http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/01/30/blu_ray_and_hd_dvd_support_demystified/

I don't think this is break any forum rules, if it is, please delete. It is well written with a good solid foundation in terms of collecting factual data. Minor errors here and there, but nobody can be perfect.

Not an unbiased article, clear HD DVD bias.

Not an unbiased article, clear HD DVD bias.

Yes. He is reaching with those charts and they are merely distractions to make his point. For example, showing studios or hardware that support both formats is really a wash at best and still favors BD. Take away those that support both gives a better picture of the true slant towards BD. Saying hardware doesn't matter just like past generations is incorrect as well. This isn't the past. It is more an article written by someone who is hoping rather than being realistic.

Yes. He is reaching with those charts and they are merely distractions to make his point. For example, showing studios or hardware that support both formats is really a wash at best and still favors BD. Take away those that support both gives a better picture of the true slant towards BD. Saying hardware doesn't matter just like past generations is incorrect as well. This isn't the past. It is more an article written by someone who is hoping rather than being realistic.

Why would you take away the neutral studios? If you take away the complete picture, of course BR will look better. That is why being unbias is to present the whole picture, not part of the picture. Also, the article make reference early on that BR is winning.

Thanks for the link. Seems like he covered the bases.

Why would you take away the neutral studios? If you take away the complete picture, of course BR will look better. That is why being unbias is to present the whole picture, not part of the picture. Also, the article make reference early on that BR is winning.

He isn't giving acurate info in the charts though... No mention of Pioneer or Denon on the Blu-Ray side for hardware and he mentions Weinstein on the HD DVD side, but no Lionsgate on the Blu-Ray side.

He isn't giving acurate info in the charts though... No mention of Pioneer or Denon on the Blu-Ray side for hardware and he mentions Weinstein on the HD DVD side, but no Lionsgate on the Blu-Ray side.

Yes, that is what I mean by not perfect, I'm sure there are mistakes on both sides. I believe Denon recently said they will also supporting HD DVD, but they were not listed in either side. However, the jist of the article still holds true.

Yes, that is what I mean by not perfect, I'm sure there are mistakes on both sides. But the jist of the article still holds true.


With some facts he is telling the truth, but I disagree with the jist as you call it. The jist I get is someone hoping for what he wants and believes rather than the reality of what is happening.

He isn't giving acurate info in the charts though... No mention of Pioneer or Denon on the Blu-Ray side for hardware and he mentions Weinstein on the HD DVD side, but no Lionsgate on the Blu-Ray side.

Plus this got me. "* Meijer HD DVD player sales are limited to Microsoft's Xbox 360 HD DVD player" So uh why not mention the PS3?

This is not a Well written unbias article as the title suggests.

It's poorly written, biased and filled with inaccuracies.

With some facts he is telling the truth, but I disagree with the jist as you call it. The jist I get is someone hoping for what he wants and believes rather than the reality of what is happening.

That is fine, I respect your opinion. I like to point out that the charts are from tg daily, which has always been somewhat favorable to BR.

It's an article. As for the qualifiers such as "well-written" or "unbiased", those are subjective terms that are open to interpretation and long-winded but unnecessary discussions.

For example, it's easy to see that the author of the article had never lived through Betamax vs VHS or understood what the last days of LD were like. The AMD and intel comparisons are wrong because both AMD and intel PCs run all the windows software, but HD DVD players can't play BD movies (and vice versa), but that's all moot at this point.

Suffice to say that whatever anyone writes at this point has little impact on what is unfolding. The only way to change this outcome is to have the sales of disk improve significantly on the red side. The sea change in perception in not a simple case of Warner picking blu-ray, it's that WB said clearly that only one should proceed. Once that idea started to percolate around, it appears that a lot of people in the food chain that delivers and sells movies could be thinking about carefully and many perhaps are making moves to end it in the near future.

One quandary facing a lot of AV enthusiasts is the question if coexistence is possible. Once the majority believe that coexistence is not possible, then one format must prevail, and at this point, one has numerical advantages in both software and hardware sales that are difficult to ignore, regardless of which qualifiers we put in to measure those sales.

If this drags on further, then if we accept that peaceful coexistence of both formats is no longer possible, then it means that only one will prevail, and this means that the people who buy enough of the wrong format disks will find that new players will not be available beyond a certain date in the future to play those disks.

Similarly, people who buy players of the wrong format will also run out of media to buy at some future date, as the logical conclusion that both cannot coexist is that only one proceeds or both fails.

This means whichever way you look at it, picking the wrong format is going to be wasted expense since the useful life of the primary feature of the intended product is no longer as long as what the buyer expected. For some this is not a big deal, but for others, it might be.

I think for people who have not stepped in so far, it's mainly the question of not making the wrong choice, and dealing with the stigma of picking the wrong choice, should this wind down soon.

As soon as I saw you were the poster, I knew the article would have an HDDVD bias.

Nobody is unbiased.

Yes, that is what I mean by not perfect, I'm sure there are mistakes on both sides. I believe Denon recently said they will also supporting HD DVD, but they were not listed in either side. However, the jist of the article still holds true.

