HD DVD: Blu-ray Has Problems - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 02:15 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
The picture and sound quality of HD DVD and BD can be identical. If this were true of Yugu and it performed as well as a Honda, we would all be driving Yugos .
not if the movie is only available in one format. That will affect around 70% of the HD movies a bit over 55% are only BD and a bit under 15% are only HD-DVD
AnthonyP is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 02:21 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyP
not if the movie is only available in one format. That will affect around 70% of the HD movies a bit over 55% are only BD and a bit under 15% are only HD-DVD
You know your logic was proven wrong at CES Anthony. Warner came and announced a lot more movies for HD DVD than BD (11 titles more). And with them having some of the strongest titles, the stats will be way different than what you note. Even Paramount was soft at CES wrt to BD.

I mentioned all of this before CES and you kept counting studios the way you have here. I hope moving forward, we don't keep doing this given the facts that are in front of us :).

Amir

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #93 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 03:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
AnthonyP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 17,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Amir, I did not go back to my calculations, so it can be that my numbers are a bit wrong. But the numbers I posted before where calculations based on what the studios said they will release for launch and over the year (if they stipulated anything).

PS the calc was done with the CES numbers, so they don't include the Weinstein’s or the porno titles or studio canal
AnthonyP is offline  
post #94 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 03:24 PM
Member
 
titaniumx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Q of BanditZ, I had no idea that my factual statements would give you so much... uhmm... emotional distress that you would make many revisions to your post attaching emotional words. Anyways.... :rolleyes:
titaniumx is offline  
post #95 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 03:45 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Q of BanditZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: blurayoasis.com
Posts: 15,242
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by titaniumx
Q of BanditZ, I had no idea that my factual statements would give you so much... uhmm... emotional distress that you would make many revisions to your post attaching emotional words. Anyways.... :rolleyes:
What facts did YOU post? Not one.

It's all in your mind.

Great ISF Job by Chad B.
Q of BanditZ is offline  
post #96 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 04:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
joshd2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
You know your logic was proven wrong at CES Anthony. Warner came and announced a lot more movies for HD DVD than BD (11 titles more). And with them having some of the strongest titles, the stats will be way different than what you note. Even Paramount was soft at CES wrt to BD.

I mentioned all of this before CES and you kept counting studios the way you have here. I hope moving forward, we don't keep doing this given the facts that are in front of us :).

Amir
Its silly to assume that just because a title wasn't announced today for a particular format that it won't be announced tomorrow. Just because Warner announced Blazing Saddles for HD-DVD, doesn't mean that at some later date it won't be announced for Blu-Ray, especially when their overall stance of supporting both formats is a public position. Being that Warner and Paramount have been long time HD-DVD supporters, it would make sense that they have more content for that standard than Blu-Ray, as it takes time to create all the disc content.

If you want to say that these studios came up short on Blu-Ray, thats fine, but make sure you add the stipulation that they have had a lot less time working with Blu-Ray. Otherwise, there is no reason to make a point of it.
joshd2012 is offline  
post #97 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 04:37 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 28,478
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 442 Post(s)
Liked: 442
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyP
Amir, I did not go back to my calculations, so it can be that my numbers are a bit wrong. But the numbers I posted before where calculations based on what the studios said they will release for launch and over the year (if they stipulated anything).

PS the calc was done with the CES numbers, so they don't include the Weinstein’s or the porno titles or studio canal
Not sure how accurate this list is, Larry combed through a number of posts to compile it,

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=626178
Hi-Def DVDs: Movie Release Announcements - AVS Forum
Keenan is offline  
post #98 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 05:00 PM
Member
 
titaniumx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
The picture and sound quality of HD DVD and BD can be identical. If this were true of Yugu and it performed as well as a Honda, we would all be driving Yugos :).

Amir
Exactly. It's funny people would make such an outlandish comparison to prove their point. It's not even worth taking the time to reply to those ludicrous posts. Let me outline the differences between the two to make it simpler to comprehend. BR and HD DVD are both high definition with superior audio... however there are two main differences.

