Fox's opinion about early adopters - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 04:53 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Chris_TC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hey,

I believe this has not been posted here yet, and I found it very interesting.
German news mag heise has posted an article about a press event with 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment.

Here is the link to the article:
http://www.heise.de/ct/hintergrund/meldung/85035

I'm not going to translate/paraphrase all of it, but some of the most telling statements need to be posted. They were made by Fox's Executive Vice President Global Research and Technology Strategy Danny Kaye.

Kaye confirmed that Blu-ray players are not required to be capable of decoding two video streams at once which is why they can't display optional video commentaries like the ones on some Universal and Warner HD DVD releases. This capability is a requirement only for BD-Live capable players, with Playstation 3 the only one currently on the market.

However, Kaye is convinced that this situation is going to change considerably in this year - due to the release of BD-Live capable standalone players and apparently also due to a change of the Blu-ray specifications for players without internet access.
Heise online asked whether early adopters with current standalone players won't be disappointed about the limited interactive features of their machines. Kaye answered that this demography is mainly interested in perfect image and sound quality - which current players already deliver. Also, early adopters are the kind of people who will buy more than one player anyway: "They'll have one for watching movies and maybe another one for other things", said Kaye.


The article talks about other things as well.
-> Fox sees Blu-ray victorious ("people who think of HD movies think of Blu-ray"). -> After the AACS hack, Fox is happy to have supported the right format and will enforce BD+ and the ROM mark on future titles

But the part about early adopters struck me the most as being one big F!CK YOU to everybody who already bought a Blu-ray player.
Yeah, I know that a lot of people are indeed not interested in bonus features, but the whole idea of "ahh, whatever, they'll buy a second player anyway, stupid early adopters" is just incredibly messed up.
Chris_TC is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 05:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
majortom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 1,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_TC View Post

But the part about early adopters struck me the most as being one big F!CK YOU to everybody who already bought a Blu-ray player.
Yeah, I know that a lot of people are indeed not interested in bonus features, but the whole idea of "ahh, whatever, they'll buy a second player anyway, stupid early adopters" is just incredibly messed up.

I do not read it that way at all. What he said is true and does not mean that he or Fox feels that early adopters are stupid. Look on here and see how many forum members switch video projectors every year or two, when some new feature is available. Even among Blu-ray or HD DVD owners, how many of them have already owned more than one player?

Early adopters always want the latest and greatest and usually know that buying early means that one lives with problems and frequent upgrades - they do not call it "the bleeding edge" for nothing.

/carmi
majortom is offline  
post #3 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 05:23 AM
Member
 
tojal city's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lisbon, Portugal
Posts: 32
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
GOD... English is not even my first language and I don't see anything that says early adopters are stupid. Could you be more bypassed? Besides what he says is true, early adopters buy more than one player, and they are well aware of the risk of being early adopters.
tojal city is offline  
post #4 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 05:33 AM
Advanced Member
 
csmith75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 677
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
How exactly did you come to the conclusion that he felt early adopters are stupid?
csmith75 is offline  
post #5 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 05:38 AM
 
plazman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 6,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by csmith75 View Post

How exactly did you come to the conclusion that he felt early adopters are stupid?

I don't believe the FOx rep said anything to that effect. At least not on that interview. However, it is interesting that they will now be implementing BD+ on their up coming titles...

That was one reason they went with BD in the first place (as he says).
plazman is offline  
post #6 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 06:14 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Chris_TC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I pointed out the fact that they feel it's perfectly okay to release discs with features that don't work on current players*. Nobody minds this?

I would feel pretty cheated, hearing that I'll have to buy a second player to watch those new extras ("do other things" as Mr. Kaye put it). I would feel even more cheated, hearing that I, being an early adopter, am even expected to (be stupid enough) to do exactly that.