DenonJeff said they hadn't ruled out a HD DVD player...not that they have plans for one...besides there are Denon Blu players in folks homes being used right now and definately no reason not to mention Pioneer...

That is fine, I respect your opinion. I like to point out that the charts are from tg daily, which has always been somewhat favorable to BR.


I don't blame the guy who wrote it for wanting something he enjoys to succeed. :)

http://images.tomshardware.com/2008/01/30/blu_ray_and_hd_dvd_support_demystified/hd_ce.jpg

LOL.

Apparently, Pioneer, Hitachi and Denon doesn't support Blu-ray :)

Nobody is unbiased.


That maybe the most truthful statement I have seen in a while, but is it a biased comment? :D

DenonJeff said they hadn't ruled out a HD DVD player...not that they have plans for one...besides there are Denon Blu players in folks homes being used right now and definately no reason not to mention Pioneer...

If the moderator feels strongly that this article is bias, then by all means, please move this to the HD DVD forum. Thank you.

The article is HD DVD biased and it uses charts from TG Daily which are HD DVD biased. For instance the CE chart missed out on many Blu-ray CE companies such as Denon, Funai, Marantz, Pioneer, and Philips without bothering to mention that both RCA and Venturer sold rebadged players. Also the articles states a lot of things as fact without offering evidence or explanation for why the author believes that. That is of course in addition to several small mistakes such as stating that Warner would stop support HD DVD on April 2nd. Also the studio chart includes Weinstein even though they hasn't released/announced a HD DVD title for over 6 months. I would give the article an 5 out of 10 since it has to much bias, not enough fact checking, and several opinions stated as fact.

If the moderator feels strongly that this article is bias, then by all means, please move this to the HD DVD forum. Thank you.I vote for the thread title to be changed to "An article on the current state of HDM" since though the article is biased it is about both HD formats.

I would not write an article on this subject and present myself as "unbiased" at this point. However, my article would be a lot less biased than this one is.

For example: look at the lists of supporting studios. Weinstein as an HD DVD supporter? They haven't shipped a title since last June and have told the press that they are evaluting their situation. They cannot be counted as supporting either side at this point.

On the Blu-ray side, Lionsgate is missing. This studio has over 5% of the home video market (that's one-half of Universal), and has just won the month of January with titles including 3:10 to Yuma.

The HD DVD side is also fattened up by mentioning subsidiaries, while the Blu-ray side does not benefit as much from this practice. For example, we see Focus (a part of Universal) for HD DVD, but we do not see Sony Pictures Classics or Fox Searchlight or Picturehouse on the Blu-ray side.

If you want an accurate picture of the studios, their market shares, and support, see Videobusiness.com or homemediamagazine.com, both of which have published accurate lists.

Likewise, the list of hardware companies betrays the truth. RCA was a Toshiba OEM but dropped out over a year ago. The Venturer (not "Venture") machine is, according to reports, made by the same manufacturer that makes the Toshiba. The authors have forgotten the Onkyo, another Toshiba OEM. On the Blu-ray side, a number of key manufacturers are omitted, including: Phillips, Pioneer, Denon/Marantz.

The important role that the PS3 has is slighted significantly.

Of course, when the Blu-ray profiles are mentioned, the older machines are said to be "near obsolescence". Most objective reviewers note that the Profile 1.0 Blu-ray machines will continue to play movies just fine, it is a question of the special features. Is this really "near obsolescence"?

If I were writing this article, I would supply ACCURATE lists of studios/companies, not clearly biased lists designed to give a false impression of the level of support. I would also mention objective measures of sales like Videoscan.

Nobody is unbiased.

Perhaps not. But you can use objective, industry-standard measures for things like lists of studios and hardware manufacturers.

If I go to Best Buy today, I will not find an HD DVD machine made by RCA. (They are out of the business.) I will however find Pioneer very prominently displayed in the Magnolia section.

I would not write an article on this subject and present myself as "unbiased" at this point. However, my article would be a lot less biased than this one is.

For example: look at the lists of supporting studios. Weinstein as an HD DVD supporter? They haven't shipped a title since last June and have told the press that they are evaluting their situation. They cannot be counted as supporting either side at this point.

On the Blu-ray side, Lionsgate is missing. This studio has over 5% of the home video market (that's one-half of Universal), and has just won the month of January with titles including 3:10 to Yuma.

The HD DVD side is also fattened up by mentioning subsidiaries, while the Blu-ray side does not benefit as much from this practice. For example, we see Focus (a part of Universal) for HD DVD, but we do not see Sony Pictures Classics or Fox Searchlight or Picturehouse on the Blu-ray side.

If you want an accurate picture of the studios, their market shares, and support, see Videobusiness.com or homemediamagazine.com, both of which have published accurate lists.

Likewise, the list of hardware companies betrays the truth. RCA was a Toshiba OEM but dropped out over a year ago. The Venturer (not "Venture") machine is, according to reports, made by the same manufacturer that makes the Toshiba. The authors have forgotten the Onkyo, another Toshiba OEM. On the Blu-ray side, a number of key manufacturers are omitted, including: Phillips, Pioneer, Denon/Marantz.