The first is the capacity. While some may argue that BD-DVD holds more data than HD-DVD, what differences does that make at long as the movies we are buying are a significant leap from SDTV? All the consumers want is the ability to watch a full length high def movie...do you think they're concern about how much capacity a disc hold? No, not at all. Even today, the average commercial DVD average around 4-5GB in term of data storage, that is including those useless (for the most part) bonus content.

Second, the price gap between HD-DVD and BR-DVD are very significant. The average Joe aren't willing to spend more than their HDTV to watch high def content.... so HD-DVD will clearly be the winner. Once HD-DVD hits the shelf in about 2 more months, many people going to go out and embrace the new technology that they've all been dying for. Some on this thread has argue that the salespeople should inform the consumers about the battle between BR and HD DVD... but seriously, do you really think that's gonna happen? No, they are salespeople... they WANT you to buy their stuff. HD-DVD is very good deal when you making a cost/benefit analysis and that's what consumers will buy. Simple as that.

Now, from what I'm seeing from many BR supporters.... they are supporting BR because they have more studios backing them, regardless of the cons. OK, that is a reasonable point since everyone would like more content. I do too as a matter of fact. However, you guys are forgetting the principles of economics. Holding a minor in economics, I believe I can say that in the real world there are many economic factors to take in account. The most important one is price. Period. No one with background in economics is going to argue against that. While I would like to see more content, the fact is that HD-DVD will certainly win the format war because both products are comparable. Some may argue that since BR-DVD is using a completely new technology that must be manufacture with a high level of precision, it will be less reliable. While I can certainly easily afford a $1800 BR DVD player, I doubt I'm going to buy it. Why? Because in the real world, there's is always a factor called an "opportunity cost" that consumers are bombarded with whenever making a purchasing decision. If people are to buy a substantially pricey BR player (and BR-DVDs), they will forgo the opportunity to use that money for buy something else, like a car or take a vacation, or in my situation, using it to invest and earn a huge return. In macroeconomics, resources are scarce and supplies are not unlimited. If so, everything would be free. That's one of the major reasons why businesses are constantly slashing cost and finding new ways to increase profits.

With all of that in mind, in the end, the winner will not be determined by which side has more studio support, but by which product the consumers buy. When HD-DVD sales greatly outpaced that of BR-DVD, there is no doubt the companies that support BR will release movies in HD-DVD. Why? Because DVD sales account for a huge amount of a studio's profit. Also, the cost of putting a movie on HD-DVD is significantly less than on a BR-DVD, thus it decreases the cost of revenue for the studio and decreases the cost for us... good for businesses and consumers. Also, the fact that HD-DVD is backed by Microsoft and approved by the DVD forum, the international association of about 400 companies that designed the DVD we use today put Blu-ray at a significant disadvantage. Also, it's worth nothing that it's kind of ironic that Pioneer and Sony are/were a member of the DVD forum. My post about which format will win is based purely on an economic standpoint cause like I said before, everyone would like more content but there is more to it that just that.
titaniumx is offline  
post #99 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 05:18 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Its silly to assume that just because a title wasn't announced today for a particular format that it won't be announced tomorrow.
I guess it would be silly if you didn't know much else about Warner. But we do know a lot. We know that they love HD DVD because they have IP in it. We know they can replicate HD DVD without going to their competitors. We know they can make hybrids that they like. We know they can make discs now. We know that the decision for BD was made at corporate level not studio.

Now if you want to make assumptions for the future, how about Disney, MGM and Fox also publishing in HD DVD to take advantage of Xbox 360 add-ons and people who will buy the much cheaper HD DVD player? Yes, I know. This is not 100% likely this minute and hence the reason I don't mention. But you can't make the reverse assumption for BD but ignore the market dynamics for the other side.

Quote:
Being that Warner and Paramount have been long time HD-DVD supporters, it would make sense that they have more content for that standard than Blu-Ray, as it takes time to create all the disc content.
This assumes that they want to do more. But going along with your logic, Warner at least has issues with BD. They want to use BD-9. To do that, they need advanced codecs that are available in HD DVD (i.e. VC-1) but not yet in BD. With Sony producing the key authoring tool and using it only for MPEG-2, they have basically cut off the other studios for now. Sony doesn’t mind using BD-25 but Warner sure does. Because their price caps are still higher than what red laser DVDs would cost them. As a competitor to Sony, there are in mood to be in charity business for BD.

