[noah katz]

Stop fighting over the formats, just produce players that play both.


Maybe subsidize player mfgr's to help offset the cost increase, which I'd guess at 10-15%.


Or would this just be another fight over including capability in the players, as well as subsidies, since a lot of the format owners produce players.


OTOH, anyone who made a player that handled only one format would be shooting themselves in the foot.

 

[thirdkind]

If we do end up with both HD-DVD and BluRay, I'm sure manufacturers like Denon and Pioneer, who are format agnostic, will release multi-format players just as they've done with DVD-A and SACD.


Have these multi-format players saved DVD-A and SACD? Nope.

 

[MrWigggles]

thirdkind,


I think lack of content has hurt DVD-A and SACD. The people who can afford the players and are willing to pay the premium for the content, typically middle-aged white males, can't find any new content that is compelling. The Who, Led Zeppelin etc aren't exactly putting out new albums. You can try and remaster the old source tapes over and over again and make them worthy of 24bit 96KHz but I the people (for whatever reason) aren't buying it.


I heard a couple more studios have switched support to Blu-ray. If the licensing cost are reasonable and Sony brings Blu-ray to PS3 next summer, the studios will have the instal base and will go Blu-ray full force.


You might not need a dual format player. Blu-ray might just win this thing hands down.


-Mr. Wigggles


Ps. I give no more than 3 minutes before everything I said here is vehemently refuted by someone and we embark on yet another next-gen DVD speculation marathon.

 

[anthonymoody]

Yeah Lionsgate just committed to BR. It's now basically 48% to 48%.


TM

 

[thirdkind]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrWigggles thirdkind, I think lack of content has hurt DVD-A and SACD. The people who can afford the players and are willing to pay the premium for the content, typically middle-aged white males, can't find any new content that is compelling. The Who, Led Zeppelin etc aren't exactly putting out new albums. You can try and remaster the old source tapes over and over again and make them worthy of 24bit 96KHz but I the people (for whatever reason) aren't buying it.

Actually, I think the main problem with DVD-A and SACD is that nobody wants either of them (by "nobody", I mean enthusiasts, whose numbers are so infinitesimally small compared to the rest of the populace as to be meaningless). Most people are happy with CDs and MP3s. I personally love hi-res audio, but, like you said, the content isn't really there, so even I don't care all that much.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrWigggles Blu-ray might just win this thing hands down.

I hope that's the case. The technology is superior and the list of hardware manufacturers supporting the platform is much larger.

 

[darinp2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by thirdkind Actually, I think the main problem with DVD-A and SACD is that nobody wants either of them (by "nobody", I mean enthusiasts, whose numbers are so infinitesimally small compared to the rest of the populace as to be meaningless). Most people are happy with CDs and MP3s. I personally love hi-res audio, but, like you said, the content isn't really there, so even I don't care all that much.

I had heard that DVD-A and SACD weren't successful, but I didn't realize how big their failures were until I decided that I wanted to try one out recently (after getting a DVD player that plays DVD-As) and went into a record/DVD store where I would expect fairly knowledgeable people and the guy behind the counter didn't even know what I was talking about. I then searched around on the internet and it looks like I would have to buy off ebay to get what I wanted. I'm not sure that even 100 times as much interest would make these video formats succeed, but I still think one of them will succeed.


--Darin

 

[Paulidan]

i had expected HD DVD to surprise everyone and seriously undercut (the theoretically superior) Blu ray, based on start up replication costs and library titles and familiarity based on the 'dvd' moniker.

now i'm not so sure.

it really looks like HD DVD was bluffing and if one of the alliance members like Universal or Paramount ever announce that they will produce content for both formats i think thats gonna be it. it may take a while for the others to fully jump ship (with Warner and its MGM catalog holding out the longest- just like with their snappers), but the writing will be on the wall by then.


i just wish people would stop confusing storage space with superiority.

superiority in a a/v experience has much more to do with than just available space.

if the source material is poorly mastered to begin with, or elements are not restored and are in miserable shape (as are a lot of Columbia/Sonys catalog) than how does that translate into a superior product?

i expect that Fox titles will look great on Blu ray because they already produce some spectacular looking/sounding dvds. i have no such similar expectations on Sony or MGM (or Lions Gate for that matter).