The important role that the PS3 has is slighted significantly.

Of course, when the Blu-ray profiles are mentioned, the older machines are said to be "near obsolescence". Most objective reviewers note that the Profile 1.0 Blu-ray machines will continue to play movies just fine, it is a question of the special features. Is this really "near obsolescence"?

If I were writing this article, I would supply ACCURATE lists of studios/companies, not clearly biased lists designed to give a false impression of the level of support. I would also mention objective measures of sales like Videoscan.

This is a fairly accurate summary of what is wrong with the article.

The article may be balanced but it's not fully accurate.

Sure, the article is a little loose on the facts, but I would hardly call it intentionally biased. Maybe unintentional, but I didn't get the feeling he was preaching HD DVD.

I love the people that nit pick some of these HDM related stories. Ok, Weinstein hasn't released anything for a long time. On the other hand, you want Marantz and Denon included in the BD player CEs? Not that I would personally throw $2K on a BD player, but please tell us where we can buy a Denon or Marantz player.

Sure, the article is a little loose on the facts, but I would hardly call it intentionally biased. Maybe unintentional, but I didn't get the feeling he was preaching HD DVD.

I love the people that nit pick some of these HDM related stories. Ok, Weinstein hasn't released anything for a long time. On the other hand, you want Marantz and Denon included in the BD player CEs? Not that I would personally throw $2K on a BD player, but please tell us where we can buy a Denon or Marantz player.

I didn't say it was intentional. I also don't think that exposing the serious errors noted in this story can be called "nit-picking".

I don't know if you can buy a Denon or Marantz today, but the Denon rep ("DenonJeff" I think) just rejoined the Blu-ray players forum to answer questions and stir up interest, maybe we can ask him. They are surely coming, and people have seen them.

[I did deliberately omit Funai from my list because their new machine is a bit further out. If I had been trying to pad, I would have included them.]

If you followed CES, you would also have observed that a large number of new Blu-ray machines were announced. The only HD DVD player mentioned was the dual-format Samsung 5500. Members of the mainstream press commented (almost to excess) on the disparity between the formats at CES.

I really Don't understand alot of people on these forums. This is a forum to discuss Blu-Ray and HD-DVD.. So when a Article come out for HD-DVD saying good things and get posted on these boards no one pops in and says ( I give this post 0 mins and its banned )

But when someone post some article about sale of Blu-ray and HD-DVD and it show HD-DVD losing oh my god the sky is falling. And I am sure everyone who is pro HD-DVD pm's a Moderator and say you have to delete this post and bann this guy and burn his house down..

People need to wake up and see the facts for what they are period... the Moderators don't need to keep holding certain people hands when certain facts come to light. Or a article form a well known site ( Tomshardware.com ) Put forths an article stating facts.

Come one 90% of the recent article out state very simular fact as Tomhardare did.

I love the people that nit pick some of these HDM related stories.Well this is a thread on the article and as such people are going to discuss the flaws in the article. Personally speaking I don't see any reason to criticize people for doing that.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/01/30/blu_ray_and_hd_dvd_support_demystified/

I don't think this is break any forum rules, if it is, please delete. It is well written with a good solid foundation in terms of collecting factual data. Minor errors here and there, but nobody can be perfect.

It's definitely not the worst article I ever read. Although, while you say it's unbiased, it's clear that the intent of the article is to prove that HD DVD isn't as "dead" as many have claimed it to be. In that vein, it did give some misleading information, not the least of which was the first chart.

Yes, that is what I mean by not perfect, I'm sure there are mistakes on both sides.

And when the omitted facts tend to be heavily skewed to one side or the other, the slight bias is manifesting itself ;)


This is not a Well written unbias article as the title suggests.

It's poorly written, biased and filled with inaccuracies.

Still, relative to other HD DVD biased articles out there, this is easily the best one I've read. I guess that's not saying much? :)

Brandon

It's an article. As for the qualifiers such as "well-written" or "unbiased", those are subjective terms that are open to interpretation and long-winded but unnecessary discussions.

For example, it's easy to see that the author of the article had never lived through Betamax vs VHS or understood what the last days of LD were like. The AMD and intel comparisons are wrong because both AMD and intel PCs run all the windows software, but HD DVD players can't play BD movies (and vice versa), but that's all moot at this point.

Suffice to say that whatever anyone writes at this point has little impact on what is unfolding. The only way to change this outcome is to have the sales of disk improve significantly on the red side. The sea change in perception in not a simple case of Warner picking blu-ray, it's that WB said clearly that only one should proceed. Once that idea started to percolate around, it appears that a lot of people in the food chain that delivers and sells movies could be thinking about carefully and many perhaps are making moves to end it in the near future.

One quandary facing a lot of AV enthusiasts is the question if coexistence is possible. Once the majority believe that coexistence is not possible, then one format must prevail, and at this point, one has numerical advantages in both software and hardware sales that are difficult to ignore, regardless of which qualifiers we put in to measure those sales.

If this drags on further, then if we accept that peaceful coexistence of both formats is no longer possible, then it means that only one will prevail, and this means that the people who buy enough of the wrong format disks will find that new players will not be available beyond a certain date in the future to play those disks.