Amir

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #100 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 05:47 PM
Member
 
RedSoxInHD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Nashua, NH.
Posts: 99
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
The picture and sound quality of HD DVD and BD can be identical. If this were true of Yugu and it performed as well as a Honda, we would all be driving Yugos :).

Amir
And what are you basing this on? The way I see it, the more capacity the less compression which is always a good thing. That and the fact that you're trusting Microsoft and their "codecs" to do alot of the work. Do you actually believe Bill Gates when he says how advanced their codecs are? Showing video on WMP on a 20" monitor is a whole lot different than throwing it up on a 100" screen. Clever as their codecs may be, there is no substitute for more space and less compression.
RedSoxInHD is offline  
post #101 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 06:14 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedSoxInHD
And what are you basing this on?
Simple. The same three codecs exist in both formats. With BD-25 being the only feasible format, you actually have less capacity here than with HD-DVD-30. Using advanced codecs, 4 hours if top quality video only needs 20 gigabytes leaving plenty of room for extras, lossless audio, etc. in HD DVD-30 (assuming 12 Mbit/sec data rate for video – see below). In other words, even if BD does get 50 gigabytes working, it is off little value for movie distribution (unless you want to use inefficient codecs like MPEG-2).

Quote:
The way I see it, the more capacity the less compression which is always a good thing.
I am with you there. But once the quality peaks, incremental bit rate doesn't give you much quality. For example, DVD would not look any better if I doubled its data rate. Likewise, with advanced codecs such as VC-1, we get incredible quality that is perceptually the same as D-5 masters at 12-13 Mbit/sec. Indeed, with our latest encoder, we get that kind of quality now at just 10 Mbit/sec (using segment re-encoding)

Quote:
That and the fact that you're trusting Microsoft and their "codecs" to do alot of the work. Do you actually believe Bill Gates when he says how advanced their codecs are?
I really have no choice in the matter. My division at Microsoft produces VC-1, media player, etc. :). Would be hard to argue with Bill that what comes out of my group is not good :D.
Quote:
Showing video on WMP on a 20" monitor is a whole lot different than throwing it up on a 100" screen.
Indeed. But as we designed VC-1, were using it for digital cinema applications with 30 *foot* screens. So 100†is rather small in comparison :). We have proven in a number of tests that we can outperform MPEG-2 by at least a factor of 2 with VC-1.

Quote:
Clever as their codecs may be, there is no substitute for more space and less compression.
Again, up to a point yes. Beyond that there is no gain. Indeed, once you reach 15 Mbit/sec, it is unclear that there is any value to higher bit rates given the resolution of current formats (1080p, 4:2:0 sampling).

Amir

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #102 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 06:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dialog_gvf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 4,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
I guess it would be silly if you didn't know much else about Warner. But we do know a lot. We know that they love HD DVD because they have IP in it. We know they can replicate HD DVD without going to their competitors. We know they can make hybrids that they like. We know they can make discs now. We know that the decision for BD was made at corporate level not studio.

Now if you want to make assumptions for the future, how about Disney, MGM and Fox also publishing in HD DVD to take advantage of Xbox 360 add-ons and people who will buy the much cheaper HD DVD player? Yes, I know. This is not 100% likely this minute and hence the reason I don't mention. But you can't make the reverse assumption for BD but ignore the market dynamics for the other side.
It helps HD DVD, I'm sure you'd agree, if there is a perception of hope that other studios will begin supporting it. And so, I very much doubt you'd try to do anything but promote that hope.

By extension of what you said, the likelyhood would be based on how committed the corporations are compared to the studios, and why the studios chose it to begin with. So, my analysis at this point would be:

Disney: Chose because of format capabilities. Already have expressed disappointment that 50GB isn't available from the start. Good chance to go HD DVD if BD doesn't deliver or HD DVD impresses.

Fox: Chose because of BD+. No other studio is so paranoid about the CP. Unlikely to go HD DVD except as a last resort.

