bought it for games are actually subsidizing the movie use through a higher price.

Anyway, Sony thought they could get away with the higher price due to BD as they thought it would sell high volumes anyway, but it appears it made the price too high, and they aren't getting their volume.

Well you are sincerely wrong. Read up at the gaming forums and you'll learn a lot. A few 360 titles have already been reduced in content to fit on 1 DVD (not very feasible to swap for online gaming) as well as PS3 titles exceeding 1 DVD's limitations. Latest one being PGR4, straight from the developers mouths at www.bizarrecreations.com. Earlier games like D0A4 had content reduced as well as The Darkness having less content than the PS3 version.

You won't see different times of day per city because this involves recreating all the textures again (one for day and one for night). Whilst this wasn't a problem for our dev team, it was a problem fitting all this data onto a single DVD. So we've worked around the problem by providing different lighting models per city. For example, Macau is always in the daytime, but if you play it during a storm everything looks darker and more foreboding. If you play during a blizzard then things are slightly tinged blue and everything seems more frozen. Of course, playing this track in sunshine will make everything appear bright and yellowy.

Well you are sincerely wrong. Read up at the gaming forums and you'll learn a lot. A few 360 titles have already been reduced in content to fit on 1 DVD (not very feasible to swap for online gaming) as well as PS3 titles exceeding 1 DVD's limitations. Latest one being PGR4, straight from the developers mouths at www.bizarrecreations.com. Earlier games like D0A4 had content reduced as well as The Darkness having less content than the PS3 version.

And yet some PS3 games have less content the the 360 version. Like The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion for example. Mehrunes' Razor, the Vile Lair, the Wizard's Tower and more are nowhere to be found on the PS3 version.

And yet some PS3 games have less content the the 360 version. Like The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion for example. Mehrunes' Razor, the Vile Lair, the Wizard's Tower and more are nowhere to be found on the PS3 version.

....the stark difference being that your example of missing features have absolutely nothing to do with the storage limitations of a 50GB disc.

And yet some PS3 games have less content the the 360 version. Like The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion for example. Mehrunes' Razor, the Vile Lair, the Wizard's Tower and more are nowhere to be found on the PS3 version.

They are nowhere to be found on the 360 edition either when comparing the non-collectors editions of the game. What is your point, or were you trying to imply that the same game at the same price point should include content that 360 owners previously had to pay for? Isn't that what the upcoming PS3/360 COLLECTORS EDITION is for?

....the stark difference being that your example of missing features have absolutely nothing to do with the storage limitations of a 50GB disc.

bingo

That is exactly the claim of people who say the 360 needs to be counted in full for both the games and again for the HD DVD add on. If the opportunity cost needs to be counted in full twice for that, it needs to be counted in full twice for the PS3.

Sorry, I misinterpreted your post, going back I probably still would if you hadn't clarified it for me with your second post (makes me feel dumb) which makes a lot of sense now. Thanks.

Very articulate answer. The key point with regards to the XBOX add-on vis-a-vis the PS3 is that we know the price paid for the add-on to play HD DVD. However, only the PS3 owner knows the price paid for the PS3 as a Blu-ray player. If the PS3 was bought to only play BD's, then it cost that person $500/$600 for that ability. The PS3 is an exceptional value only to those who value it's dual use.

Yes.

For folks that wanted the PS3 game selection over the 360 for some reason, and maybe also Playstation fanboys - these people that ALSO wanted Blu-ray - I can see for them it is an exceptional value.

The rest of us looked at it and either didn't want it as a console due to the selection of games, or didn't want it as a blu-ray player, or just winced at the pricetag.

You don't really have a choice. The PS3 is the lowest priced available blu-ray player but it comes with bundled gaming and a bunch of other stuff. It's up to you to decide if that has value or not.

But that doesn't mean you have to include the price of the 360 with the HD-DVD drive to "replicate" the PS3's features. If the 360 + add on was the cheapest HD-DVD option like the PS3 situation, maybe you'd have something. But the A2 is out there for $250 or so.

BestBuy has the 360 HD add on for $149 today. With King Kong in the box that is 6 free movies.

If the expected $50 price cut on the 360 happens next week then 360 + HD DVD will be $500 to match PS3.

....the stark difference being that your example of missing features have absolutely nothing to do with the storage limitations of a 50GB disc.

Maybe I did not make myself clear. Today the 360 has those features available and the PS3 does not. Because you can start with a 9 GB ot 50 GB disc and download more content, the size limitations matter less. It actually makes sense to download part of the larger games rather than to have them on the discs, because there will be less bugs and more fixes. As for HD space you can just clear it when you need to and re-download what you need later.

