Format Battle General Discussion Thread: Discuss it here! - Page 55  

Originally Posted by scaesare

No matter how I've tried to read your quote, I can't make this reconcile. I really have completely avoided all the console talk here, but I have to ask:

Are you trying to say that the ~10mil 360's reported as sold thru the end of the year isn't true?

Originally Posted by wco81

Huh?

Where did I question the 10 million number?

Read carefully, I was pointing out that Sony may have shipped more PS3s in the first 6-7 weeks (from middle of November to end of the year) than MS shipped X360s in its first 6-7 weeks (from when it launched last year to the end of 2005).

At a higher price, despite heavy competition from the X360 this year and the Wii.

Originally Posted by 2Channel

Maybe someone can step up and correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that Sarbox made it illegal to claim shipments into the channel as sales numbers, as channel stuffing was a very popular end of quarter sport in the heyday of the technology boom. I believe Sarbox requires companies to report only sell through numbers.

If someone knows otherwise, please chime in.

Originally Posted by wco81

Except they've been shipping them by air and said they'd continue to do so if necessary.

EDIT:

BTW, NPD numbers are due this Thursday.

So how many PS3s do you think are sitting on the shelves, in some warehouse, sitting in a plane cargo hold, etc.?

50k? 100k? 200k? 500k?

Originally Posted by 2Channel

As I've pointed out before, for PS3 to have a chance at winning the console war, it has to sell more units every month than the Xbox360 is currently.

The PS3 not only started at a deficit, but continues to sell less units every month than the Xbox360. To even be in the game, Sony needs to reverse that trend.

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

It's only illegal if it is booked as REVENUE at the point of sale. In fact, proper disclosure requires them to indicate the accounts receivables. They book the revenue when they are paid, and that will be some nominal period after the customer receives the product.

If the product is in shipment (and that is a long time by boat) it won't have been paid for, and it can't be booked as revenue.

They are quite allowed to tell people the unit counts those receivables are based on.

Microsoft does the exact same thing. Are you saying they may be breaking the law too?

Gary

Originally Posted by b2bonez

Looks like RCA has officially bowed out of HD-DVDs "race to the bottom" (as in pricing) and is leaving the "biz" in the hands of Toshiba/MS. No news yet of Tosh/MS suckering er.. um.. welcoming in another company to fill RCAs shoes..

News is in the "News Thread"

b2b

Originally Posted by wco81

Well it hasn't been two months yet.

So lets see how much longer X360 outsells the PS3 each month.

Before November, X360 was selling around 220k a month. Lets see if X360 falls back to that trend. It really shouldn't because it should have a lot of games coming out by now, over a year after launch.

Meanwhile, Sony's game release calendar doesn't look so hot but with the EU launch, there should be some games which appeal to American and Japanese gamers. Don't be too shocked if the PS3 outsells the X360 in March for instance, unless there's some killer X360 title coming out then.

If PS3 outsold X360 in their respective first 6-7 weeks, lets see what it's like by the end of this year before we pronounce the lead insurmountable.

Originally Posted by jdg345

*sigh*

Looks like RCA has officially bowed out of Blu-Ray's "race to the bottom" (as in pricing) and is leaving the "biz" in the hands of Sony. No news yet of Sony suckering er.. um.. welcoming in another company to fill RCAs shoes..

I don't understand why to post things that are just going to get a rise out of people? It clearly states RCA won't be supporting either format:

Originally Posted by Kosty

If there is anything specific anybody here is personally very interested in at CES, I may be able to grab some literature or information during my rounds.

I have a far amount of time allocated to walking the floors.

Please PM me on any specific requests.

Originally Posted by jdg345

It clearly states RCA won't be supporting either format:

Originally Posted by 2Channel

No, just looking for feedback on how Sarbox restricts their ability to play fast and loose with channel numbers vs. sell through numbers. I'll ask the Microsoft folks tomorrow at CES to confirm the nature of the 10.4 million number.

Originally Posted by b2bonez

More news from the "News Thread"

Toshiba announces 50GB TL HD-DVD disc. I guess they didn't get the memo from Microsoft that 30GB was "good enough".. (another joke, the "memo part".. lighten up folks)

b2b

Originally Posted by RobertR1

So if the Samsung Gen 2 player is cheaper and fully BD-Live compatiable than Gen 1 then all of a sudden this massive cost of full BD-Live support has disappeared in only the past few months? This is a tough pill to swallow.

Originally Posted by patrick99

I personally don't care that much about secondary video. What I am concerned about is whether discs with this feature will be completely unplayable on my first generation player. Are you telling me that my concern is unfounded, and that as long as I don't care about the secondary video feature, I will be able to access all other features on the disc without upgrading to a second generation or later player?