MGM: Chose because of corporate pressure. Anyone know what the studio really thinks? Likelyhood based on how powerful Sony is to keep them in line.

SPHE: Fair to say BD has to approach dead before they do anything with HD DVD.

Fair?

This said, Warner, and Paramount would almost certainly drop BD if it didn't deliver sales that were compelling. It's all about the Benjamins there.

Gary


- Don't trust sigs
dialog_gvf is offline  
post #103 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 06:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
joshd2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
I guess it would be silly if you didn't know much else about Warner. But we do know a lot. We know that they love HD DVD because they have IP in it. We know they can replicate HD DVD without going to their competitors. We know they can make hybrids that they like. We know they can make discs now. We know that the decision for BD was made at corporate level not studio.
Your point being? If they are going to support Blu-Ray, its going to happen regardless of what some lower level decision maker really wants. They didn't have to adopt Blu-Ray - they chose to do so.

Quote:
Now if you want to make assumptions for the future, how about Disney, MGM and Fox also publishing in HD DVD to take advantage of Xbox 360 add-ons and people who will buy the much cheaper HD DVD player? Yes, I know. This is not 100% likely this minute and hence the reason I don't mention. But you can't make the reverse assumption for BD but ignore the market dynamics for the other side.
Unless you are willing to announce the price of Xbox360 add-on, we'll have to leave that out of the equation for now. But I'm sure studios will take the number of $500 Toshibas and Xbox360 add-ons and compare that to the number of PS3s. And if for some reason the Toshiba/360 number is bigger, I imagine they will adjust at that time. But if you can find me anyone who thinks thats going to happen, I'd love to talk to them.

Quote:
This assumes that they want to do more. But going along with your logic, Warner at least has issues with BD. They want to use BD-9. To do that, they need advanced codecs that are available in HD DVD (i.e. VC-1) but not yet in BD. With Sony producing the key authoring tool and using it only for MPEG-2, they have basically cut off the other studios for now. Sony doesn’t mind using BD-25 but Warner sure does. Because their price caps are still higher than what red laser DVDs would cost them. As a competitor to Sony, there are in mood to be in charity business for BD.

Amir
Again, they wouldn't have supported the format unless they wanted to. It obviously wasn't big enough of a deal to prevent them from releasing on the format.
joshd2012 is offline  
post #104 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 06:24 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshd2012
Again, they wouldn't have supported the format unless they wanted to. It obviously wasn't big enough of a deal to prevent them from releasing on the format.
No, they didn't really "want to" support BD. They wanted to have a back up plan and get price caps on BD production. In exchange for that insurance policy, they had to do 15 titles. And that is what they announced. No more. No less. There is absolutely no love of their competitor here.

Amir

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #105 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 06:26 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by dialog_gvf
Fair?
More than fair :).

On MGM, they have independent charter and responsibility to shareholders which lets them make different decisions but obviously, they are tilted toward Sony. However, getting to do HD DVD is a lot easier than SPE :).

Quote:
This said, Warner, and Paramount would almost certainly drop BD if it didn't deliver sales that were compelling. It's all about the Benjamins there.

Gary
And PS3 volume and delivery. I don't know the exact language there but if Sony misses those milestones, there will be consequences I am sure.

Amir

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #106 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 06:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dialog_gvf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 4,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by titaniumx
Holding a minor in economics, I believe I can say that in the real world there are many economic factors to take in account. The most important one is price. Period. No one with background in economics is going to argue against that. While I would like to see more content, the fact is that HD-DVD will certainly win the format war because both products are comparable. .
So why haven't other HD formats existing right now, with $200 players, won?

Answer WITHOUT mentioning content.

The reality is there is some tipping point between zero support and full support where price DOES take over. Where is it?

Gary


- Don't trust sigs
dialog_gvf is offline  
post #107 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 06:31 PM
AVS Special Member
 
joshd2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,297
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
No, they didn't really "want to" support BD. They wanted to have a back up plan and get price caps on BD production. In exchange for that insurance policy, they had to do 15 titles. And that is what they announced. No more. No less. There is absolutely no love of their competitor here.