 

[darkman6420]

I'm rooting for Blu-ray because of the disc capacity. 100gb is alot. BD-discs will be great for pc users no matter the cost.

 

[AnthonyP]

Noah: I think it is harder said then done. I also think it would be more then 10-15%


MrWigggles: I agree and yes now it is Sony (with MGM), Disney, Fox and Lion's Gate on the BR side and TW, Universal and Paramount on the HD-DVD side. Also don't know what it means but Universal Music, EA games and vivendi are on the BR side

 

[AnthonyP]

Quote:

I'm rooting for Blu-ray because of the disc capacity. 100gb is alot. BD-discs will be great for pc users no matter the cost

even though BR is theoretically able to do 100GB and 200GB, with 4 layers and 8 layers respectively. The specs are only for dual layer and 50GB.

 

[Glimmie]

Quality alone will never win unless the cost is the same as the inferior pruduct. Betamax vs VHS proved that.


Cheap isn't always choosen either. Remember RCA CEDs. This system as a whole was cheaper than tape of the day but didn't make sense. No record capability and the quality was really poor even compared to VHS. Who wanted a stylus contact video LP? It just sounded like trouble even to a layman.


I personally think Blu Ray will succede simply because it has merits for the computer industry. HD-DVD offeres the non video community nothing new. A DVD is still 4.7GB.


But both formats will launch. You can bet on that. And there probvably will be dual format players. But just like Beta and VHS, one will ultimatlly win. The public is not going to accept two different formats in the long run.

 

[rlsmith]

A combo player is not the answer. I really do not want to collect two different formats, running the risk that one will disappear. The risk is very high since the channel does not want to double-stock.


The best answer I can think of is:

-- Sony and Toshiba flip a coin to see which format to use

-- They call it "HD DVD" which is the better name

-- They split the royalties.


The format war amounts to "winner take nothing".

 

[darkman6420]

I heard that Sony and toshiba were having meetings about combining the two formats, but failed when they couldn't come to an agreement because of the disc capacity and some other issues.

 

[Carled]

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkman6420 I heard that Sony and toshiba were having meetings about combining the two formats, but failed when they couldn't come to an agreement because of the disc capacity and some other issues.

Because of that impenetrable 0.5mm gap between them.

 

[darkman6420]

i wonder why they can't just combine them.

 

[AnthonyP]

Quote:

I personally think Blu Ray will succede simply because it has merits for the computer industry. HD-DVD offeres the non video community nothing new. A DVD is still 4.7GB.

HD-DVD R is 15GB and RW is 20GB


no where near BR with the same for both (R and RW) 25GB SL and 50GB DL

 

[AnthonyP]

Quote:

Because of that impenetrable 0.4mm gap between them.

it is .5mm

Quote:

i wonder why they can't just combine them.

they are too different in what matters, the soft things are already almost the same (i.e A/V codecs...) the hard things (the disk) is an either one or the other, so there is not much manoeuvring room. Neither side wants to give up.

 

[drapp1952]

Quote:

Originally Posted by thirdkind Actually, I think the main problem with DVD-A and SACD is that nobody wants either of them (by "nobody", I mean enthusiasts, whose numbers are so infinitesimally small compared to the rest of the populace as to be meaningless). Most people are happy with CDs and MP3s. I personally love hi-res audio, but, like you said, the content isn't really there, so even I don't care all that much.

The only thing that makes me think HD-DVD or Blu-ray might be different from the failed DVD-A or SACD formats is all those big screen sets that greet me when I enter Costco. Joe six-pack may want one of those big screens for football games but if he develops a taste--with the assistance of effective marketing-- for HD and wants it in his action flick there may be hope for the format. The hardware and software can't be priced too fancy if this is going to work, though and Sony looks like it's aware of this with the SXRD RPs priced to move relatively quickly--let's hope Blu-ray players and software will follow suit.


Dan

 

[darinp2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by drapp1952 The only thing that makes me think HD-DVD or Blu-ray might be different from the failed DVD-A or SACD formats is all those big screen sets that greet me when I enter Costco.

Yep. Audio cannot be effectively marketed to masses in a place like that because there is always sound around and you would have to get the people to do something special (like put on headphones or go in a special room). Video is much easier in that regard.


--Darin

 

[Carled]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AnthonyP it is .5mm

Yup. My bad.