AVS Forum banner
1 - 20 of 60 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Let's assume that there will soon be dual-format players out there and that in a couple years almost every player sold is capable of playing either format. Under that scenario, does one of the formats actually become the preferred format?


I can't imagine studios will offer content in both formats if all the players handle either format. Seems to me that if I am a publisher and it doesn't matter which format I produce (since my customers can play either), I would probably produce Blu-ray discs. There are two reasons for this: 1) more space...yeah, I think that will matter for a lot of titles, and 2) the millions of PS3's out there that will only play Blu-ray. If the vast majority of the stand-alone players end up playing either format, and there are millions (tens of millions over the next 4 years probably) of PS3's out there that only play Blu-ray, why wouldn't I just put all my content on Blu-ray so I could capture both audiences?


Dual format players are not the saving grace for HD-DVD, it would seem to me that they are the nail in the coffin. About the only thing the dual-format players do is allow people with existing HD-DVD collections to migrate over to blu-ray painlessly. They also serve to get consumers who are waiting to see which format wins off the side lines, so they don't feel like they have to pick a side in a battle they really don't care about.


Finally, if you are sitting there with your dual-format player a couple years from now and you have a handful of HD-DVD discs and a handful of blu-ray discs, and a new title comes out that you want that is in both formats, as a consumer, which format do you buy? (kind of a hypothetical question really, since once the dual-format players are commonplace, I don't expect publishers to produce content in both formats -- like I said, they will likely go blu-ray so they can get the PS3 audiene as well.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
481 Posts
Even in 4 years and even with a combo player I would buy the HD DVDs. And not only because the red cases look so much better.


About the PS3, well, the people who own a PS3 do not seem to be too exited about watching blurays. The attachment rates for bluray is abysmal. So the effect of the millions and millions PS3 is countered and completely negated by just a few hundred thousands HD DVD standalone players.


So what will happen in the next 4 years? We will have cheap HD DVD standalone players and expensive bluray and combo standalone players. The people will buy either a HD DVD standalone player or a combo player. You know, price does matter to customers. So HD DVD will dominate the market. Besides: it is cheaper to produce HD DVDs and low costs is a pretty big thing in business! Enterprises love low costs, so they love HD DVD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,716 Posts
I think that while HD DVD will likely continue to survive, Blu-ray will always remain the preferred format just as it is now and for the very reason it is now - more studio and hardware support.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
Not to mention the hardcoat on BD that protects your investment much better than what you get on HD-DVD. My HD-DVD player is quickly becoming a door stop. My PS3 plays every disc perfectly, now with judder free 24fps, and other Netflicks customers can toss the discs around all they want. With BD, there is never a scratch on them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,448 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caurus /forum/post/0


Even in 4 years and even with a combo player I would buy the HD DVDs. And not only because the red cases look so much better.


About the PS3, well, the people who own a PS3 do not seem to be too exited about watching blurays. The attachment rates for bluray is abysmal. So the effect of the millions and millions PS3 is countered and completely negated by just a few hundred thousands HD DVD standalone players.


So what will happen in the next 4 years? We will have cheap HD DVD standalone players and expensive bluray and combo standalone players. The people will buy either a HD DVD standalone player or a combo player. You know, price does matter to customers. So HD DVD will dominate the market. Besides: it is cheaper to produce HD DVDs and low costs is a pretty big thing in business! Enterprises love low costs, so they love HD DVD.

It might be slightly cheaper now to produce but that can and probably will change as they produce more and more. But the BD discs will always have more space and if your gonna pick one to produce on why would you limit yourself?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
234 Posts
The way I see it, HD DVD discs will always be cheaper because the process is simpler, and uses existing production lines. If huge numbers of BR production lines are built, DVD lines will eventually become obsolete. Just this process of changing over will be a huge expense. If I could deliver a movie in either format, I'd make an HD DVD. It will always be cheaper to make, and for the forseeable future, more readily accessable to smaller studios. The extra capacity of BR means extra money spent for something that's not needed - at least not for high quality HD movie distribution.


In a world of dual format players, only the die-hards will make BR discs.


Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
251 Posts
I don't think it is out of the question for hd-dvd to start adding a protected coating later in life for scratches. they should play just fine, i mean you can get scratch resistant cd-r's that burn and play in every player out there. Just when the price gets right they should do it.