*I believe it has not happened yet, but the article talks about future releases where this is going to happen
Chris_TC is offline  
post #7 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 06:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Issac Hunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,644
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So you don't even own a BD player, yet you decided to get all indignent anyway? Is that about the size of it? You wouldn't be an HD DVD supporter pis*ed at Fox for not releasing on your format by any chance, would you...
Issac Hunt is offline  
post #8 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 06:23 AM
Member
 
PerHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Norway
Posts: 111
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Early adopter will always "suffer" because they are early in the game. But, that's life. They will probably buy new system anyways because of increased quality/new features/ what ever.

-P
PerHT is offline  
post #9 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 06:30 AM
Advanced Member
 
csmith75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 677
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_TC View Post

I pointed out the fact that they feel it's perfectly okay to release discs with features that don't work on current players*. Nobody minds this?

I would feel pretty cheated, hearing that I'll have to buy a second player to watch those new extras ("do other things" as Mr. Kaye put it). I would feel even more cheated, hearing that I, being an early adopter, am even expected to (be stupid enough) to do exactly that.

*I believe it has not happened yet, but the article talks about future releases where this is going to happen

1. It's already been repeatedly discussed on the forums.
2. It's the nature of being an early adopter.....sometimes you miss out on features, sometimes you don't. If it weren't for early adopters, many products wouldn't be successful today. There's a certain risk involved.
csmith75 is offline  
post #10 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 06:38 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Chris_TC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Issac Hunt View Post

So you don't even own a BD player, yet you decided to get all indignent anyway? Is that about the size of it? You wouldn't be an HD DVD supporter pis*ed at Fox for not releasing on your format by any chance, would you...

Of course I don't own a Blu-ray player. Like I said, I would feel cheated.
But frankly, the real reason why I don't own one is price. I wasn't aware about the interactivity problems until a short while ago, so if the price had been right, chances are I would have bought one.
Now that I know what's going on, not only will the prices have to go down but I'll also wait for a full-featured player, not a crippled one.

I'm certainly not pissed at Fox, I merely question their point of view concerning a number of things.
Chris_TC is offline  
post #11 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 06:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Early adopters are scr*wed by the BDA changing their specs to keep up with HD DVD capabilities. This guy is more or less stating: It's your own fault, you should have known better.




Fox is going for BD+ and rom mark due to the recent BR hacks.
BR spec is going to change, again, to implement this additional layer of security. Several Fox titles will be delayed until the BD+ 'spec' matures.
There is a good chance that future titles will not play anymore on current generation BR hardware.

Blu ray isn't even a finished format but it is already marketed as 'better' and 'the winner'.
It would be a sad day when HD DVD is done in by the BDA marketing blitzkrieg.
Frank Derks is offline  
post #12 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 06:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Issac Hunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,644
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_TC View Post

Of course I don't own a Blu-ray player. Like I said, I would feel cheated.
But frankly, the real reason why I don't own one is price. I wasn't aware about the interactivity problems until a short while ago, so if the price had been right, chances are I would have bought one.
Now that I know what's going on, not only will the prices have to go down but I'll also wait for a full-featured player, not a crippled one.

I'm certainly not pissed at Fox, I merely question their point of view concerning a number of things.

So you don't own a BD player. Don't intend to buy one until the prices come down. And are still incensed enough to re-interpret a Fox exec's statements to fit your views. Impressive.
Issac Hunt is offline  
post #13 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 06:57 AM
Advanced Member
 
fa8362's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 951
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Derks View Post

Early adopters are scr*wed by the BDA changing their specs to keep up with HD DVD capabilities. This guy is more or less stating: It's your own fault, you should have known better.




Fox is going for BD+ and rom mark due to the recent BR hacks.
BR spec is going to change, again, to implement this additional layer of security. Several Fox titles will be delayed until the BD+ 'spec' matures.
There is a good chance that future titles will not play anymore on current generation BR hardware.

Blu ray isn't even a finished format but it is already marketed as 'better' and 'the winner'.
It would be a sad day when HD DVD is done in by the BDA marketing blitzkrieg.

