or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HD DVD Players › Sony might Compromise with HD-DVD?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sony might Compromise with HD-DVD? - Page 2  

post #31 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by ADGrant
Minidisc failed in the market. The fact that another format failed also does not change that fact..
I think a "failed" format should be considered one that enters the marketplace and disappears without a successor. One that never seriously competes with the pre-existing formats it was meant to replace.

Minidisc has sold 80-90 million units worldwide since introduction. It didn't fail. It was quite successful before the flash memory/HDD devices came along.

People are way too quick to label anything that isn't a huge success, as a failure.

They also fail to look at geographic differences. MD has sold 80-90 million units worldwide since its introduction in 1992. That makes it about 33% as successful as A/V DVD (MD wasn't a computer format). But many times more successful than LaserDisc.

You tell me the time it will take after introduction for HD-DVD, Blu-Ray, or a compromise format to reach 80 million unit A/V sales worldwide.

Gary
post #32 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by samiam95124
The one thing I think everyone here can agree on is that the takeup for any HD
format is going to be slow, since it cannot go any faster than the take up for HDTVs,
which are not moving particularly fast, either.
Agreed. But, there is an very interesting gap developing between the sales of HD capable displays, and their use to display HD.

There are plently of HD sets out there that don't have HD OTA/cable/sat tuners attached. So, the take up of HD discs will probably significantly lag HDTV sales.

Quote:
Originally posted by samiam95124

I don't think there is a possibility that an HD format will be rejected by the market.
The difference between an HD and standard DVD format is much more apparent
than between DVD-audio and CD formats, and Fox already failed with a "DVD like"
TV signal vs. HDTV. The stage is well set for this next adventure.
Depends what you mean by rejected.

If you mean it the idea won't fail outright, that is clear. It's niche is assured. If you mean it will power through niche status and become dominant over DVD, well there is already evidence showing that this won't happen.

It is possible that eventually HD and DVD players will be one and the same on the market. But, I think that will take a decade or more to occur. Any savings made by not including HD stuff is a possible competitive advantage.

Fox failed with sub-par DVD within the niche early adopter (mostly big screen) HD community. That doesn't really mean anything for the mass market.

You had to be able to receive HD to receive Fox's ED. It is unclear that if tens of millions of 30-34" DTV sets were sold that the average consumer would bother obtaining the HD broadcasts, and could tell much of a difference between a high quality ED broadcast (853x480p) and a possibly overcompressed HD broadcast (1280x720p) which would be the comparison for FOX.

Gary
post #33 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by ADGrant
Minidisc failed in the market. The fact that another format failed also does not change that fact..


It was a mild success in the U.S., and a big success in Japan. Hardly a failure.

Quote:
The Playstation did not win a format war since their was no format war in that case. No one expects there to be just one video game console or all the video game consoles to paly the same games
Bottom line is each game system is a different format. You're over simplifying the term "format". Sony was successful, period end of statement.

Quote:
Beta (professional) is not used to deliver movies or music direct to consumers so no format war there either.
Again, you're over simplifying the term format. Your definition of format is applying to consumers. And saying Sony never won a format war. And since Beta does deliver movies direct to consumers via over the air or cable/satellite networks, it's very much applicable.

Quote:
Compact discs. Again there was no format war with CDs and they were a huge success.
Funny, record companies were adamantly opposed to CD from the beginning. CD took a while to catch on. CD was still competing with LPs and Cassettes.
post #34 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by bwiklem


It was a mild success in the U.S., and a big success in Japan. Hardly a failure.



Bottom line is each game system is a different format. You're over simplifying the term "format". Sony was successful, period end of statement.



Again, you're over simplifying the term format. Your definition of format is applying to consumers. And saying Sony never won a format war. And since Beta does deliver movies direct to consumers via over the air or cable/satellite networks, it's very much applicable.



Funny, record companies were adamantly opposed to CD from the beginning. CD took a while to catch on. CD was still competing with LPs and Cassettes. [/b]
I don't see how record companies could have been "adamantly opposed" to CD since they all released music on that format.

Yes I am defining the success of a format as applying to consumers and I am further limiting it to cover only "pre-recorded" audio and video content. I am not including video games in that definition because they are essentially a disposable item. Very few people keep a game console around for ten years and build a huge collection of games for it.