I have thought about this too, since combo players are out there now no one format will win so they should just produce on both of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
481 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by theforce8686 /forum/post/0


It might be slightly cheaper now to produce but that can and probably will change as they produce more and more. But the BD discs will always have more space and if your gonna pick one to produce on why would you limit yourself?


When I want to carry 10 liters of water from A to B, and I have the choice to use either a bucket that can hold 15 liters or a bucket that can hold 20 liters, which one should I use? I would the 15 liters bucket. The bucket with 20 liters capacity would be just a waste of space.


Same with the HD discs. The extra space is unnecassary. Why is it unnessasary? Because of the deminishing returns of the extra space! Do you really think, that PotC would look better if it would be on a 100 GB bluray disk or on a 3,900 GB HVD with a 1 GB/s transferrate? Well then dream on.


And concerning the hardcoat. HD DVD does not need this hardcoat. I have a terrible scratched HD DVD and it plays flawless. Why should someone put a hardcoating on a HD DVD? If there would be any need for this, this would mean there would be a market for it and profits to make. Whereever profits are to be made, someone will come and get the profits. But I do not see anybody producing hardcoated HD DVDs. And it would be rather weird to see someone who tries to sell them "Look, my great hardcoated HD DVD, do you want to buy them" - "What difference do they make regarding the playback?" - "Err, well... actually no difference at all for the playback - but you can rub steelwool across them and they stay shiny....". Hardcoating for HD DVD makes no sense. It is unnecassary - it would be more expensive and ulimtatly even a risky business. Who knows if these hardcoated disks, like the bluray discs, will play at all in 5 years. There is no experience about the aging of the hardcoated discs. So far there are first hints that the discs are pretty allergic to temperature changes: they crack and become unreadable. So lets see how these discs look after a couple summers and winterns... especially because Bluray uses only have a rather cheap coating instead of the high quality TDK Durabis coating.


So if you would give me the choice to buy a HD DVD either with or without hardcoating, I would ALWAYS take the HD DVD without hardcoating! Because there I can be sure that I can play this HD DVD even in 5 years from today - just like my DVDs.


Now let me come back to the bucket of water to close the circle. The small bucket would be the better choice because it would be the more elegant solution to fulfill the task. And HD DVD is simply the more elegant format. And I like that. Bluray is more or less a transitional solution. The bluray developers were still thinking in terms of DVD with MPEG2 and stuff like that when they were defining bluray and were simply blowing up the DVD specs. Kind of a brute force solution to get HD on the discs. HD DVD on the other hand is the real next generation. They focused on producing a real next generation medium, with a lot of innovations (internet link, VC1, DTHD, IME...) and they were always keeping the whole picture in mind instead of just blowing up a few isolated specs that have from a certain point on no influence on the outcome - the big picture.


Or like Steve May, editor of Home Cinema Choice, wrote a couple month ago:


The HD DVD format wins out because it is simply the genuine article. Blu-Ray hardware and software is trailing behind HD DVD, which offers genuine user benefits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caurus /forum/post/0


When I want to carry 10 liters of water from A to B, and I have the choice to use either a bucket that can hold 15 liters or a bucket that can hold 20 liters, which one should I use? I would the 15 liters bucket. The bucket with 20 liters capacity would be just a waste of space.


Same with the HD discs. The extra space is unnecassary. Why is it unnessasary? Because of the deminishing returns of the extra space! Do you really think, that PotC would look better if it would be on a 100 GB bluray disk or on a 3,900 GB HVD with a 1 GB/s transferrate? Well then dream on.


And concerning the hardcoat. HD DVD does not need this hardcoat. I have a terrible scratched HD DVD and it plays flawless. Why should someone put a hardcoating on a HD DVD? If there would be any need for this, this would mean there would be a market for it and profits to make. Whereever profits are to be made, someone will come and get the profits. But I do not see anybody producing hardcoated HD DVDs. And it would be rather weird to see someone who tries to sell them "Look, my great hardcoated HD DVD, do you want to buy them" - "What difference do they make regarding the playback?" - "Err, well... actually no difference at all for the playback - but you can rub steelwool across them and they stay shiny....". Hardcoating for HD DVD makes no sense. It is unnecassary - it would be more expensive and ulimtatly even a risky business. Who knows if these hardcoated disks, like the bluray discs, will play at all in 5 years. There is no experience about the aging of the hardcoated discs. So far there are first hints that the discs are pretty allergic to temperature changes: they crack and become unreadable. So lets see how these discs look after a couple summers and winterns... especially because Bluray uses only have a rather cheap coating instead of the high quality TDK Durabis coating.