Originally Posted by scaesare

Perhaps, seeing as how Talk, Richard, wco81, xbd, and others have all igonored my resquest for some easily accessible pulbic info cor a customer to educate themselves on BR profiles, perhaps you'd be kind enough to point me to some?

Originally Posted by Richard Paul

Well that is a bit of exaggeration considering it is more like 9 months between the release of the two players. Also aren't you forgetting the improvements made in HD DVD players since the HD-A1? Granted the price hasn't gone down on the newer HD DVD players but I think most of us know the reason for that.


All Blu-ray movies will be able to play in BD-Video 1.0 players and it is only in the matter of certain features that will differ. Note that firmware upgrades may be needed for certain discs to play, but that is true for both HD formats.


scaesare, only a few days ago I posted all the information I have heard about the Blu-ray profiles. Apparently you missed that so I will post it again.

This information came from various insider posts on this forum and not all of it can be proven, but personally I believe this information is accurate. There is one Blu-ray spec and four profiles in it including an audio only profile. Excluding the audio profile there are three profiles for video playback. BD-Video 1.0 is allowed until June of 2007 after which Blu-ray players must either be BD-Video 1.1 or BD-Live. For the sake of comparison I will include the requirements for HD DVD as well:

HD DVD:

144 MB of persistent memory required
SD PiP decoding required
secondary audio decoding required
internet support required

BD-Video 1.0 (allowed until June of 2007):

64 KB of persistent memory required
no SD/HD PiP decoding required
no secondary audio decoding required
no internet support required

BD-Video 1.1:

256 MB of persistent memory required
SD/HD PiP support required
secondary audio decoding required
no internet support required

BD-Live:

1 GB of persistent memory required
SD/HD PiP support required
secondary audio decoding required
internet support required

Originally Posted by RobertR1

Most likely, someone didn't wanna play with HD DVD until they got their 50GB discs.......

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

The head scratcher is, why wasn't the offer of 45GB two years ago good enough?

They held out for 5GB?!

Toshiba should have offered 60GB and had them go HD DVD exclusive.

Gary

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

The head scratcher is, why wasn't the offer of 45GB two years ago good enough?

They held out for 5GB?!

Toshiba should have offered 60GB and had them go HD DVD exclusive.

Gary

Or for the most capacity, just pile on more high-capacity layers. In May 2005, Toshiba announced a triple-layer HD DVD disc at Media-Tech. The HD DVD 45 has a capacity of 45 GB (12 hours). The draft specification for the format has been submitted to the DVD Forum, and should be approved "later this year," says Knox.

Knox reports that triple-layer demo material should be available in the summer, and that existing players can read the format, requiring only a firmware change. The discs could be available in 2005, he says, "although the very beginning of 2006 is more likely for volume production."

Originally Posted by RobertR1

Likely a sum of things:

failed promises from their current affiliate
wanting exact space on both for easy cross platform titles with the same level of content

The format is actually 51 gigabytes (17 gigabytes/layer). And it is just at technology proposal at this point. They would need to submit it to DVD Forum for approval. Once we are through that cycle, then one can determine whether it plays or does not (DVD Forum may modify their proposal before ratification).

Originally Posted by darinp2

I could see them using the 50GB to say, "we have that for you". However, there are often unspoken things with feature requests. Like, "we want 50GB" when they really mean "we want 50GB with the bandwidth that would normally go with it". HD DVD and Blu-ray largely kept the same ratios between space and bandwidth that DVD had. It has been in the range of 1Mbps per 1GB for each. Going to 50GB while keeping the peak bandwidth at the same value as it is now for 30GB would mean straying from that range and ending up with a small peak bandwidth for that amount of space. Basically, only about 0.6 Mbps per 1GB. Or big-pool-but-small-hose.

If a Blu-ray exclusive studio told Toshiba that they would go neutral as soon as the 50GB discs are ready for them to release content on, I wonder how long before that studio would actually be neutral.

--Darin

Originally Posted by Rio

Picture from LG's demonstration of HD DVD playback

This pretty much illustrates that the popup menu shown in above picture seems some sort of OSD of the player, instead of "popup menu" rendered by HDi function. If so, it can play HD DVD title just as current DVD, switch audio and subtitle, do chapter skip and title jump, that's all.

Originally Posted by Rob Zuber

It was very funny seeing HD-DVD supporters get so excited over 20 GB they say isn't necessary! The threads in the HD-DVD section are hilarious.

Originally Posted by jdg345

Perhaps, but Developer Kits != Components. The RSX and Cell were ready at roughly the same time that the Xenos and Xenon Chipsets were.

'Most' TV's cannot accept a 1080p Signal

Therefore, if a game is encoded solely in 1080p, the PS3 will only output in ... yup ... 1080p -- which means 'Most' people will be able to see that content in SD 480p