BestBuy has the 360 HD add on for $149 today. With King Kong in the box that is 6 free movies.

If the expected $50 price cut on the 360 happens next week then 360 + HD DVD will be $500 to match PS3.

with no wireless, no HDMI, crappier audio and only a 20GB hard drive that can only be upraded to 120GB for $180...

with no wireless, no HDMI, crappier audio and only a 20GB hard drive that can only be upraded to 120GB for $180...

:rolleyes:

I've got 8GB free and I haven't even tried cleaning it up. I don't need hundreds of GB on a console.

Wireless routers that support bridging are dirt cheap ($25 each) - 2 of those provide 4 wireless ports for everything in your AV rack. I plan on getting the 20GB PS3 someday because I already have wireless - getting wi-fi in the console is a waste of money for me.


Crappier audio depends on whether you plan on having or care about new audio format support - the 360 re-encodes the advanced audio to some pretty decent 1.5mbps? DTS which is better than the PS3's optical output of the new advanced audio to older receivers as far as I understand.

And HDMI? Again, that only matters to folks getting new receivers w/ the new audio codecs. On the video front component video is pretty close to identical.

BestBuy has the 360 HD add on for $149 today. With King Kong in the box that is 6 free movies.

If the expected $50 price cut on the 360 happens next week then 360 + HD DVD will be $500 to match PS3.

Thanks for the heads up. A friend here at work who is a big EQ2 player just mentioned that he is thinking about getting HD DVD or BR. I know that his PC is less that a month old and has a new $300 video card that supports HDMI. It is also connected to a 50" HDTV.

For him this is a no brainer. $149 for the HD DVD add-on and he gets 6 free movies including King Kong. The only other piece will be to upgrade his version of PowerDVD, but that should not cost too much.

with no wireless, no HDMI, crappier audio and only a 20GB hard drive that can only be upraded to 120GB for $180...

Or someone could buy an Elite. But you are missing one of the critical components of owning a 360 or PS3

THE VIDEO GAMES!

From a pure gaming perspective the 360 holds much more value than the PS3.

MS dropped the ball on the Elite, it doesn't do lossless surround.

with no wireless, no HDMI, crappier audio and only a 20GB hard drive that can only be upraded to 120GB for $180...

Crappy audio is the stuff you find on most most MP3 players, and yet the majority of people have no problem with it.

The stuff coming out of game consoles is pretty darn good, and most people don't even have receivers that will support it.

MS dropped the ball on the Elite, it doesn't do lossless surround.

And what % of the population need or have receivers that support lossless sound?

And what % of the population need or have receivers that support lossless sound?


It's the ELITE edition.

The top tier 360 doesn't do lossless... give me a break. It was a moronic move and you know it.

And what % of the population need or have receivers that support lossless sound?

Well need does play into luxury goods but neither of us know the %'s on the receivers. Regardless if a person wants to go next gen on movies I'd recommend them going with a stand alone to go the full way PQ and SQ not just PQ. Just watched 300 (latest example) in lossless surround yesterday it is absolutely amazing :D

Of course many don't care about going next gen and stick with DVD's, but clearly this forum isn't targeted for those people. Though I'm sure they are in the majority and you can talk about them all you want ;)

It's the ELITE edition.

The top tier 360 doesn't do lossless... give me a break. It was a moronic move and you know it.

Short-sited to say the least, but then again their priorities aren't really with HD-DVD, just to offer a half-arsed option to play them.

Short-sited to say the least, but then again their priorities aren't really with HD-DVD, just to offer a half-arsed option to play them.

:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:

:eek: :p

:eek: :p

lol :D

It's the ELITE edition.

The top tier 360 doesn't do lossless... give me a break. It was a moronic move and you know it.

Sound does not matter like video. That is why SACD and DVD-A failed miserably.
Sound is very, very subjective. Some people think that MP3s sound amazing, and some people can not even tell the difference between lossless and say Dolby EX sound.

I am sure MS did their home work and found that lossless sound was about the last thing people looked at when buying an Xbox 360.

Sound does not matter like video. That is why SACD and DVD-A failed miserably.
Sound is very, very subjective. Some people think that MP3s sound amazing, and some people can not even tell the difference between lossless and say Dolby EX sound.

I am sure MS did their home work and found that lossless sound was about the last thing people looked at when buying an Xbox 360.

Depends who you ask. Sound does matter to me and many others (take a guess at what the "A" stands for in "AVSforum" ;) ). Personally I'm very glad we've moved way beyond mono sound.