So if you would give me the choice to buy a HD DVD either with or without hardcoating, I would ALWAYS take the HD DVD without hardcoating! Because there I can be sure that I can play this HD DVD even in 5 years from today - just like my DVDs.


Now let me come back to the bucket of water to close the circle. The small bucket would be the better choice because it would be the more elegant solution to fulfill the task. And HD DVD is simply the more elegant format. And I like that. Bluray is more or less a transitional solution. The bluray developers were still thinking in terms of DVD with MPEG2 and stuff like that when they were defining bluray and were simply blowing up the DVD specs. Kind of a brute force solution to get HD on the discs. HD DVD on the other hand is the real next generation. They focused on producing a real next generation medium, with a lot of innovations (internet link, VC1, DTHD, IME...) and they were always keeping the whole picture in mind instead of just blowing up a few isolated specs that have from a certain point on no influence on the outcome - the big picture.


Or like Steve May, editor of Home Cinema Choice, wrote a couple month ago:


The HD DVD format wins out because it is simply the genuine article. Blu-Ray hardware and software is trailing behind HD DVD, which offers genuine user benefits.

Uhhh, studios can always use BD-25 discs, they can encode the movies with the VC-1 codec, and Dolby TrueHD, by the holiday seasion the IME functionality should be in all new players, and ummm, blu-ray player prices are dropping, they're not going to be $600 forever.


And if it's a choice between a hard coating that likely has been tested, and returning the combo discs because they have known issues...


You are right that price matters - matters so much that the regular consumer is not going to put up with what we do. $250 for a possibly obsolete player, with a limited selection of movies? I don't think so. Unless the prices drop to an unrealistically low price soon, most will wait out the format war.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,188 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by BagMan /forum/post/0


Dual format players are not the saving grace for HD-DVD, it would seem to me that they are the nail in the coffin.

I have said something similar multiple times in the past, but it applies to both formats. Single format players are their best defense (or offense). That includes the add-ons for the XBOX360 and the PS3. If 100% of the players were dual format it would be one thing, but if 80% of owners are dual format and 20% are single format (after using some fair reduction ratio for the number of people that would use the PS3 as a movie player for instance), then the side that covered 100% of the customer base would have a big advantage over the one that covered only 80%. Disc cost of course matters, but can easily get trumped by extra sales.


--Darin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,538 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyg /forum/post/0


I think that while HD DVD will likely continue to survive, Blu-ray will always remain the preferred format just as it is now and for the very reason it is now - more studio and hardware support.

The PS3 is solely responsible for keeping Blu-ray afloat now. Obviously the PS3 sales are dropping fast, so the less expensive HD DVD players are going to make HD DVD the "preferred format" for the masses. I have no doubt that almost all of the BD studios will go neutral when they realize that stand-alone Blu-ray players aren't selling well enough to support the format. I'm still expecting a huge backlash from the people that got talked into buying a current stand-alone Blu-ray player when they find out that they are not fully functional---not the informed people on this forum, but the majority of owners that will feel that they got sold a bill of goods. If I had paid $1000 for a Blu-ray player and just found out that the standards won't be final until later this year, I would be looking into trying to get some of my money back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
561 Posts
You would be even madder if you spent $1000 on a blu ray player last year, and had to spend another $600 this year to get the fully interactive content to work.


And then possibly have both players obsolete next year? No thank you. I'll spend $250 to get all of the functionality and 5 movies to boot.


As for dual format players, some consider them to be the brass ring. Those are people who do not consider the price. Those people are a tiny minority. While I consider it to be a technological advantage, I can't justify the price.


Give us a $250 dual format player with full interactivity and the war will be over, peacetime.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
BD is the only camp providing 24fps playback right now. My PS3, that I paid $350 for in January (thanks to the $150 credit card rebate at the time), not only plays without hanging up (unlike my HD-A1), but it is infinitely upgradeable as the BD format evolves, and Sony just proved they are serious about it with their latest FW. The same thing can't be said for my HD-DVD player, that hasn't had a firmware fix in months....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,850 Posts
Actually - if I was a publisher and everyone had dual-format drives, I'd produce only HD DVDs - since they are cheaper.