Furthermore, I do not think that hardware sales can be used to judge the success of a format. Success or failure should be judged on sales of pre-recorded media and on the number and quality of titles available. (i.e. are major movies or recording artists readily available in a given format).
Plenty of people own players capable of playing either DVD-Audio or SACD or both. Software sales and title availabilty are poor however. Those formats have so far failed in the market.

I understand that it is possible for a format to succeed in one market and fail in others. However given U.S. domination of the movie industry and huge presence in the music industry, a format that fails in the U.S. has pretty much failed period, end of story. I am of course aware of non U.S. standards succeeding (e.g. PAL, GSM). They are not formats as I define them.
post #35 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by ADGrant
I don't see how record companies could have been "adamantly opposed" to CD since they all released music on that format.
Because, multiple casette tape recordings could be made of CDs without much if any differtiation in quality from the industry provided tapes. Casette tapes were very profitable (I would guess more than vinyl) because of its portability.
post #36 of 94
I just hope that any compromise will not lead to Blu-Ray reducing its storage capacity. The capacity of "HD-DVD" is simply not high enough to store a full movie in MPEG-2 with a reasonable bitrate, and I DON'T WANT MPEG-4 used since it would be incompatible with integrated HDTVs that only have MPEG-2 decoding.
post #37 of 94
Would the decoding not be done in the HD DVD or BR player not in the TV making your concerns a none issue? Integrated versus non-intergrated refers to the ATSC tuner not to the ability of such TVs to play back future HD pre-recored formats.
post #38 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by Marc Alexander
Because, multiple casette tape recordings could be made of CDs without much if any differtiation in quality from the industry provided tapes. Casette tapes were very profitable (I would guess more than vinyl) because of its portability.
So if they were "adamantly opposed" to CD as a format, why did they release all their content on CD?
post #39 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by foxfan
The capacity of "HD-DVD" is simply not high enough to store a full movie in MPEG-2 with a reasonable bitrate, and I DON'T WANT MPEG-4 used since it would be incompatible with integrated HDTVs that only have MPEG-2 decoding.
Even if you could get the MPEG-2 data to the TV, it wouldn't be able to decode and display it.
post #40 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by ADGrant
(snip)
Yes I am defining the success of a format as applying to consumers and I am further limiting it to cover only "pre-recorded" audio and video content. I am not including video games in that definition because they are essentially a disposable item. Very few people keep a game console around for ten years and build a huge collection of games for it.

(snip)

I understand that it is possible for a format to succeed in one market and fail in others. However given U.S. domination of the movie industry and huge presence in the music industry, a format that fails in the U.S. has pretty much failed period, end of story. I am of course aware of non U.S. standards succeeding (e.g. PAL, GSM). They are not formats as I define them.
Video games are not disposable items. As I recall, they cost US$30-50 a game, much more so than any box-office movie DVDs cost. And they still cost some US$10-30 in the second hand market. The game consoles are not disposable either. I suggest you go buy a PS2, play it for six months and then sell it on E-bay. You can get rid of it for a penny but it can still sell for half of its original purchase price. Even a two-year old computer is not disposable - you can still use WinXP on it and it'll run basic word processing, spreadsheet and do calculatons rather well. All of these things are not DISPOSABLE.

If one uses a definition that one likes, that supports one's point of view and not the big picture, that one can win argument against anyone else based on the definition alone, then why bother having a discussion?


fuad
post #41 of 94
Quote:
I am not including video games in that definition because they are essentially a disposable item. Very few people keep a game console around for ten years and build a huge collection of games for it.
1) I don't think I have kept any piece of electronic for 10years
2) you can build a game collection pretty fast and since each game is much more $ then a DVD, you can invest just as much in much less titles
3) I have many things disposable by your definition. For instance all my PCs, does that make them any less important

Quote:
However given U.S. domination of the movie industry and huge presence in the music industry, a format that fails in the U.S. has pretty much failed period, end of story.
talk about delusional. Have you ever went past your towns limit?
post #42 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by ADGrant
I understand that it is possible for a format to succeed in one market and fail in others. However given U.S. domination of the movie industry and huge presence in the music industry, a format that fails in the U.S. has pretty much failed period, end of story. I am of course aware of non U.S. standards succeeding (e.g. PAL, GSM). They are not formats as I define them.
VCD. It sold far better than Laserdisc and in many ways was the precursor to DVD.
post #43 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by kjack
Even if you could get the MPEG-2 data to the TV, it wouldn't be able to decode and display it.
Not true the Sony KD-34XBR2 has a fire wire input that can decode MPEG2 content
post #44 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by jaybrubin
Not true the Sony KD-34XBR2 has a fire wire input that can decode MPEG2 content
But the MPEG-2 decoder inside the TV doesn't know anything about the Blu-ray specific info embedded inside the MPEG-2 bitstream. Plus, it is unlikely it could hande the [up to] 2x higher bitrates.

