Here they come! HD-DVD deals.

[PDK]

I just saw my first deal on HDDVD. Crutchfield has the newly announced Toshiba HD DVD Player with HDMI for ordering at $499.99 - $50 off Code: PA440 = $449.99 shipped free.

No, I haven't ordered one. I'd be curious to see what the HDDVDs are priced at.

[Geoffcin]

I just saw my first deal on HDDVD. Crutchfield has the newly announced Toshiba HD DVD Player with HDMI for ordering at $499.99 - $50 off Code: PA440 = $449.99 shipped free.

No, I haven't ordered one. I'd be curious to see what the HDDVDs are priced at.

HD-DVD disks require NO new tooling up of the DVD factorys, which can be a billion dollar proposition. BlueRay production has to be re-tooled from the ground up, so they are going to want to amortize the cost of these factories into the price of a BlueRay disk.

I can see that HD-DVD is looking like MUCH more cost effective from the get-go.

[cam]

HD-DVD disks require NO new tooling up of the DVD factorys, which can be a billion dollar proposition. BlueRay production has to be re-tooled from the ground up, so they are going to want to amortize the cost of these factories into the price of a BlueRay disk.

I can see that HD-DVD is looking like MUCH more cost effective from the get-go.
Your last comment is why I think HD-DVD will become KING. Not because it is superior, because it is not (having seen the specs), but because financially, if people have to adapt to a new format, they will choose the less expensive. Most people are very, very satisfied with the way that 480P looks.

Lots of people are satisfied with the way regular cd's sound and downloaded music, that's why the DVD-A and SACD is going the way of the laser disc.

Any upgrade from here (DVD), better be really good and affordable or people (the market) will say screw-it, my 480P will be just fine.

I wish the better format to win (blue-ray), but in a price consious world that we live in, I'm predicting that consumers will be knocking each other over to get their hands on a HD-DVD player.

[EdwardGein]

Well said Totally agree

[drseid]

Your last comment is why I think HD-DVD will become KING. Not because it is superior, because it is not (having seen the specs), but because financially, if people have to adapt to a new format, they will choose the less expensive. Most people are very, very satisfied with the way that 480P looks.

I wish the better format to win (blue-ray), but in a price consious world that we live in, I'm predicting that consumers will be knocking each other over to get their hands on a HD-DVD player.

I wouldn't count Blu-Ray out just yet... Remember it will be included in the PS3 this Spring, and priced $500 or less. That is an immediate market penetration to millions of holmes. Heck, I am buying one and I don't even play console games. :-)

---Dave

[swgiust]

I have heard many people say how good 480p is. COME ON!! Do you have a HDTV?
Lord of the Rings was on TNT the other day (in HD, compresed I'm sure). I got sick of
watching the comercials and threw in the disc. Major difference. In HD the colors were
richer and deaper, the detail was fantastic. 480P was ok, but no where near as good
as HD.

[noddin0ff]

I have heard many people say how good 480p is. COME ON!! Do you have a HDTV?
Lord of the Rings was on TNT the other day (in HD, compresed I'm sure). I got sick of
watching the comercials and threw in the disc. Major difference. In HD the colors were
richer and deaper, the detail was fantastic. 480P was ok, but no where near as good
as HD.
Excuse my ignorance, but why would colors be deeper and richer? I haven't read anything that states that the color range of HDTV spec is different from previous modes. I suppose more resolution, and the sharpness that comes with it could give the impression of richer color...or perhaps its just the signal path. But if you're comparing DVD to cable HD I don't see why there should be a color difference unless your DVD player is not set up/calibrated for color.

[edtyct]

The color space for HD is different from that for standard NTSC. Color depth will also generally be better because of higher processing modes, meaning less granularity and contouring and more richness.

[noddin0ff]

The color space for HD is different from that for standard NTSC.

Thanks! Didn't know that. If you'll humor me...

Is the change in the colorspace related to appearance of new media like plasma? Or is it to maintain more consistency with the color space for digital cameras. Isn't it all still RGB? Was the color space for NTSC not large enough to use all of RGB?

[edtyct]

Sure, it's related, even if only trivially. Without display technology capable of showing HD's wider color gamut, HD would only be a rumor. Like you say, HD is capable of more subtlety on the one hand and more color depth on the other than the old system. Everything flows from that. When the two color spaces of SD and HD get confused, as sometimes occurs when DVD players upconvert digitally to HD resolution, the discrepancy is evident on test screens, and to certain eyes. I could barely tell on upconverted images from a Sony DVPNS975V in regular viewing that the wrong color space was in use, even though green was depressed by about 25%. I would think that awareness of the differences would depend on the source material, the color bias and processing ability of the display, and on how experienced the viewer happens to be.