Where are you getting this stuff from? There is no reason why current players won't play all future BD discs. Current players simply won't be able to access all the extra features on the disc. Disc security is transparent unless you're trying to copy.
fa8362 is offline  
post #14 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 06:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
majortom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 1,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_TC View Post

I pointed out the fact that they feel it's perfectly okay to release discs with features that don't work on current players*. Nobody minds this?

Why should they? They bought players to take advantage of those features that were available when they bought them. As technologies progress, new features become available and sometimes they are not backward compatible. The player I bought does what I bought it to do. Just as new Fox discs that include BD-Live features will still play in current generation players (just not taking advantage of these new features).


Quote:
I would feel pretty cheated, hearing that I'll have to buy a second player to watch those new extras ("do other things" as Mr. Kaye put it). I would feel even more cheated, hearing that I, being an early adopter, am even expected to (be stupid enough) to do exactly that.

You must never buy any technology products or must be angry all the time. My laptop had a CD-ROM drive and later one came out that could write CDs as well. Apple even included software that took advantage of that feature. It did not do anything on my system, until I upgraded my hardware. Is it your argument that companies should never upgrade technologies? Will you be angry if Toshiba releases triple layer discs that are incompatible with current players? If so, do you feel that they should not release them if that is the only way they can be made to work?

/carmi
majortom is offline  
post #15 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 07:16 AM
Senior Member
 
paulbh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 361
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
As an early adopter of both formats I know changes are possible and likely, I would just hope they were not substantial. It's one thing to mention the nature of the early adopter in passing and another thing to count on in it as if it is OK to come to market too soon and make the early adopter pay the price. Personally, I appreciate that HD DVD took defining the specs more seriously before launch than BD.
paulbh is offline  
post #16 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 07:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Assayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Posts: 1,233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by paulbh View Post

As an early adopter of both formats I know changes are possible and likely, I would just hope they were not substantial. It's one thing to mention the nature of the early adopter in passing and another thing to count on in it as if it is OK to come to market too soon and make the early adopter pay the price. Personally, I appreciate that HD DVD took defining the specs more seriously before launch than BD.

Yup, they took the specs more seriously. That is why Toshiba is now pushing to band-aid TL-51 into the HD-DVD spec, with no real word on whether the legacy players will be patchable to support it. I'm guessing probably not.
Assayer is offline  
post #17 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 07:33 AM
Senior Member
 
JackBauer24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: nyc
Posts: 312
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
He's right though. If you skim through any forum or blog the number 1 thing is always PQ and AQ. And on this very forum we have several people buying multiple players. How many people who had the HD-A1 bought the HD-A2? How many Samsung buyers bought a PS3? I myself have owned all four.
JackBauer24 is offline  
post #18 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 07:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
majortom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 1,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assayer View Post

Yup, they took the specs more seriously. That is why Toshiba is now pushing to band-aid TL-51 into the HD-DVD spec, with no real word on whether the legacy players will be patchable to support it. I'm guessing probably not.

Both specs were a bit rushed, which is why I strongly disagree with those that claim that this competition is good for us as consumers. Had Toshiba not gone forward with HD DVD, Blu-ray might have taken a bit longer but finalized BD-Live before shipping. As for poor transfers, Sony would not have felt they had to rush to release The Fifth Element and might have done a better job. There is enough competition among studios to ensure quality. If no one buys a title because it is a low quality transfer, studios will get the message.

/carmi
majortom is offline  
post #19 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 08:17 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Chris_TC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by majortom View Post

Why should they? They bought players to take advantage of those features that were available when they bought them. As technologies progress, new features become available and sometimes they are not backward compatible. The player I bought does what I bought it to do.

Like I stated above, I would have already bought a Blu-ray player if it fitted my price expectations. And I would have bitten my ass because, as stated above, I did not know about the shortcomings of current players until a few days ago.

You don't walk into a store and get told by salespeople "oh, btw, those players won't be able to play some of the stuff on future discs."

When I buy a DVD player I know for a fact that it'll play retail DVDs, and that it'll play all the features on those DVDs. I expect the same for HD players.