Everyone had to redesign their decoder chips, even before the new video codecs were added.
post #45 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by kjack
But the MPEG-2 decoder inside the TV doesn't know anything about the Blu-ray specific info embedded inside the MPEG-2 bitstream. Plus, it is unlikely it could hande the [up to] 2x higher bitrates.
All ATSC MPEG-2 decoders can handle up to 40 Mbps, which is the limit on Blu-ray. I don't think Hollywood will allow Firewire output from Blu-ray/HD-DVD players, but for MPEG-2 video content on Blu-ray there is no technical reason why it wouldn't work.
post #46 of 94
I can view D-Theatre tapes through the firewire port on my Sony 34xbr960. I need to be able to do the same with Blu-Ray since my component and HDMI ports are already all in use...
post #47 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by Richard Paul
All ATSC MPEG-2 decoders can handle up to 40 Mbps, which is the limit on Blu-ray. I don't think Hollywood will allow Firewire output from Blu-ray/HD-DVD players, but for MPEG-2 video content on Blu-ray there is no technical reason why it wouldn't work.
Can they handle the 192-byte transport streams Blu-ray uses instead of the standard 188 bytes?

Anyway, I'm not aware of firewire being on any proposed players. Haven't seen it on any proposed player feature lists yet.
post #48 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by Richard Paul
All ATSC MPEG-2 decoders can handle up to 40 Mbps, which is the limit on Blu-ray. I don't think Hollywood will allow Firewire output from Blu-ray/HD-DVD players, but for MPEG-2 video content on Blu-ray there is no technical reason why it wouldn't work.
thank you richard...

in fact there are some JVC DVHS decks that shuttled ATSC HDTV over fire wire to some Mitsibushi and Sony hdtv(s)...much of the isue had to do with 5C encryption...

Though this technology has been in place for almost 5 years...

Only now are we begininning to get source playback systems...

Its nice to know that BD is committed to the reference MPEG2 at high bit rates 20mbs...

These are gonna be awesome movie content...
post #49 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by kjack
Can they handle the 192-byte transport streams Blu-ray uses instead of the standard 188 bytes?

Anyway, I'm not aware of firewire being on any proposed players. Haven't seen it on any proposed player feature lists yet.
all true...one of the saddest things is that a DVD player was never released with fire wire implemented for even SD MPEG2 content...

but its bound to be a option in many DVR systems where daisy chainning and additional storage come into play...

I owend a TV and comcast DTC6100 tuner emiting a signal over fire wire...

Cheaper cables...then HDMI...

thought now I am running a strict HDMI display...
post #50 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by jaybrubin
but its bound to be a option in many DVR systems where daisy chainning and additional storage come into play...
What's wrong with Ethernet and 802.11a/g? That's being added to a lot of consumer products already.
post #51 of 94
even over ethernet...the protocol would be the same as fire wire MPEG2 content...
post #52 of 94
I hope Sony doesn't compromise too much. I'd rather the formats stay seperate than get some watered down end product.
post #53 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by kjack

Anyway, I'm not aware of firewire being on any proposed players. Haven't seen it on any proposed player feature lists yet.
Firewire ports will be required on every Blu-Ray device. How else will you be able to record content from an external tuner (like cable box)?
post #54 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by kjack
Can they handle the 192-byte transport streams Blu-ray uses instead of the standard 188 bytes?
The extra four header bytes do not need to be sent on a standard MPEG-2 video stream so Blu-ray does use a 188-byte standard transport stream. This can be seen on page 16 of the Blu-ray specs. Of course if the Blu-ray disc uses something other than MPEG-2 and Dolby Digital it would not be playable through Firewire on current ATSC receivers. I don't think we will see Firewire output of movies but it is techically possible.