Similarly, people who buy players of the wrong format will also run out of media to buy at some future date, as the logical conclusion that both cannot coexist is that only one proceeds or both fails.

This means whichever way you look at it, picking the wrong format is going to be wasted expense since the useful life of the primary feature of the intended product is no longer as long as what the buyer expected. For some this is not a big deal, but for others, it might be.

I think for people who have not stepped in so far, it's mainly the question of not making the wrong choice, and dealing with the stigma of picking the wrong choice, should this wind down soon.

Now that's a well-written and unbiased (read: objective) post!

Brandon

I believe that the article is basically saying that BR is leading, but HD DVD is not dead. The point that the author is trying to make does not have a bias intention. That statement is a true statement, BR is leading and since Universal, Paramount, and Dreamworks is still exclusive to HD DVD. Therefore it is true that HD DVD is not dead at this current time (who knows what will happen in the future). However, the burden of proof is mostly on HD DVD side since many media sites are jumping on the "war is over and BR has won" wagon. Does that make the author bias? I personally don't think so, he is obviously trying to break thru the smoke and mirrors that is the excitment that was generated from the Warner annoucement and bring some perspective on what is really happening. He also doesn't put any condescending remarks on any one side (which is a huge Plus for me,) since it makes the article non offensive to either side, therefore more credible. HD DVD is still around, and Toshiba is commited, as it is obvious with their paid superbowl ad.

Mistakes are definitely made on both sides, but the article seems well written due to tone and the ability of the author to strike a balance for both sides of the HDM race (which contributes to it unbiasness), without offense remarks.

The article is HD DVD biased and it uses charts from TG Daily which are HD DVD biased. For instance the CE chart missed out on many Blu-ray CE companies such as Denon, Funai, Marantz, Pioneer, and Philips without bothering to mention that both RCA and Venturer sold rebadged players. Also the articles states a lot of things as fact without offering evidence or explanation for why the author believes that. That is of course in addition to several small mistakes such as stating that Warner would stop support HD DVD on April 2nd. Also the studio chart includes Weinstein even though they hasn't released/announced a HD DVD title for over 6 months. I would give the article an 5 out of 10 since it has to much bias, not enough fact checking, and several opinions stated as fact.

That seems about right. And the factual errors (including errors of omission) are ones that could have been avoided by spending 30 minutes on AVS. There are lots of little things (like the studio list) that collectively detract from the persuasiveness of the article, which is plainly intended to show that HD-DVD is supposedly alive and kicking. But it is hard to be persuasive when you don't address things like Nielsen numbers, NPD numbers, the PS3 effect, international sales, etc.

And this confirms once again that any article advertised as "unbiased" will not be as advertised.

And the factual errors (including errors of omission) are ones that could have been avoided by spending 30 minutes on AVS.

I don't you think you can use AVS as a reliable source for data. Its many things, but I wouldn't rely on it.

I believe that the article is basically saying that BR is leading, but HD DVD is not dead. The point that the author is trying to make does not have a bias intention. That statement is a true statement, BR is leading and since Universal, Paramount, and Dreamworks is still exclusive to HD DVD. Therefore it is true that HD DVD is not dead at this current time (who knows what will happen in the future). However, the burden of proof is mostly on HD DVD side since many media sites are jumping on the "war is over and BR has won" wagon. Does that make the author bias? I personally don't think so, he is obviously trying to break thru the smoke and mirrors that is the excitment that was generated from the Warner annoucement and bring some perspective on what is really happening. He also doesn't put any condescending remarks on any one side (which is a huge Plus for me,) since it makes the article non offensive to either side, therefore more credible. HD DVD is still around, and Toshiba is commited, as it is obvious with their paid superbowl ad.

Mistakes are definitely made on both sides, but the article seems well written due to tone and the ability of the author to strike a balance for both sides of the HDM race (which contributes to it unbiasness), without offense remarks.

Just a little note for the future, when you have an agenda on a topic, and an article seems unbiased to you, it is potentially biased.

Like how many people who watch Fox News just assume that everything that isn't like Fox News has a liberal bias. You see people who agree with you as centrist.

For instance the CE chart missed out on many Blu-ray CE companies such as Denon, Funai, Marantz, Pioneer, and Philips without bothering to mention that both RCA and Venturer sold rebadged players.

Hey, they also fail to list Onkyo on the HD DVD column, but still... ;)

The studio chart misses out on Lionsgate, which has a much bigger market share than Weinstein (not to mention that they actually release HD content...).

So, if I may correct the OP, it is a badly-researched article on the current state of HDM.

To be fair, I don't think Tom's Hardware made any claims that it was an unbiased article, and it seems to be more of an editorial than anything else.

I don't you think you can use AVS as a reliable source for data. Its many things, but I wouldn't rely on it.

If you ignore the rumor, speculation, and opinions stated as facts, I don't think there are many (any?) better resources for AV information.

To be fair, I don't think Tom's Hardware made any claims that it was an unbiased article, and it seems to be more of an editorial than anything else.

You are not entitled to your opinion - you are entitled to your informed opinion.
If you are not informed on the subject, then your opinion counts for nothing.