Quote:
You must never buy any technology products or must be angry all the time. My laptop had a CD-ROM drive and later one came out that could write CDs as well.

This is a bad comparison. When you buy a CD ROM drive, you know that it's read-only. However, when you buy an HD player, nobody tells you that it's "certain features only".

Quote:
Will you be angry if Toshiba releases triple layer discs that are incompatible with current players? If so, do you feel that they should not release them if that is the only way they can be made to work?

That is exactly what I feel. If Toshiba wanted triple layer discs they should have included them in the specs to begin with. I will be majorly p*ssed if studios start releasing triple layer discs that don't run on current hardware.
Chris_TC is offline  
post #20 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 08:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
HPforMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,813
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
That's why I got the PS3, hehehe!
HPforMe is offline  
post #21 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 08:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
theforce8686's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_TC View Post

Like I stated above, I would have already bought a Blu-ray player if it fitted my price expectations. And I would have bitten my ass because, as stated above, I did not know about the shortcomings of current players until a few days ago.

You don't walk into a store and get told by salespeople "oh, btw, those players won't be able to play some of the stuff on future discs."

When I buy a DVD player I know for a fact that it'll play retail DVDs, and that it'll play all the features on those DVDs. I expect the same for HD players.


This is a bad comparison. When you buy a CD ROM drive, you know that it's read-only. However, when you buy an HD player, nobody tells you that it's "certain features only".


That is exactly what I feel. If Toshiba wanted triple layer discs they should have included them in the specs to begin with. I will be majorly p*ssed if studios start releasing triple layer discs that don't run on current hardware.

I have 84 BDs and have never one been shorted by my Samsung. I dont care about special features or the idiotic idea of having them play video over the movie Im trying to watch. You are missing out on a great player and great movies. The 500 dollars I spent on my Samsung have been well worth it.
theforce8686 is offline  
post #22 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 08:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
majortom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 1,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_TC View Post

You don't walk into a store and get told by salespeople "oh, btw, those players won't be able to play some of the stuff on future discs."

Actually, what they would have to say is: "This player is only guaranteed to do what it says it will do today, and may not support new features that may be introduced in future systems that will play these same discs."

Quote:
This is a bad comparison. When you buy a CD ROM drive, you know that it's read-only. However, when you buy an HD player, nobody tells you that it's "certain features only".

You do not like that comparison? I will give you another. If you bought a PC before Vista (or before Mac OS X.3) with a fully supported video card, you might discover that it would not support Microsoft's Aero or Apple's Quartz Extreme as these required a certain level of 3D acceleration that was not required of earlier systems. These features do not yet exist. They are being proposed and will likely be added, but they did not exist when Samsung's first player was sold. Just as many early CD-ROM drives were not able to read the 700MB discs that became available later whose specifications were added to the Red Book.

At best, you are arguing for stagnation, requiring a completely new format to be introduced every time a new ability is needed. Your solution would be much more expensive for consumers and would never bring about mass adoption.

Quote:
That is exactly what I feel. If Toshiba wanted triple layer discs they should have included them in the specs to begin with. I will be majorly p*ssed if studios start releasing triple layer discs that don't run on current hardware.

You need not worry about this as it is unlikely that Toshiba will actually release their triple layer format, just as it is unlikely that HD DVD will survive long term.

/carmi
majortom is offline  
post #23 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 09:41 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
Chris_TC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by majortom View Post

Actually, what they would have to say is: "This player is only guaranteed to do what it says it will do today, and may not support new features that may be introduced in future systems that will play these same discs."

"In future systems"? You speak as if a new standard was about to get invented. We're still talking about Blu-ray, aren't we?

Quote:


You do not like that comparison? I will give you another. If you bought a PC before Vista (or before Mac OS X.3) with a fully supported video card, you might discover that it would not support Microsoft's Aero or Apple's Quartz Extreme as these required a certain level of 3D acceleration that was not required of earlier systems.