Particularly as the tools to produce HD DVDs seem to work, while the Bluray tools still seem to be a work in progress.


And, if looking at it as a consumer with a dual-format drive, I would choose to buy HD DVDs, since they will probably have VC1 encoding, versus some sort of mpeg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,715 Posts
This thred quickly turned into a BD vs HD.

And will be closed soon


So ill try to say on topic..

Theirs already a duel format player by LG.

But if they start making duel format players all the time.

I'd guess movies will be put on the format that's needed. Based on movie. Extras. PCM, dolby true HD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
297 Posts
PREMISE: If dual-format players are widespread, studios no longer need to worry about installed userbase, and can release on whatever format they want. At this point, the format with the most studio support is blu-ray. Therefore, the dual-format players are better news for blu-ray than for HD-DVD


Now, if HD-DVD gets more studio support, they could turn that analysis to their favor.


(my 1/50th of $1)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,249 Posts
If dual format players become the norm studios will go with whatever is cheapest and easiest to produce, especially smaller labels that are sitting it out. My belief is that will remain HD DVD because Blu-ray disks won't hit a level of production that makes them a cheaper option before low-end hybrid players start selling.


Warner has shown a HD DVD lean, Paramount would follow, Universal would stay put, and labels like Criterion, Image, and Anchor Bay would go HD DVD for cost and because their product has more in common with that of those already producing HD DVD.


Currently HD DVD gives more bang-for-the-buck for studios and consumers, that's a plus in an evened playing field.


It would also be pretty unusual for studios to line the pockets of a competitor (Sony) if they have a choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
321 Posts
If the majority of players were dual format, then as a studio I would produce in both formats but taking into account the sales rate per units and what type movie was to be release...to me, the exclusive movie lovers are on HD DVD side while gamers with some movie interests are on the PS3 as shown in the sales rate per unit numbers...as a studio I would try to release more on the side that has the larger stand alone player, not the game machine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
The PS3's success of failure will be based on how well it does in the gaming market and little else. Personally, I think once they come out with a few good games, the next holiday season will be kind to the PS3.


That doesn't mean PS3 owners who bought their systems to play games won't eventually start buying movies as well.


If Sony only sells 10 million PS3's over the next 5 years, it will be considered a failure I think -- as far as gaming consoles go. But no matter how you slice it, that still means 10 million blu-ray only players on the market. Sure the tie-ratio is low, but that is only because the average PS3 consumer is not a videophile. When hi-definition movies become common place, I think you will start to see J6P buying movie-content for their PS3.


I think that will make the large PS3/blu-ray-only segment of the market compelling enough. The thing about the 100k HD-DVD-only units is that they are owned by people who by nature are early adapters and videophiles. That audience will buy whatever player they need to in order to play the content they want. This is evidenced by so many people on this forum already claiming to own players for both formats. The PS3 consumer on the other hand is not going to go out and buy an HD-DVD player when they already have a blu-ray player...they will simply limit their high-def video viewing to titles available on blu-ray and buy other movies on DVD.


Production cost differences between the two formats is negligable and will be on par shortly anyways...the manufacturing capacity gap was narrow to begin with and is closing rapidly.


But staying on topic, I think the main purpose of the dual-format concept is to ease consumer concern about their investment becoming obsolete. Dual format players primary effect will be to speed up the introduction of high-definition video formats into the wider consumer market.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,538 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by GodsLabRat /forum/post/0


PREMISE: If dual-format players are widespread, studios no longer need to worry about installed userbase, and can release on whatever format they want. At this point, the format with the most studio support is blu-ray. Therefore, the dual-format players are better news for blu-ray than for HD-DVD


Now, if HD-DVD gets more studio support, they could turn that analysis to their favor.


(my 1/50th of $1)

I see dual format players as helping HD DVD more. The BDA was hoping that Samsung and LG would stay true to Blu-ray to help with a quicker death to HD DVD. That ship has sailed. The other Blu-ray manufacturers are realizing that they can't sell their players because they are competing with the PS3 as well as HD DVD. I won't be surprised to see a dual format player from either Panasonic or Pioneer. If any more Blu-ray manufacturers switch to dual format players, it certainly won't be good news for Blu-ray.
 
1 - 20 of 60 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top