Depends who you ask. Sound does matter to me and many others (take a guess at what the "A" stands for in "AVSforum" ;) ). Personally I'm very glad we've moved way beyond mono sound.


Fact. I got into the HD game with the addon, but now, I rarely use it... The lossless on the PS3 has me ordering everything on BD, rentals et all.

It is a big deal for those who do have the hardware. It's just a shame they didn't add the ability, especially for the price point.

Fact. I got into the HD game with the addon, but now, I rarely use it... The lossless on the PS3 has me ordering everything on BD, rentals et all.

It is a big deal for those who do have the hardware. It's just a shame they didn't add the ability, especially for the price point.

Indeed, go back to before the Elite came out and read some of the posts. Many were hoping that the Elite's HDMI would answer our hopes for lossless surround.

So by that logic, minimum buy-in price for blu-ray is $0 for PS3 owners.

That would be true if you bought the PS3 solely for gaming. A fair number of people bought the PS3 solely for playing movies. The maximum buy-in price for PS3 owners is $499-599 or whatever price they paid for it.

Most are somewhere in the middle so they are probably paying an additional $200+ for Blu-ray.

Indeed, go back to before the Elite came out and read some of the posts. Many were hoping that the Elite's HDMI would answer our hopes for lossless surround.

I would think that anyone that concerned about lossless surround would simply buy a standalone. MS's add-on was not meant to compete with Toshiba's standalones as far as I know. The add-on is simply a entry-level player for those who have budget constraints.

Fact. I got into the HD game with the addon, but now, I rarely use it... The lossless on the PS3 has me ordering everything on BD, rentals et all.

It is a big deal for those who do have the hardware. It's just a shame they didn't add the ability, especially for the price point.

That fits myself to a T, as well. Got the add-on first to test the waters, liked what I saw. Got the PS3 and been spoiled ever since and using my add-on, if not the 360 in general, less and less. Getting an HDMI AVR exasperated that trend big time.

For anyone with the HDMI hardware, the Elite was pointless since the HDMI doesn't offer any PQ upgrade over component or VGA and only allowing 2CH means it just oh so slightly simplifies the cable situation down the optical cable (or maybe 2ch stereo). The only way I could see the Elite mattering was for people who were lacking (free) component or VGA ports or aren't using surround sound. Or who wanted a black 360 without having to paint it.

I still dream of my perfect Xbox 365 with HDMI allowing 8ch PCM output and an internal HDDVD drive. THAT would be "Elite." Hopefully 65nm (quieter and cooler) and no fear of the Red Circles of Death would be nice, if not required.

or who wanted to upscale DVDs without resorting to VGA.

And what % of the population need or have receivers that support lossless sound?

Here's that classic "HD DVD is good enough" attitude.

What % of the population has a 1080p HDTV? I guess the 360 should have just gone for SD output too right?

I don't want good enough. I want ELITE when I pay more for it.

Back to the real topic. Of course price matters! I bought an A2 because it was only $199. When the PS3 or BR player drops below $250, I plan on buying one too. Personally I do not care who wins, I just like to watch movies.
I thought about that (buying) too, until I learned a bit more about the profile system. It looks like we'll have to wait for Profile 2.0 systems to get functionality equivalent to today's HD-DVD players , and I don't expect one for less than $250 until the end of 2008 at least.

the real question is when hd dvd players will have the features of bd players, and at what price point. 1080p24 is still coming for hd dvd, right?

I bet it arrives before Profile 2 (and maybe 1.1) - anything else?

the real question is when hd dvd players will have the features of bd players, and at what price point. 1080p24 is still coming for hd dvd, right?

24P should be on the A20 and XA2 in September. The last update (news wise) was June. No reason to think it won't be here next month.

And 24P is only good for certain (read: expensive) HDTVs that have 24P native support like this Sony for $4000:

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665119487

Just because a HDTV says 120Hz does not mean that it supports 24P. It can convert 24 to 30, then 30 to either 60 or 120 so the 3:2 Pulldown has not been avoided. The new Toshiba 120Hz LCD says 120Hz but does not say anything about 24P support.

Just because a HDTV says 120Hz does not mean that it supports 24P. It can convert 24 to 30, then 30 to either 60 or 120 so the 3:2 Pulldown has not been avoided. The new Toshiba 120Hz LCD says 120Hz but does not say anything about 24P support.

I may be mistaken, but since 120 is a multiple of 24 (24 x 5 = 120), isn't pulldown unnecessary?

BTW, I don't know what the differences are between Toshiba's U.S. models and the Japanese models, but the latest REGZA line here does support 1080 24p.