Quote:
Originally posted by kjack
Anyway, I'm not aware of firewire being on any proposed players. Haven't seen it on any proposed player feature lists yet.
It will be on Blu-ray recorders, but I don't think Hollywood will allow pre-recorded movies to be sent over Firewire. I remember reading DVD Demystified (second edition) and even in 2001 there was the idea that we would soon see DVD players with Firewire outputs. At this point in time I am so cynical about Firewire's future that I think it will be relegated to recording.
post #55 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by foxfan
Firewire ports will be required on every Blu-Ray device. How else will you be able to record content from an external tuner (like cable box)?
Maybe they won't be able to record external digital sources. The devices would have on-board tuners.

The upcoming Sony PVRs don't have Firewire. They have ATSC (8VSB) and Cablecard (QAM) tuners.

It is reasonable to expect the exact same thing extended with a Blu-Ray burner for archiving.

Clearly they SHOULD have Firewire. But, it also seems equally clear that TPTB are fevioursly fighting against it. Without Firewire the CE can't be accused of supporting piracy since they have absolute control of the legitimacy of what they record. Versus possibly being lied to by a hacked external source.

(sigh)
post #56 of 94
Firewire DVD players just aren't cost effective. The big problem is how to send
the OSD (On Screen Display) to the 1394 receiver. Although there are a
couple of protocols for OSD over 1394 (EIA-775 and Havi), neither one has
much following.

Here's the DVD Forum recommendation for DVD video and audio
over 1394:

http://www.dvdforum.com/images/Guide...0_20020911.pdf

The big cost factor is the necessity of re-encoding the content video and the
OSD composite so that the 1394 display can show the user interface menus.
See figure 3.5-1 in the document for a block diagram that includes the "Video
Re-Encoder".

To make this MPEG-2 encoder cheaper, the recommendation allows the
Transport Stream to be sent on 1394 at up to 36.096 Mbps. In other words,
the MPEG-2 encoder can be a high bitrate I-frame only chip (possibly
implemented in an FPGA to reduce cost).

With the advent of DVI amd HDMI, it's just so much easier and cheaper (and
now has wider market appeal) to drop in a HDMI chip instead of a complex
1394 solution.

Ron
post #57 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by Richard Paul
All ATSC MPEG-2 decoders can handle up to 40 Mbps, which is the limit on Blu-ray. I don't think Hollywood will allow Firewire output from Blu-ray/HD-DVD players, but for MPEG-2 video content on Blu-ray there is no technical reason why it wouldn't work.
An MPEG-2 decoder that claims to be MP@HL compliant should go to 80 Mbps.

Ron
post #58 of 94
Quote:
Originally posted by dr1394
An MPEG-2 decoder that claims to be MP@HL compliant should go to 80 Mbps.
My point was that inside the DTV, nobody is looking to use a generic MPEG-2 decoder -- they want to use an ATSC/OpenCable decoder. These days, MPEG is just a tool, with application-specific specifications adding constraints and extensions. Can the currently installed base of ATSC or generic MPEG-2 decoders handle BD's overlapping audio streams? Probably not...
post #59 of 94
I say adopt Blu-Ray's disc format in hybrid form. Make a DVD layer and a Blu-Ray layer. With VC-9 or H.264 encoding, you'd have plenty of space for an excellent quality version of the movie on the Blu-Ray layer, and the thing would still work in normal DVD players.

You could just stop making normal DVDs this way and people could upgrade their players whenever they feel like it, if ever. You'd be sneaking the format into consumers' hands. This way, you don't have to twist studios' arms to put out two different releases for every movie, one of which they are paranoid nobody will buy.

And hell, that even gets you out of the chicken-and-the-egg problem, too, because you can release the content at will and then use that to push players and HDTVs. "Hey, next time you go to buy a TV or DVD player, check out your collection and see how many of the DVDs you already own are HD-ready!" Only catalog titles will have to be re-released, and they can be extra-expensive enthusiast-style special editions on straight blue discs. And you even get a chance for a guaranteed double-dip excuse down the line. Sell the new releases on hybrid HD/DVD then sell it later in a souped up special edition on an all blue disc if your market research says a lot of HD people bought that movie.

Sure, some of the DVD quality would take a hit, but hey, do 2-disc releases when you need to and consider the fact that early on, all of the PQ-concerned people will have bought the HD players anyway. Honestly, it's hard to tell the difference between a perfect transfer and something that's a little overcompressed on a 32" 480i SDTV.

It's the perfect launch. Which is why it will never, ever happen.


Dan
post #60 of 94
Dan JVC has a a disk with two layers of DVD and one of BR
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HD DVD Players
This thread is locked  
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › HD DVD Players › Sony might Compromise with HD-DVD?