[noddin0ff]

I was googling and saw a bit on Gamut from wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamut) which more or less placed CRT high on the gamut range but mentioned that it was underutilized by broadcast SD TV, but that HDTV is better on CRT (I infer because of a bigger specified color range). But it then says "HDTV is far better, but still somewhat less than, for example, computer displays using the same display technology." meaning I suppose that the gamut for HDTV is still less than what the media is capable of delivering. A computer application like photoshop could use a larger gamut than HDTV and give you better color on the same monitor than the HDTV gamut. Is that about right?

The way they are ranked on the wiki page, I would infer that both plasma and projection type TVs have a gamut larger than the HDTV spec?

I'm being academically wonkish, I know.

[edtyct]

CRT phosphors generally have a wider color area than, say, LCDs, which in the scheme of things are pretty poor. Frankly, I don't know where plasmas rank; I would certainly think that they outclass LCDs by a good amount. But limitations in color may be due more to the source material, like TV broadcasting, than in the inherent limitations of the display technologies. I would think that Photoshop's gamut would be far wider than anything video were capable of exploiting. HDTV still comprises a mere subset of possible colors, and digital photography and display certainly don't trump the potential of their analog counterparts at this point. They're just more convenient and flexible, but the sky's the limit for the future. By the way, the grey scale on plasmas, as well as on CRTs, is produced by an analog process.

[noddin0ff]

Thanks again! Wonkishness satisfied... for now.

[BadAssJazz]

I just saw my first deal on HDDVD. Crutchfield has the newly announced Toshiba HD DVD Player with HDMI for ordering at $499.99 - $50 off Code: PA440 = $449.99 shipped free.

No, I haven't ordered one. I'd be curious to see what the HDDVDs are priced at.

The components are much cheaper than I thought, but I wonder how much will the actual media cost?

It's always interesting to watch the industry parade out "the next big thing" before the masses have truly had an opportunity to absorb the last "big thing." At some point new technology runs the risk of falling flat before the consumer who is not willing to pay $0.01 more for an already incredible viewing experience. I know HD DVD is considered to be the next leap, but good luck convincing non-videophiles that they are wrong for skipping, instead of long jumping.

[swgiust]

#1 players must be universal. the pioneer is. this takes the format out of the equation.
regular dvd, ok, HD dvd, ok, Blue ray, ok.

#2 must be recordable. i have seen it written that new formats only take off once
they are recordable. sony and jvc both make hd camcorders right now. they are
priced where regular camcorders were about 15 years ago.

[Eric Z]

this is in response to the comment about how 480p sucks. you're right, HD is better, but the general public doesn't really care about richer, deeper colors. they care about convenience and cost- they're getting both of that was SD DVDs. i'm all for new technology, but i like to first see the companies/manufacturers fight it out and cut prices.

[BadAssJazz]

this is in response to the comment about how 480p sucks. you're right, HD is better, but the general public doesn't really care about richer, deeper colors. they care about convenience and cost- they're getting both of that was SD DVDs. i'm all for new technology, but i like to first see the companies/manufacturers fight it out and cut prices.

You summarize my viewpoint superbly.

Yes, HD is better, but I opted to purchase a 42" Panasonic plasma EDTV (my first "big screen") and I'm going with the old "run of the mill" progressive scan DVD player for now. HD just isn't that much more compelling to me. Paying another $1K - $2K for the hdtv and another $350-400 for hd dvd player -- to say nothing of upgrading the dvd's themselves -- is not something that I plan to take up any time soon.

[Eric Z]

I know what you mean, BAJ!

I think I'm acting like the general public when it comes to HDTV- I'm not ready to get onboard yet. Maybe in a year or two, but I'm not too rushed. I know my thoughts may change if I watch playoff football in HD, but I'll have to wait and see. There are just too many unknowns at this point. I'm waiting for prices to drop some more on HDTVs, HD-DVD/Bluray to get into the market and solidify themselves, cable/satellite to get their heads out of their asses and have some consistent programming (I know there are tons of programming available, but I'm just waiting for things to settle a bit- I was all channels to be in HD- not sure how realistic that is, but I can wait- I'm the customer, right?), and Mars and Venus must line up!

I wonder what's next after HDTV- super HDTV? and then super-duper HD? haha!

[GMichael]

Thanks guys. I learn so much around here.

My take: As people want bigger and bigger screens, HD will be needed to give them the same quality that they were used to seeing with 480P. Enter front projectors. With a 120+" screen HD will come in handy.

Next up: hallograms.........

[BadAssJazz]

I wonder what's next after HDTV- super HDTV? and then super-duper HD? haha!

I think after HDTV someone designs Direct-to-Cranium TV. Imagine the advertisements:

"DCTV. You don't just hear voices in your head." :D

[HT BUFF]

Very strange looking DVD player, it looks very "old fashion" to me, I was expecting a much sleeker style, looks BIG like the old 1st generation VCR'S.r

[Eric Z]

I agree with HT BUFF regarding the look of one of the first HD-DVD players- talk about bulky!