Amir
A back-up plan? For if HD-DVD failed to catch on?

I really appreciate you giving insight into the inner workings of this, but if you can't just admit that Warner and Paramount added Blu-Ray support because they felt HD-DVD might fail, then I think I will end the conversation now. Its one thing to be commited to a format, and another to be blinded by it.

If they didn't want to support BD, they wouldn't have. There are plenty of other solutions out there - none of which have the support that Blu-Ray has - but plenty of alternatives.
joshd2012 is offline  
post #108 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 06:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Earz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Grand Rapids Michigan
Posts: 4,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshd2012
A back-up plan? For if HD-DVD failed to catch on?

I really appreciate you giving insight into the inner workings of this, but if you can't just admit that Warner and Paramount added Blu-Ray support because they felt HD-DVD might fail, then I think I will end the conversation now. Its one thing to be commited to a format, and another to be blinded by it.

If they didn't want to support BD, they wouldn't have. There are plenty of other solutions out there - none of which have the support that Blu-Ray has - but plenty of alternatives.
Hey Josh....its his story....he can tell it however he likes ;)
Earz is offline  
post #109 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 06:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dialog_gvf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 4,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm
No, they didn't really "want to" support BD. They wanted to have a back up plan and get price caps on BD production. In exchange for that insurance policy, they had to do 15 titles. And that is what they announced. No more. No less. There is absolutely no love of their competitor here.
Wow! That's a huge claim.

Would you be willing to be quoted in the press with that statement?

Relax, I'm not the press :)

Gary


- Don't trust sigs
dialog_gvf is offline  
post #110 of 155 Old 01-14-2006, 06:48 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshd2012
A back-up plan? For if HD-DVD failed to catch on?
Let me ask you this. Do you have insurance on your house? If so, does this mean you don't live in it because you expect it to catch on fire soon? Of course not. That is how it is with HD DVD studios. They were offered an insurance plan and they took it since it didn't cost them much (a press release and a few titles in BD). That doesn't mean they expect to cash in that plan. Yes, they helped the other side in the process. But that doesn't change what they believe to be a better solution for them.

Quote:
I really appreciate you giving insight into the inner workings of this, but if you can't just admit that Warner and Paramount added Blu-Ray support because they felt HD-DVD might fail, then I think I will end the conversation now. Its one thing to be committed to a format, and another to be blinded by it.
I am not blinded by anything. I get to talk to these people all the time. I get to see the look in their face and know if they are excited or not about something. I can't prove any of these to you. But I have what I need to believe in what I believe in :).

Quote:
If they didn't want to support BD, they wouldn't have. There are plenty of other solutions out there - none of which have the support that Blu-Ray has - but plenty of alternatives.
Well, they are only two games in town for optical distribution: HD DVD and BD. With HD DVD, they had the cost and capability under their belt. BD folks offered an insurance plan. They took that too.

Amir

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #111 of 155 Old 01-15-2006, 02:29 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 amirm
Let me ask you this. Do you have insurance on your house? If so, does this mean you don't live in it because you expect it to catch on fire soon? Of course not. That is how it is with HD DVD studios. They were offered an insurance plan and they took it since it didn't cost them much (a press release and a few titles in BD). That doesn't mean they expect to cash in that plan. Yes, they helped the other side in the process. But that doesn't change what they believe to be a better solution for them.
I realise you want to keep bumping threads with this title to give the impression that Blu Ray is in trouble, but this is just nonsense. Warners and Paramount were well aware that their official endorsement of Blu Ray would damage the perception of HD DVD yet went ahead anyway. Less insurance, more a wrecking ball. Can you name me any "insurance policies" where the act of becoming insured actually damages the thing you are trying to protect? Paramount have announced the same titles in both formats, which doesn't seem to indicate they are supporting HD DVD in the way you describe. It seems far more likely that their analysts have looked at the potential markets again following HD DVDs two abortive efforts to launch and have decided that it makes sense to go with both in the short term. It's entirely possible of course that they are forced to launch a minimum number of titles in HD DVD due to some prior commitment, and will pull out of that format as soon as they can.
Issac Hunt is offline  
post #112 of 155 Old 01-15-2006, 12:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Issac Hunt
It's entirely possible of course that they [Warner & Paramount] are forced to launch a minimum number of titles in HD DVD due to some prior commitment, and will pull out of that format as soon as they can.
Interesting. So you are willing to accept such a minimum deal for HD DVD, but is hard for you to accept the same for BD? If you are right, why did Warner announce more movies for HD DVD than BD (26 versus 15)? Wouldn’t you try to do less if you were going to bail out?

