Originally Posted by Laserfan
And I have the opposite view--that "HD-DVD" is exactly right; everyone nowadays knows what a DVD is, and most people are finally catching-on as to what "HD" means insofar as TV sets and PQ are concerned, so "HD-DVD" is the natural, understandable extension.
You may be right.
As I see it, It is not the just the name. The reason for the initial success of some of the past technology introductions are the demonstrable BENEFITS from the prior format. Example:8-Track
- Benefit: Oh my, I can play my own selection of music and have 4 instant track sides and can also play it in my car ;-)Cassette
- Benefit: Smaller than 8-T, cuter, and much easier to record your own tunes. Walman/VHS/Beta
- Benefit: Oh my god!, I can record "The flying Nun" and "Mod Squad"! (who said Porn?)CD -
Benefit: Instant track acces, ability to jump to any track, Domonstrably better sound.DVD
- Benefit: Abiility to get VIDEO from a "CD", would play on 95% of the TV, and the new player will still play all of my existing library of CDs
(This last one almost didn't happen, but Philips & Sony insisted that ALL DVD players MUST be able to play CDs. They saw this as key for success (the royalties on CDs didn't hurt Philips/Sony, of course)HD-DVD & Blu-Ray
- Benefit: Higher Video and Sound, but you need to play it on HD TVs, that a large % of the population do not yet have. Backwards compatible with DVD (some brands fought against this - For patent/royalty reasons).Most
consumers do not care if the new HD formats can hold 30 or 60 Gigs) They just want to be able to play any movie from a single
disc, without having to flip it over (remember LD?)
Many consumers do not YET see the benefits that HD brings to them over what they already have (DVD). Perhaps because they have an SD TV, or perhaps they are not willing to pay a 30% to 50% higher price
for an HD movie.
Just my 2 cents