(Harlan Ellison)

Are you guys being a little too picky? Can you give me an article that was written lately that's got 100% everything right? Basically, you can pick any article apart, if that is your agenda. I doubt Tom's hardware is considered a unreliable site with badly researched content.

Just a little note for the future, when you have an agenda on a topic, and an article seems unbiased to you, it is potentially biased.

Like how many people who watch Fox News just assume that everything that isn't like Fox News has a liberal bias. You see people who agree with you as centrist.

And when you have an agenda on a topic, and the article seems biased against your position, you may be overreacting in your feelings about the bias of the article.

BTW, I don't think the article necessarily is biased in trying to show HD DVD as a potential winner, but as an editorial, it painted the picture in a way that allowed the author to show HD DVD as a not-yet-dead format. That offends some people who run around the internet with the single agenda of seeing HD DVD die, but for those of us that think the BDA is better for consumers when HD DVD is around, that's a good thing.

For example: look at the lists of supporting studios. Weinstein as an HD DVD supporter? They haven't shipped a title since last June and have told the press that they are evaluting their situation. They cannot be counted as supporting either side at this point.

On the Blu-ray side, Lionsgate is missing. This studio has over 5% of the home video market (that's one-half of Universal), and has just won the month of January with titles including 3:10 to Yuma.

The HD DVD side is also fattened up by mentioning subsidiaries, while the Blu-ray side does not benefit as much from this practice. For example, we see Focus (a part of Universal) for HD DVD, but we do not see Sony Pictures Classics or Fox Searchlight or Picturehouse on the Blu-ray side.

Did you see this sentence below the chart?

Some studios listed above are owned by the same parent company but are listed separately because their distribution decisions are independent.

Does Sony Pictures Classics have independent distribution rights? Fox searchlight? Picturehouse? I don't know the answer, I am really asking it.

If we dont know this answer then we should stop assuming people are specifically excluding these studios due to their "bias".

Does Sony Pictures Classics have independent distribution rights? Fox searchlight? Picturehouse? I don't know the answer, I am really asking it.

If we dont know this answer then we should stop assuming people are specifically excluding these studios due to their "bias".Actually, it is bias. Focus Features, for instance, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Universal. They don't have independent distro rights any more than Fox Searchlight or Picturehouse.

It's one of many glaring errors in the article. I mean, Lionsgate has released almost as many titles as Paramount has, but they're not on the list? Unreal.

Actually, it is bias. Focus Features, for instance, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Universal. They don't have independent distro rights any more than Fox Searchlight or Picturehouse.

It's one of many glaring errors in the article. I mean, Lionsgate has released almost as many titles as Paramount has, but they're not on the list? Unreal.

Can you provide proof that Focus Features doesn't have independent distribution rights? Just because it is wholly-owned doesn't necessarily mean it doesnt have separate rights. So if you have no proof than you are just spreading more misinformation.

Plus this got me. "* Meijer HD DVD player sales are limited to Microsoft's Xbox 360 HD DVD player" So uh why not mention the PS3?


Read the entire article before making posts like this please. People might read your post and think the article doesn't mention the PS3 when it in fact DOES.

Toshiba remains is the major driver in developing and marketing HD DVD and thus it commands the market for HD DVD players. The same goes for Sony with Blu-ray, especially because of the Playstation 3.

So....

Can you provide proof that Focus Features doesn't have independent distribution rights? Just because it is wholly-owned doesn't necessarily mean it doesnt have separate rights. So if you have no proof than you are just spreading more misinformation.Uh, wholly-owned is exactly what means it doesn't have separate distro rights. You don't see Scion dealerships run by Honda of America, do you? No, because they're wholly owned by Toyota.

Look at the back of the "Eastern Promises" HD DVD (http://www.dvdempire.com/Exec/v4_item.asp?userid=99366175129507&item_id=1376930&tab=5&back=1&anchor=1#topoftabs). See the Universal Pictures logo?

If Focus Features is considered separate, then so are Miramax, Screen Gems, Columbia-Tristar, Fox Searchlight et al. So, either way, the author is fibbing.

Uh, wholly-owned is exactly what means it doesn't have separate distro rights. You don't see Scion dealerships run by Honda of America, do you? No, because they're wholly owned by Toyota.

Look at the back of the "Eastern Promises" HD DVD (http://www.dvdempire.com/Exec/v4_item.asp?userid=99366175129507&item_id=1376930&tab=5&back=1&anchor=1#topoftabs). See the Universal Pictures logo?

If Focus Features is considered separate, then so are Miramax, Screen Gems, Columbia-Tristar, Fox Searchlight et al. So, either way, the author is fibbing.

Sorry that is not enough proof for me. The Scion analogy does not apply here. The correct analogy would be...

Toyota has exclusive rights with Goodyear for tires. Scion has the right to make an exclusive deal with Firestone for tires if it so desires.

Make sense yet?

And when you have an agenda on a topic, and the article seems biased against your position, you may be overreacting in your feelings about the bias of the article.