Note that I gave a lot of reasons for what I said. You have given none. Warner had IP in HD DVD. They have lower cost in production of HD DVD (they produce more than 1 billion DVDs per year so even a few pennies add up!). Their rank and file spent 4 years defending and championing HD DVD. They have been working with us and many other companies on HD DVD titles for the last year. They are powerful in DVD Forum but only a newcomer in BDA. Given all of this, do you think it is likely that they are more committed to BD than HD DVD?

Amir

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #113 of 155 Old 01-15-2006, 01:21 PM
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 amirm
Interesting. So you are willing to accept such a minimum deal for HD DVD, but is hard for you to accept the same for BD? If you are right, why did Warner announce more movies for HD DVD than BD (26 versus 15)? Wouldn’t you try to do less if you were going to bail out?
If they were looking to bail out of BD they had no need to join it in the first place as they were already with the format that you claim they prefer. Note that I spoke only of the possibilities, while it was you who claimed he knew exactly what the studios were going to do. Were you aware a year ago that they WB would add support for BD even before either format had launched? I doubt it. And 24 to 15 doesn't exactly show a highly enthusiastic level of support for one format over the other. In fact it's a tentative release for both right now, which is hardly surprising.

Quote:
Note that I gave a lot of reasons for what I said. You have given none. Warner had IP in HD DVD. They have lower cost in production of HD DVD (they produce more than 1 billion DVDs per year so even a few pennies add up!). Their rank and file spent 4 years defending and championing HD DVD. They have been working with us and many other companies on HD DVD titles for the last year. They are powerful in DVD Forum but only a newcomer in BDA. Given all of this, do you think it is likely that they are more committed to BD than HD DVD?
And yet even with all those reasons they still chose to spike their HD DVD baby with the highly damaging announcement that they would also support BD. That means the reason(s) must have been pretty compelling and more than just a desire for insurance. Did they discover that the HD DVD players (not discs) still weren't ready despite Toshiba's statements? Did their analysts re-examine the projected market for each format and suggest investing in both? Or were the pro HD DVD folk within Warners over-ruled by people higher up their food chain? Regardless of what the reason(s) may have been the decision has been taken, and even if Warner are still slightly more committed to Hd DVD it's only a fine margin at this point. It's far more important that HD DVD lacks any content at all from Fox, Disney, Sony, or Lions Gate.
Issac Hunt is offline  
post #114 of 155 Old 01-15-2006, 01:36 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,375
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 981 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by Issac Hunt
If they were looking to bail out of BD they had no need to join it in the first place as they were already with the format that you claim they prefer.
I never said they would bail out of BD. I just said they had minimum obligations to keep their price caps and that they are not anxious to do more. This means that there will potentially be top Warner content that is not available in BD. That’s all.

Quote:
Note that I spoke only of the possibilities, while it was you who claimed he knew exactly what the studios were going to do.
You made a lot of assertions. If you are just guessing and you have no idea if any of it is really factual, then we can stop now :). And yes, as a close partner of Warner for 3+ years, we have tremendous amount of insight into what they do, when they do it and why. I realize that doesn’t prove anything to you. But it is a fact that we have close ties with Warner and I frequently speak to their executives. So I hope we don’t keep debating this part.

Quote:
Were you aware a year ago that they WB would add support for BD even before either format had launched?
A year ago? No such thing happened then. Warner made their decision during summer of last year which is only 6 months back. A year ago they were the mortal enemy of BD format.