Once again, you are talking about evolving systems while I'm talking about a standard. There are no standardized specs when it comes to the PC world.
A standard should not evolve, a standard should be fixed.
Chris_TC is offline  
post #24 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 09:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Issac Hunt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,644
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_TC View Post

Once again, you are talking about evolving systems while I'm talking about a standard. There are no standardized specs when it comes to the PC world.

Issac Hunt is offline  
post #25 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 09:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Frank Derks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Region A,B,C
Posts: 1,860
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by fa8362 View Post

Where are you getting this stuff from? There is no reason why current players won't play all future BD discs. Current players simply won't be able to access all the extra features on the disc. Disc security is transparent unless you're trying to copy.

BR+ and rom mark security layer is not protecting only the additional content.
It's there to protect the movie content. Fox's intentions are to use this additional security layer.
Do you realy think that current playback devices will ignore this security layer and allow playing back the future BD+ protected discs? Think again, allowing current players to ignore the BD+ protection makes BD+ protection useless.
Frank Derks is offline  
post #26 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 10:10 AM
Advanced Member
 
fa8362's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 951
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Derks View Post

BR+ and rom mark security layer is not protecting only the additional content.
It's there to protect the movie content. Fox's intentions are to use this additional security layer.
Do you realy think that current playback devices will ignore this security layer and allow playing back the future BD+ protected discs? Think again, allowing current players to ignore the BD+ protection makes BD+ protection useless.

Two seconds of research would have revealed that you are wrong.

http://www.physorg.com/news5725.html
fa8362 is offline  
post #27 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 10:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
majortom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posts: 1,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_TC View Post

"In future systems"? You speak as if a new standard was about to get invented. We're still talking about Blu-ray, aren't we?

This is a new standard, Blu-ray Profile 2. It does not yet exist.


Quote:


Once again, you are talking about evolving systems while I'm talking about a standard. There are no standardized specs when it comes to the PC world.
A standard should not evolve, a standard should be fixed.

It seems that you will discount everything that does not have a set standard. NTSC was an improvement to RS-170 (monochrome video). VHS added Hi-Fi sound. NTSC added stereo audio. AM added stereo. GSM added Push-to-talk over Cellular. Etc.

If you dislike those, I can come up with many more. How about HDMI? In order to support transmission of Dolby TrueHD, one needs HDMI 1.3. Just as there were changes between HDMI 1.0 to 1.1 to 1.1a to 1.2 and so on. These are all standards. All systems evolve or die.

/carmi
majortom is offline  
post #28 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 11:29 AM
Senior Member
 
paulbh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 361
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assayer View Post

Yup, they took the specs more seriously. That is why Toshiba is now pushing to band-aid TL-51 into the HD-DVD spec, with no real word on whether the legacy players will be patchable to support it. I'm guessing probably not.

TL-51 might end up being a nice upgrade on the media side. But it is not needed to play any of the current discs and their interactive features. There also is no need for it currently as a movie of just about any realistic length can be put out on a dual layer HD DVD without any notable loss of quality. Instead of presuming that Toshiba will not support their early adopters I'll just wait and see what happens. IMO, they've done a nice job so far.
paulbh is offline  
post #29 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 12:37 PM
Advanced Member
 
SyHD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 876
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
He is pretty much right about early adopters. Lets be honest, most of the early adopters have more money than sense. No offense to those who took offense to my comment.

Does price really matter if you are buying a ticket on the Titanic?
SyHD is offline  
post #30 of 126 Old 02-11-2007, 01:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
wreckshop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_TC View Post

"In future systems"? You speak as if a new standard was about to get invented. We're still talking about Blu-ray, aren't we?


Once again, you are talking about evolving systems while I'm talking about a standard. There are no standardized specs when it comes to the PC world.
A standard should not evolve, a standard should be fixed.


USB is a standard. Should USB have been stuck at 1.0 because all of the devices stuck at 1.0 cannot take advantage of the increased speed of USB 2.0?
wreckshop is offline  
Reply HDTV Software Media Discussion

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off