BTW, I don't think the article necessarily is biased in trying to show HD DVD as a potential winner, but as an editorial, it painted the picture in a way that allowed the author to show HD DVD as a not-yet-dead format. That offends some people who run around the internet with the single agenda of seeing HD DVD die, but for those of us that think the BDA is better for consumers when HD DVD is around, that's a good thing.

I totally agree that the bias works both ways.

Of course Blu-Ray fans are never biased. Only HD-DVD supporters are biased. Everyone knows that!

Sorry that is not enough proof for me. The Scion analogy does not apply here. The correct analogy would be...

Toyota has exclusive rights with Goodyear for tires. Scion has the right to make an exclusive deal with Firestone for tires if it so desires.

Make sense yet?No, because it's wrong.

Goodyear isn't a division of Toyota. They're not a part of the company. Focus, however, is a division of Universal. If you don't want to accept something just because it doesn't fit your incorrect view, go to the HD DVD software section. Unless you can bring me proof that Focus is not a part or division of Universal, come back.

EDIT: And none of your incorrect assumptions address the omission of Lionsgate, who isn't owned or a division of anybody, nor does it address the dropping of two of the founders of the Blu-ray format. Any of that makes this article pretty baseless, if not outright biased.

Of course Blu-Ray fans are never biased. Only HD-DVD supporters are biased. Everyone knows that!

Perhaps history is written by the victors while the vanquished never get access to ink or paper or keyboards. :)

But as far as print and internet jounalists/bloggers are concerned, I have read a lot more pro blu articles that warn their readers that there is a format war and to not buy into any format until the outcome is clear than similar warnings from pro red articles.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that throughout this soap opera, there were substantially more pro red or self-proclaimed neutral bloggers who exhort everyone to buy into red players because it is cheap (true, $ risk is limited), and to buy disks (wrong, because disks is where the money goes).

My question is still a simple one : as AV enthusiasts, today, given what we know now, can anyone ask his friends to buy a HD DVD player and movies. Remember that in 10 years (15 tops), any presumable victorious format would still be replaced with something new, while the other format will fade from history very quickly.

It is that premature obsolescence of the other format that is going to test your friendship is it not? Would you tell your friends to buy lots of hd dvd disks today?

http://www.tomshardware.com/2008/01/30/blu_ray_and_hd_dvd_support_demystified/

I don't think this is break any forum rules, if it is, please delete. It is well written with a good solid foundation in terms of collecting factual data. Minor errors here and there, but nobody can be perfect.

you are kidding right?lol....fanboyism and blindness go hand in hand. Do you know the meaning of the word UNBIAS???? And besides do you have to reopen that can of worms again?

A few mistakes I picked up on:

* - Warner Bros will stop supporting HD DVD on April 2, 2008.
Wow, wrong.



Blockbuster and Target both made public announcements about supporting Blu-ray and HD DVD. However, dozens of Blockbuster locations stock both formatsFrom reading that it doesn't sound like 250 Blockbuster stores support HD DVD compared to 1,450 for Blu-ray. That's a major 6:1 preference.




http://images.tomshardware.com/2008/01/30/blu_ray_and_hd_dvd_support_demystified/hd_stores.jpg
He also lists Meijer as selling HD DVD hardware (limited to 360 HD DVD addon) but no mention of Meijer selling Blu-ray hardware in the form of PlayStation 3.

Would you tell your friends to buy lots of hd dvd disks today?

No reason to tell them not to if they want to buy an inexpensive HD-DVD player which will also upconvert their DVD's. I'd say "you can go out and buy an excellent upconverting HD-DVD player, and hey, you can buy some high definition movies to play on it too if you want to."
Hell, there are hundreds and hundreds of great movies for it in high def, with more to come! Where's the harm?

BTW, if you want to post an article that basically says 'HD DVD isn't dead yet' without BD supporters pointing out the flaws in it, you should probably put it in the HD DVD area.

Of course Blu-Ray fans are never biased. Only HD-DVD supporters are biased. Everyone knows that!

Your post is relevant to nothing in this thread. In case you didn't notice, this thread is about a "well written unbias [sic] article" that is poorly researched, and not really unbiased.

Read the entire article before making posts like this please. People might read your post and think the article doesn't mention the PS3 when it in fact DOES.He's saying what I said in my post directly above this one: that Meijer is on the table as an HD DVD hardware seller for offering the 360 addon, while Meijer is missing from the Blu-ray column even though they sell Blu-ray players in the form of the PS3.

Sure he missed some points, etc. But i think the over all message of the article is 100% true. HD DVD is still in this no matter how many people say its dead.

I think the article was well written, and will be well received because Toms hardware is quite respected among techies and alike.

IMHO many of the blu-ray fans think its biased because they didn't declare blu-ray the winner. If the slant (Yes there was a little biased, but hes comparing a finished product to an unfinished product) would have went the other way, blu boys would be singing its praises.

IMHO he got the majority of facts bang on.

And its been rehashed over and over why the add-on would be mentioned and the PS3 isn't. The add-on has one purpose, are we going to rehash the argument over and over??