Quote:
And 24 to 15 doesn't exactly show a highly enthusiastic level of support for one format over the other.
So are you agreeing now that they are less enthusiastic for BD because they are publishing even less there? :)

Amir

Amir
Retired Technology Insider
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"
amirm is offline  
post #115 of 155 Old 01-15-2006, 01:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dialog_gvf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 4,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Issac Hunt
And 24 to 15 doesn't exactly show a highly enthusiastic level of support for one format over the other. In fact it's a tentative release for both right now, which is hardly surprising.
I too find the initial HD DVD announcements surprising subdued (1/2 from Warner and the same from Paramount and Universal as Jan 2005). But, I think you need to read what Amir said: Warner got the cap guarantee in exchange for 15 titles.

That may be all they'll release until they see if the PS/3 drives the sales. If this is the case, then we may see nothing but endless speculation that Warner is about to announce more BD titles as they announce more and more HD DVD ones.

The 16th BD title announcement invalidates the scenario.

This said, it clearly would have helped the HD DVD case FAR FAR more if Warner had told Sony to go stuff it. Warner has raised far more hope in the BD camp than they would be comfortable with, if Amir's "competitor" claim is accurate.

Do not underestimate the value of Warner titles. Especially while Fox isn't releasing Star Wars and Disney isn't releasing the A-list animation stuff.

Gary


- Don't trust sigs
dialog_gvf is offline  
post #116 of 155 Old 01-15-2006, 01:47 PM
Member
 
titaniumx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm not sure why this thread is still going on.... HD-DVD will win hands down. No question about that. And no one has yet to refute my previous post, just as I expected.

I also wouldn't trust Sony, esp after I bought an audio CD from them about two months ago and found out they installed a rootkit (trojan horse) on my computer, and I had to reformat my computer to remove it. I'm glad lawsuits were filed so they can clean up their act.
titaniumx is offline  
post #117 of 155 Old 01-15-2006, 01:59 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bferr1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Somewhere in the back of my mind
Posts: 3,388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
titaniumx, I agree with you that pricing is a factor in HD DVD's favor, but isn't the PS3 a bit of a wild card at this point? Because no one knows its pricing and availability and how it will affect Blu-Ray adoption, I think it's a bit premature to declare HD DVD the winner.
bferr1 is offline  
post #118 of 155 Old 01-15-2006, 02:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dialog_gvf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 4,990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by titaniumx
I'm not sure why this thread is still going on.... HD-DVD will win hands down. No question about that. And no one has yet to refute my previous post, just as I expected.
I notice you didn't respond to my post either.

Are you willing to listen to contrary opinions and consider them, or are you merely here to reject any opinions that are contrary to your own?

Gary


- Don't trust sigs
dialog_gvf is offline  
post #119 of 155 Old 01-15-2006, 02:52 PM
Member
 
titaniumx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by dialog_gvf
I notice you didn't respond to my post either.

Are you willing to listen to contrary opinions and consider them, or are you merely here to reject any opinions that are contrary to your own?

Gary
What was the question you asked? I believe I read your post but it made absolutely no sense to me.
titaniumx is offline  
post #120 of 155 Old 01-15-2006, 03:22 PM
Member
 
titaniumx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bferr1
titaniumx, I agree with you that pricing is a factor in HD DVD's favor, but isn't the PS3 a bit of a wild card at this point? Because no one knows its pricing and availability and how it will affect Blu-Ray adoption, I think it's a bit premature to declare HD DVD the winner.
Well, from the sources that I read, some says the PS3 will be released this spring, while other reliable sources said that the PS3 is rumored to be released in 2007 due to cost concerns and production issues.

IF the PS3 is going to be released THIS SPRING and it's in a competetive price range, then perhaps the balance will tip a bit in favor of Blu-ray. However, I find that to be totally unlikely considering the cost of a BR player. It would be possible if Sony would sell the system without the BR reader, or if they sell their system at a huge lost to compete with HD-DVD, but I don't expect that to happen considering Sony's history. The problem with Sony is that they have a huge unrealistic goal. I just highly doubt Sony can release a next-gen PS3 with BR without a substantial price tag, and we know that would hinder the adoption of BR. I already have an idea of which path Sony would take and how it'd all play out, but I'm not going to comment on that :p
titaniumx is offline  
Closed Thread Blu-ray Players

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