Edit. Well said Striderprime00, i agree 100%

I believe that the article is basically saying that BR is leading, but HD DVD is not dead. The point that the author is trying to make does not have a bias intention. That statement is a true statement, BR is leading and since Universal, Paramount, and Dreamworks is still exclusive to HD DVD. Therefore it is true that HD DVD is not dead at this current time (who knows what will happen in the future). However, the burden of proof is mostly on HD DVD side since many media sites are jumping on the "war is over and BR has won" wagon. Does that make the author bias? I personally don't think so, he is obviously trying to break thru the smoke and mirrors that is the excitment that was generated from the Warner annoucement and bring some perspective on what is really happening. He also doesn't put any condescending remarks on any one side (which is a huge Plus for me,) since it makes the article non offensive to either side, therefore more credible. HD DVD is still around, and Toshiba is commited, as it is obvious with their paid superbowl ad.

Mistakes are definitely made on both sides, but the article seems well written due to tone and the ability of the author to strike a balance for both sides of the HDM race (which contributes to it unbiasness), without offense remarks.

Very well said and I agree with you completely. However as you can see to many here, If it does not say BLU RAY HAS WON THE FORMAT WAR it is a biased article and nothing further from reality, such is life nowadays at AVS Forum. Sad, real sad!

Read the entire article before making posts like this please. People might read your post and think the article doesn't mention the PS3 when it in fact DOES.



So....

Sure he missed some points, etc. But i think the over all message of the article is 100% true. HD DVD is still in this no matter how many people say its dead.

I think the article was well written, and will be well received because Toms hardware is quite respected among techies and alike.

IMHO many of the blu-ray fans think its biased because they didn't declare blu-ray the winner. If the slant (Yes there was a little biased, but hes comparing a finished product to an unfinished product) would have went the other way, blu boys would be singing its praises.

IMHO he got the majority of facts bang on.

And its been rehashed over and over why the add-on would be mentioned and the PS3 isn't. The add-on has one purpose, are we going to rehash the argument over and over??

Edit. Well said Striderprime00, i agree 100%This has been going on for awhile with Toshiba's BS FUD about PS3's not qualifying as a player unless they're talking about movie attach rates. When talking about Blu-ray vs HD DVD player sales, PS3 = not a Blu-ray player at all. When talking about attach rates, EVERY PS3 is a Blu-ray player.

"Pray they're that stupid. Pray we're that lucky."

When everything's said and done, about 25-50% of PS3 owners use it for Blu-ray playback, whereas only about 3% of X360 owners purchase the HD DVD addon. So taking a rough figure that 360 consoles outsell PS3 2:1 in the US, for every HD DVD addon sold at Meijer 4 to 9 PS3's are sold to someone who'll put the Blu-ray functionality to use.

Maybe they're honest mistakes, but the topic of this thread is "an unbiased article" and I just can't agree with all the omissions.

Are you guys being a little too picky? Can you give me an article that was written lately that's got 100% everything right? Basically, you can pick any article apart, if that is your agenda. I doubt Tom's hardware is considered a unreliable site with badly researched content.

Any review which is not pro-BD and not declaring HD-DVD dead is considered unreliable and biased by BD kids :)

Any review which is not pro-BD and not declaring HD-DVD dead is considered unreliable and biased by BD kids :)


BD kids :D:D:D

BD kids :D:D:D

Ooh, I have two of those at home, of course neither can type very well yet so I don't think it was them.

The point that the author is trying to make does not have a bias intention.

You're essentially saying as long as you feel the point the author is trying to make is legitimate, then he's not biased. But that leaves a potential for circular reasoning. (ie: "it's not biased because it's right, and it's right because it's not biased")

The point any article is making must be supported by hard, objective facts, data, logic or reasoning that is not incomplete, inaccurate or misleading. So when factual ommissions are made in an effort to prove a point (especially one that is going against the concensus), that is indeed a manifestation of a possible bias. Not to mention it necessitates that the article isn't well-written.

It seems that most people in this thread would like to casually gloss over the ommissions as being accidental or very innocent/insignificant. If that not-so-surprising coincidence did hold true, it would still make it a poorly written article. However since the ommissions just happen to help enforce the point he is clearly trying to make, I don't really afford him that benefit of the doubt.

Again, it's not a horrible article, but it's clearly got a biased point of view. What's surprising to me is that now people are just popping into this thread and claiming everybody calling it biased must be biased:confused:. The title of the thread uses qualifiers that put the actual bias and quality of the article up for discussion. But now people are told they're nit-picking if they do so?

I mean seriously, several logical and poignant arguments have been made, and instead of challenging the merits of those, people are just going to pop in and blame it on BD kid's bias? (not to mention that is definitely going to lead to this thread being locked even though up to this point it had been a civil discussion).

See that's the problem and the irony of a thread like this. In your post you claim that the writer is simply trying to get through the "smoke and mirrors" that is the BD hype machine...but ironically he uses some form of "smoke and mirrors" himself to get you to buy into it whereas most other people in this very thread are using verifiable data or facts to state otherwise.

Brandon

thread title edited

You're essentially saying as long as you feel the point the author is trying to make is legitimate, then he's not biased. But that leaves a potential for circular reasoning. (ie: "it's not biased because it's right, and it's right because it's not biased")

The point any article is making must be supported by hard, objective facts, data, logic or reasoning that is not incomplete, inaccurate or misleading. So when factual ommissions are made in an effort to prove a point (especially one that is going against the concensus), that is indeed a manifestation of a possible bias. Not to mention it necessitates that the article isn't well-written.

It seems that most people in this thread would like to casually gloss over the ommissions as being accidental or very innocent/insignificant. If that not-so-surprising coincidence did hold true, it would still make it a poorly written article. However since the ommissions just happen to help enforce the point he is clearly trying to make, I don't really afford him that benefit of the doubt.

Again, it's not a horrible article, but it's clearly got a biased point of view. What's surprising to me is that now people are just popping into this thread and claiming everybody calling it biased must be biased:confused:. The title of the thread uses qualifiers that put the actual bias and quality of the article up for discussion. But now people are told they're nit-picking if they do so?

I mean seriously, several logical and poignant arguments have been made, and instead of challenging the merits of those, people are just going to pop in and blame it on BD kid's bias? (not to mention that is definitely going to lead to this thread being locked even though up to this point it had been a civil discussion).

See that's the problem and the irony of a thread like this. In your post you claim that the writer is simply trying to get through the "smoke and mirrors" that is the BD hype machine...but ironically he uses some form of "smoke and mirrors" himself to get you to buy into it whereas most other people in this very thread are using verifiable data or facts to state otherwise.

Brandon

The whole point he is trying to make is he thinks the format war is not over yet, nothing more, nothing less. You can read more into if you want but as it stands now NOTHING HAS BEEN DECIDED YET, contrary to what some here want to believe. So in essence his article is correct, until Toshiba quits or the 2 other studios go exclusive blu ray, thats where we stand. You can go on debating all you want but nothing is going to change that fact. What ever plays out in the coming months will of course decide which way it goes and then I'm sure plenty will be written and there will be nothing more to discuss. But that day has not arrived yet so people can call this a bias article if you want but that does not mean it does not have validity.

I don't you think you can use AVS as a reliable source for data. Its many things, but I wouldn't rely on it.

It would allow you to flag errors and issues for additional research and/or confirmation. I certainly wouldn't rely solely on anything posted on a participatory website, but it would have helped this guy.

The whole point he is trying to make is he thinks the format war is not over yet, nothing more, nothing less. You can read more into if you want but as it stands now NOTHING HAS BEEN DECIDED YET, contrary to what some here want to believe. So in essence his article is correct, until Toshiba quits or the 2 other studios go exclusive blu ray, thats where we stand. You can go on debating all you want but nothing is going to change that fact. What ever plays out in the coming months will of course decide which way it goes and then I'm sure plenty will be written and there will be nothing more to discuss. But that day has not arrived yet so people can call this a bias article if you want but that does not mean it does not have validity.

I agree.

The AMD and intel comparisons are wrong because both AMD and intel PCs run all the windows software,

Actually

Thanks in no part to the one entity everyone likes to take a stab at.. Microsoft. If it weren't for them, One or the other would have died a death long time ago but they made sure to make their NT4 OS work with,

AMD, Cyrix/Via, Intel, MIPS, Dec Alpha, PowerPC, Itanium, AMD64, EM64 etc.

Then came Windows 2000 and that killed most of the 64 bit support (Mips, Dec Alpha and PowerPC).


Linux had to have a different compile to work on AMD v. Intel v. Cyrix/Via :) Now it is included in most linux flavors.

BD kids :D:D:D


LMAO, Nice one Rezo

No, because it's wrong.

Goodyear isn't a division of Toyota. They're not a part of the company. Focus, however, is a division of Universal. If you don't want to accept something just because it doesn't fit your incorrect view, go to the HD DVD software section. Unless you can bring me proof that Focus is not a part or division of Universal, come back.

EDIT: And none of your incorrect assumptions address the omission of Lionsgate, who isn't owned or a division of anybody, nor does it address the dropping of two of the founders of the Blu-ray format. Any of that makes this article pretty baseless, if not outright biased.

Wow you really missed it didn't you. Let me break it down for you again...slower this time.

Toyota is Universal. Scion is Focus. Goodyear is HD DVD and Firestone is BluRay.

Scion[also Focus in this analogy] (even though owned by Universal!) can pick Firestone tires [bluray in this analogy] to supply the tires for their vehicles [distribute movies in this analogy]. Toyota[representing Universal Studios] can pick anyone they want to supply tires exclusively but they pick Goodyear [representing HD DVD].

Does that work for you yet?

I just pointed out that everyone shouldn't jump on the whole omission of studios under the Bluray side unless they know these studios have independent distribution rights. Can anyone provide this information?

Follow?

Wow you really missed it didn't you. Let me break it down for you again...slower this time.Slower doesn't help when you're wrong.
Does that work for you yet?No, because it's wrong. You just choose to make up excuses for why it should be right.
I just pointed out that everyone shouldn't jump on the whole omission of studios under the Bluray side unless they know these studios have independent distribution rights. Can anyone provide this information?It's been provided. I can't help it if you choose to selectively ignore it.

so the attacks start :mad: