Target goes Blu-ray hardware exclusively

[Mr Peabody]

Did you all see that Target is going to only carry Blu-ray players and will begin carrying the Sony S300? They will be exclusively Blu-ray with hardware but will sell both HD format discs.

I wonder what is behind any retailer going on record saying they are "exclusive" one way or the other. Is it because the HD-DVD players are so cheap and there's no profit? Do they have to sign some deal to be exclusive in order to carry Blu-ray? I wouldn't think that was legal. I did see though that some agency is looking into the alliances that were struck with Blu-ray and how they came about.

[PeruvianSkies]

At this point neither format is winning or losing. It's a neutral game, no matter how many units of either one is selling, that is all insignificant because both are selling and neither one is trumping the other. Since the hardware right now won't accommodate both and it doesn't seem like they can both flourish in the meantime. Even when the players arrive that can handle both formats flawlessly, it will be interesting to see what happens, but that is still some time away...notice I said 'flawlessly'.

Based on what friends and family of mine are saying it seems that even the most uninterested people out there are at least aware that there is something superior to DVD, yet they know very little about what it can do, or that they need special hardware. Also, it would seem that most people are oblivious that there are two separate formats and that you can't use one with the other...so I guess consumer awareness right now is a tad 'iffy'.

I personally see this format war going for a long long time as both will continue research and development and both will try to outdo each other and I don't see any negotiations either. Which means that Targets decision at this stage is a bit silly.

[Groundbeef]

At this point no neither format is winning or losing.

That is an excellent example of a double negative. Not sure if the grammer is correct though....:devil:

[musicman1999]

This format war is all about software.As soon as Universal studios goes format neutral it will be over.No need to buy a HD-DVD player if all films are available in Bluray.

bill

[pixelthis]

At this point neither format is winning or losing. It's a neutral game, no matter how many units of either one is selling, that is all insignificant because both are selling and neither one is trumping the other. Since the hardware right now won't accommodate both and it doesn't seem like they can both flourish in the meantime. Even when the players arrive that can handle both formats flawlessly, it will be interesting to see what happens, but that is still some time away...notice I said 'flawlessly'.

Based on what friends and family of mine are saying it seems that even the most uninterested people out there are at least aware that there is something superior to DVD, yet they know very little about what it can do, or that they need special hardware. Also, it would seem that most people are oblivious that there are two separate formats and that you can't use one with the other...so I guess consumer awareness right now is a tad 'iffy'.

I personally see this format war going for a long long time as both will continue research and development and both will try to outdo each other and I don't see any negotiations either. Which means that Targets decision at this stage is a bit silly.
Its all over but for digging a six foot hole for HDDVD and mounting the tombstone.
Circuit has a blu ray player for less than 500 bucks, for a few hundred more you have a wider choice of discs.
And with the blockbuster decision...
And this is a player war, both formats use software that is authored in such a way that you can put it on either type disc with little trouble.
And that is a good thing, if there is a prolonged "war" both sides will wake up and find most HD content is being downloaded off of cable and the net.
Its going to take a concentrated effort to sell hddvd in either form factor, and hugh production to get the price down so the "great unwashed" will think its worth it.
A lot dont think the "slight" (to them) improvement is worth the cost, with both sides
arguing that the other isnt worth the price it can only be confusing to the non-tech type
And dont think that tosh doesnt know that they are dead, which is what you get for selling a low-ball format to what will be primarily a HT enthusiast market, movie collectors,
etc:1:

[kexodusc]

I wonder what is behind any retailer going on record saying they are "exclusive" one way or the other. Is it because the HD-DVD players are so cheap and there's no profit? Do they have to sign some deal to be exclusive in order to carry Blu-ray? I wouldn't think that was legal. I did see though that some agency is looking into the alliances that were struck with Blu-ray and how they came about.

There's no legal concerns to signing exclusivity deals, at least not in North America. Just about every college and university on the continent does this in various forms- most sporting complexes/arenas, movie theaters, heck any franchise (think Coke only at McDonald's) have been doing this for years.
There's no restriction of trade because each party willingly agreed to the terms of the contract. When I worked at Honda, I remember a dealership took on Honda over the right to advertise outside their territory. They lost, because territorial privileges were a condition of being awarded a franchise. I don't think the market would support an anti-trust argument at this point in time either, what with 0.0001% of consumers actually owning either format. This is just the free-market working at it's imperfect, inefficent best.

As for why - I think there's less margin on HD-DVD, but that wouldn't matter - Taget's a business of low margins. More likely it's just Target picking the winner in their eyes, with a little incentive from BluRay. If they really believe HD-DVD is doomed, they don't want to be caught with a million HD-DVD orphan units in their inventory.
Of course, does anyone really believe Target will be a major player in the format war?

[Feanor]

Its all over but for digging a six foot hole for HDDVD and mounting the tombstone.
...
And dont think that tosh doesnt know that they are dead, which is what you get for selling a low-ball format to what will be primarily a HT enthusiast market, movie collectors,
etc:1:

I wonder: will the video hi-rez, (presumably Blu-ray), work out like audio hi-rez, (SACD, DVD-A) :confused5: . That is, strictly a niche market? Or will it go mainstream?

A lot of people have pronounced SACD a "failure" because it hasn't gone mainstream. Personally I'm doubtful that Sony/Philips ever really had the objective that it would. Futhermore, from the enthusiasts' point of view, it's perhaps just as well because it ensures that producers who use the format are more likely to aim for a higher than mainstream quality.

[Woochifer]

Did you all see that Target is going to only carry Blu-ray players and will begin carrying the Sony S300? They will be exclusively Blu-ray with hardware but will sell both HD format discs.

I wonder what is behind any retailer going on record saying they are "exclusive" one way or the other. Is it because the HD-DVD players are so cheap and there's no profit? Do they have to sign some deal to be exclusive in order to carry Blu-ray? I wouldn't think that was legal. I did see though that some agency is looking into the alliances that were struck with Blu-ray and how they came about.

Would not surprise me at all if this is nothing more than Sony "renting" display space at Target stores, since plenty of major retailers will already provide prime display space to those manufacturers willing to pony up. If anyone has seen Target's electronics sections, they don't carry a big selection of products, and I doubt that they at this stage they would carry more than one or two HD optical players to begin with. Any "exclusivity" might simply come from the fact that there's not a whole lot of space to begin with, and Sony made the choice of which player to display "easier."

Right now, both sides are fighting more over public perception than actual market growth. Having Target announce that they are "exclusive" to Blu-ray, when in actuality they are doing nothing more than stocking only one HD optical player, is more of a propaganda victory that shapes market perception than an event that will tip the balance of sales in one direction over another. This is no different than the Blockbuster announcement in favor of Blu-ray, which on the surface looks devastating for HD-DVD, but in actuality does not impact 3/4 of Blockbuster's retail locations and has no effect on their online operations, which continue to support both formats.

But, the perception that these announcements create further magnifies the momentum that Blu-ray has already established. A lot of people on this and other boards say that the sales numbers are low, and that it's still early. But, the market structure already inherently favors Blu-ray, and if current market trends continue without some major market event (i.e., one or two of Blu-ray's exclusive studios going neutral, and/or manufacturing partners defecting over to HD-DVD -- both unlikely events at this point), HD-DVD is a goner or at least will be a dead format walking by this time next year. As I've said before, Joe6p will not decide the Blu-ray v. HD-DVD format war, but the mass market will have its say on whether either of these formats can displace the DVD. If anything, the Target and Blockbuster announcements might have more of an effect in alerting the general public that HD optical discs are on the horizon than anything having to do with putting HD-DVD away.

As far as who's looking into these alliances, it's a potential anti-trust investigation by the EU. I believe it's HD-DVD's proponents that are calling for the EU to look into the legality of Blu-ray's studio tie-ins. Problem here is that if Blu-ray's exclusivity arrangements with Fox, Disney, and Sony fall under scrutiny, then Universal's arrangement with HD-DVD is also fair game. I think though that the market trends will have long played out by the time any anti-trust investigation runs its course.


wonder: will the video hi-rez, (presumably Blu-ray), work out like audio hi-rez, (SACD, DVD-A) . That is, strictly a niche market? Or will it go mainstream?

A lot of people have pronounced SACD a "failure" because it hasn't gone mainstream. Personally I'm doubtful that Sony/Philips ever really had the objective that it would. Futhermore, from the enthusiasts' point of view, it's perhaps just as well because it ensures that producers who use the format are more likely to aim for a higher than mainstream quality.

I think there are a couple of crucial differences between the HD-DVD/Blu-ray format war compared to the SACD/DVD-A format war.

First and foremost, the major studios' support for HD-DVD and Blu-ray is light years ahead of the record companies' at best tepid support for DVD-A and SACD. The movie studios have been releasing their major titles concurrently on DVD with Blu-ray and/or HD-DVD (e.g., tomorrow's concurrent release of 300 on all three formats). This contrasts sharply with the record companies, which hardly ever put out DVD-A/SACD releases concurrently with the CD release. Scan the recent box office charts, and most of the top grossing releases have come out or are due out on HD-DVD and/or Blu-ray. Even in DVD-A and SACD's best days, the majority of the top selling CD titles never came out in high res.

Second, I think it's simply easier to demonstrate the virtues of HD optical discs than high res audio. As HDTV finally catches on with the general market, it's easy for any casual passerby to see how much clearer a Blu-ray or HD-DVD image looks on a HDTV than a DVD. Joe6p shopping at Costco or Best Buy can see how clear the Blu-ray and HD-DVD images look.

Those same warehouse-like stores though are less than conducive to demonstrating DVD-A or SACD. To fully appreciate DVD-A and SACD requires a decent demo room, quality components, and a properly setup alignment. You'll rarely find this combo in a mass merchandise store, or in most people's living rooms for that matter. If a relatively low percentage of the households are equipped to hear the difference with high res audio, then it stands to reason that these formats were destined to remain niche formats from the outset.

With HDTV penetration pushing close to 1/3 of U.S. households, that's a much bigger potential audience. And unlike DVD-A and SACD, which require good equipment and/or multiple speakers to hear the benefits, HD-DVD and Blu-ray only require the HDTV to see the difference.

[Mr Peabody]

Although Target isn't what comes to most peoples mind when they think, electronics, they are said to be the 2nd largest retailer.

The Blockbuster decision was significant to me, and maybe others like me. It gave me access to Blu-ray discs. I wasn't about to replace my DVD's, I won't use the internet for renting. and I'm not buying every movie I think I might want to see. To view a Blu-ray movie for $2.99 is significant. Not only can I see new releases in Blu-ray but $2.99 is cheap enough to re-watch something good I have on DVD or have seen before.

Wooch you are usually right on the money with things, but I believe whoever says 1/3 of the U.S. households have HDTV are exaggerating I won't believe it is even close until I start running into people who say they have one. It's difficult to find anyone who even knows that much about HDTV, like what it is or how to get programming.

Good points in the hi-rez audio to video comparison. Even if HD discs don't displace the DVD, I sure hope the studios continue to support one or both. I still see some SACD new titles being announced on Musicdirect but they are usually titles that have already been released on another format previously..

[Feanor]

...

I think there are a couple of crucial differences between the HD-DVD/Blu-ray format war compared to the SACD/DVD-A format war.

First and foremost, the major studios' support for HD-DVD and Blu-ray is light years ahead of the record companies' at best tepid support for DVD-A and SACD. The movie studios have been releasing their major titles concurrently on DVD with Blu-ray and/or HD-DVD (e.g., tomorrow's concurrent release of 300 on all three formats). This contrasts sharply with the record companies, which hardly ever put out DVD-A/SACD releases concurrently with the CD release. Scan the recent box office charts, and most of the top grossing releases have come out or are due out on HD-DVD and/or Blu-ray. Even in DVD-A and SACD's best days, the majority of the top selling CD titles never came out in high res.

Second, I think it's simply easier to demonstrate the virtues of HD optical discs than high res audio. As HDTV finally catches on with the general market, it's easy for any casual passerby to see how much clearer a Blu-ray or HD-DVD image looks on a HDTV than a DVD. Joe6p shopping at Costco or Best Buy can see how clear the Blu-ray and HD-DVD images look.
...

With HDTV penetration pushing close to 1/3 of U.S. households, that's a much bigger potential audience. And unlike DVD-A and SACD, which require good equipment and/or multiple speakers to hear the benefits, HD-DVD and Blu-ray only require the HDTV to see the difference.

Wooch, I sure you're right on this. Still, I think Mr.Peabody is correct to wonder whether 1/3 US households have HDTV -- seems high. I'm not in a US household, of course, but it will likely be years most before I have an HDTV -- actually there is one in our household but it's in my daughter's bedroom and I don't get to watch it. :nonod:

[Mr Peabody]

Feanor! not you, your a hold out? :)

[pixelthis]

There's no legal concerns to signing exclusivity deals, at least not in North America. Just about every college and university on the continent does this in various forms- most sporting complexes/arenas, movie theaters, heck any franchise (think Coke only at McDonald's) have been doing this for years.
There's no restriction of trade because each party willingly agreed to the terms of the contract. When I worked at Honda, I remember a dealership took on Honda over the right to advertise outside their territory. They lost, because territorial privileges were a condition of being awarded a franchise. I don't think the market would support an anti-trust argument at this point in time either, what with 0.0001% of consumers actually owning either format. This is just the free-market working at it's imperfect, inefficent best.

As for why - I think there's less margin on HD-DVD, but that wouldn't matter - Taget's a business of low margins. More likely it's just Target picking the winner in their eyes, with a little incentive from BluRay. If they really believe HD-DVD is doomed, they don't want to be caught with a million HD-DVD orphan units in their inventory.
Of course, does anyone really believe Target will be a major player in the format war?

There is no margin whatsoever, indeed both sides are losing money, trying to buy market share.
As for target, its for people who cant stomach Wall-fart but are too cheap to buy anywhere else, not that they're that cheap.
AND you cant really compare SACD/DVD-AUDIO debacle to the current skrimish.
Music is more portable, most are downloading in a way thats hurting not just there two, but the CD itself.
The only market for these two formats is audiophiles who dont think the turntable is the end-all be-all.
HDDVD and blu-ray are for stationary HT systems, offering a viable (they think)
replacement for the DVD.
The major hurdle is to get a format established at all, not to waste energy on a silly fight
over realitivly minor tech issues.
Because the fact is a lot of DVD'S market is rental, and netflix proves that people just HATE taking movies back to the rental outlet.
I cant remember the last time I rented a DVD, why bother when you can download
HD over the cable?.
If these two warring factions dont get their act together they will BOTH be extinct.
This is'nt a few decades ago where the only way to watch movies was through a
hard copy, now there's the net and video on demand
More and more people are looking at a 500$ player, then their dvr, and saying fooey,
who needs it? Thats why I havent bought one yet.
My cable box has more HD than I can handle and is ten bucks a month.
The dino's went extinct because they could'nt adapt to changing conditions,
If sony and tosh dont wise up they will be father to basically a niche format for
movie collectors:1:

[Mr Peabody]

I have HD through my cable and I hate to watch non-HD programming because once you get used to the better quality the SD is just a drag. With that being said, let me tell you that HD via cable is no comparison to Blu-ray either. My Blu-ray is superior in both video and audio compared to channels like HBO or Cinemax which are the better of the HD channels I receive I'm sure video via cable will vary from network to network and city to city as well. But I don't think HD discs have to worry much about cable for competition..

[Woochifer]

Although Target isn't what comes to most peoples mind when they think, electronics, they are said to be the 2nd largest retailer.

The Blockbuster decision was significant to me, and maybe others like me. It gave me access to Blu-ray discs. I wasn't about to replace my DVD's, I won't use the internet for renting. and I'm not buying every movie I think I might want to see. To view a Blu-ray movie for $2.99 is significant. Not only can I see new releases in Blu-ray but $2.99 is cheap enough to re-watch something good I have on DVD or have seen before.

Wooch you are usually right on the money with things, but I believe whoever says 1/3 of the U.S. households have HDTV are exaggerating I won't believe it is even close until I start running into people who say they have one. It's difficult to find anyone who even knows that much about HDTV, like what it is or how to get programming.

Good points in the hi-rez audio to video comparison. Even if HD discs don't displace the DVD, I sure hope the studios continue to support one or both. I still see some SACD new titles being announced on Musicdirect but they are usually titles that have already been released on another format previously..

Target indeed is the second largest retail chain, and like Wal-Mart, they tend to focus their electronics sections around a very narrow selection of models to choose from. Unlike big box electronics stores like Best Buy and Circuit City, Target doesn't try to carry a manufacturer's entire lineup or a big selection of competing products at a particular price point. They'll cherry pick among the best sellers, stock two or three items at a specific price point, and let the electronics specialists worry about the rest. Target and Wal-Mart don't generate a huge percentage of their sales volume from electronics, but their sales volumes are so gigantic that even that small percentage of their overall sales is still enough to influence the market for electronics.

As for 1/3 of households, that's my educated guess, but I think it's well within reason. In January, I read that the U.S. HDTV penetration had blown past the 25% mark because of strong 4th quarter sales, and plummeting price points. Figure that the typical household buys a TV roughly every three years or so (I used to know the exact figure, but I can't remember it off-hand), and the price points on HDTVs have solidly pushed into mass market territory -- that's a lot of households potentially replacing their TVs or adding additional sets with HDTVs.

But, I've also read in the past that about half of HDTV owners don't watch any actual HD programming. For a long time, this was due to lack of HD programming, but I also think that a lot of people simply buy HDTVs because that's all that they can pick from at all but the entry level price points nowadays. Having a HDTV is no guarantee that the TV will be optimally enjoyed. Just as an example, my coworker wanted to replace a 27" CRT TV, so she got the family a 40" LCD HDTV. She basically wanted the flat panel, yet only uses it for basic cable and DVDs -- no HD programming. My parents also have a 50" plasma HDTV, and they do not use it for HD programming. Here too, they wanted a larger screen to replace an old CRT TV, and preferred a flat panel.

[Mr Peabody]

I bet if you ask your co-worker if she has her DVD player set to Progressive Scan you'd get a blank look too.

There's a couple of big hurdles to over come before DVD gets replaced, one is the confusion or lack of understanding of the whole HD issues and the other is you can still buy a DVD player for $30.00 and most people don't seem to care if the picture is not as good as the $300.00 one.

I wonder if those who don't view HD content on their set don't understand what it is about, or they don't want to pay the extra money for it. Even if your cable/satelite provider gives "free" HD channels such as network, it really isn't free,, you still have to pay extra for the box through cable. I'm not sure if you buy a HD satelite receiver if you can get any channels without an extra fee or not.

Wooch, buy Mom & Pop an HD disc player.

[Feanor]

I bet if you ask your co-worker if she has her DVD player set to Progressive Scan you'd get a blank look too.

There's a couple of big hurdles to over come before DVD gets replaced, one is the confusion or lack of understanding of the whole HD issues and the other is you can still buy a DVD player for $30.00 and most people don't seem to care if the picture is not as good as the $300.00 one.
...

Wooch, buy Mom & Pop an HD disc player.

I'm "holding out" with my old Toshiba and Samsung DVD players. Why not? It's not the Cdn$600 for the Blu-ray, it''s the $2500 for the half-decent, medium-sized LCD HDTV with the HDMI interface and 720p, (never mind 1080p).

But it's not a matter of "holding out"; it's a matter of poverty. My wife would like a new setup: I tell her, "Go out and get a job and it'll be the first thing we buy."

[Groundbeef]

I wonder if those who don't view HD content on their set don't understand what it is about, or they don't want to pay the extra money for it. Even if your cable/satelite provider gives "free" HD channels such as network, it really isn't free,, you still have to pay extra for the box through cable. I'm not sure if you buy a HD satelite receiver if you can get any channels without an extra fee or not.


The only thing "free" about sat tv is that you can use your HD reciever to pull in local HD OTA (over the air) broadcasts. For smaller markets like where I am at, it is the ONLY way to get HD local broadcasts. Insight Cable (local provider) does pipe in local HD channels, but at what compression level I am not sure.

If you have either an HD TV with an HD OTA reciever on board you can bypass both cable or sat, and get your HD fix that way. Granted your selection is rather sparce, but you are not paying for it.

An alternative would be to simply pick up an HD OTA reciever and plug it into your HD TV, and viola, same as above, but slightly more expensive.

[Groundbeef]

As for 1/3 of households, that's my educated guess, but I think it's well within reason. In January, I read that the U.S. HDTV penetration had blown past the 25% mark because of strong 4th quarter sales, and plummeting price points. Figure that the typical household buys a TV roughly every three years or so (I used to know the exact figure, but I can't remember it off-hand), and the price points on HDTVs have solidly pushed into mass market territory -- that's a lot of households potentially replacing their TVs or adding additional sets with HDTVs.

But, I've also read in the past that about half of HDTV owners don't watch any actual HD programming. For a long time, this was due to lack of HD programming, but I also think that a lot of people simply buy HDTVs because that's all that they can pick from at all but the entry level price points nowadays. Having a HDTV is no guarantee that the TV will be optimally enjoyed. Just as an example, my coworker wanted to replace a 27" CRT TV, so she got the family a 40" LCD HDTV. She basically wanted the flat panel, yet only uses it for basic cable and DVDs -- no HD programming. My parents also have a 50" plasma HDTV, and they do not use it for HD programming. Here too, they wanted a larger screen to replace an old CRT TV, and preferred a flat panel.


I'm gonna agree with Wooch on this one. HD TV is rapidly becoming the ONLY choice for consumers when they upgrade/buy a new set. So it isn't hard to fathom that a third of the market place has at least 1 HD TV in their home.

The second part I also agree with. I think we may have read simliar articles about HD awareness versus HD usage. I would be willing to bet that the 50% that don't recieve HD programming belive that the HD set they just bought makes ALL broadcasts HD.

Wooch, you ought to see if your folks can get HD OTA. If their TV is pretty new, it may take a signal without needing a converter box. Just get some rabbit ears, and away you go. It is uncompressed, and looks simply stunning on the plasma. Belive it or not, at least around me PBS has one of the best signals, and programming in HD.

[Mr Peabody]

That's a good point about over the air. When I first got my Sony I picked up some off air with a set of rabbit ears and it is a great picture. The off air digital version A/B'd against the same channel in standard is night and day. The rabbit ears dropped the signal sometimes, so for consistency and convenience I went with the cable card.

[pixelthis]

I have HD through my cable and I hate to watch non-HD programming because once you get used to the better quality the SD is just a drag. With that being said, let me tell you that HD via cable is no comparison to Blu-ray either. My Blu-ray is superior in both video and audio compared to channels like HBO or Cinemax which are the better of the HD channels I receive I'm sure video via cable will vary from network to network and city to city as well. But I don't think HD discs have to worry much about cable for competition..
Spoken like a true purist.
But to a lot theres not that big a difference.
A lot of the prob stems from something called "variable bitrate", while watching entrapment
(one of my favorite dumb movies) on max tonite I saw several shifts in quality.
You have that advantage with a disc, sure they also do this to save space, but its not as impromtu, and not done as often.
And digital SD aint that bad, really, it has less noise and upconverts better.
And penetration of HD is a lot more intensive than you might think, remember, when ntsc gets shut off it will be the only game in town, and all HD sets are sold with atsc tuners.
And you would be surprized at the quality of HD on the cable now, especially with VOD,
and theres a lot thats free.
They dont have to sell the peabodies of the world, they have to sell the great unwashed,
who compare the ease and convience of hitting a button with (to them) slight improvement
over quality.
And while HD content is important theres another factor to consider, having an HD set
automactically boots pic quality up there.
Theres no ghosting, color is better even on standard def, some think SD IS HD,
and considering the way some keep their set thats no surprize

[Mr Peabody]

Pix, you must have the greatest cable company ever, great picture quality and free programming. It is true though, that if some one buys one of the HDTV's with upconverting of SD, they will notice an improvement over what they had.

I didn't think I was a purist, I'm just saying how it is with my set up. One thing I've noticed though is video is dependent on the original source too. I watched Aeon Flux on Blu-ray and it was better than DVD but not by a large margin without viewing side by side, where Fantastic Four on Blu-ray was just, stop in your tracks, stunning. I'm sure these types of differences would come out whatever delivering source you where using.

Besides that, if I was a purist, I'd send you my DLP and buy me something with 1080p:)

[Woochifer]

Wooch, you ought to see if your folks can get HD OTA. If their TV is pretty new, it may take a signal without needing a converter box. Just get some rabbit ears, and away you go. It is uncompressed, and looks simply stunning on the plasma. Belive it or not, at least around me PBS has one of the best signals, and programming in HD.

Already tried that, and it would only pull in the CBS affiliate if someone holds the antenna at JUST the right angle! :18: Unfortunately, they live in a development that bans outdoor aerial antennas, so that's also out of the question.

They seem fine with just having a larger screen to run standard def programs. Count them as part of the Joe6p crowd for whom DVD resolution is "good enough."

[Groundbeef]

Already tried that, and it would only pull in the CBS affiliate if someone holds the antenna at JUST the right angle! :18: Unfortunately, they live in a development that bans outdoor aerial antennas, so that's also out of the question.

They seem fine with just having a larger screen to run standard def programs. Count them as part of the Joe6p crowd for whom DVD resolution is "good enough."

I'll have to look but I'll bet the development bylaw is unenforceable in court. I seem to rember reading in the Chicago Tribune Home section a while back a Condo owner was having some difficulty erecting a DirecTV dish. Seems there is some sort of law that specifically prohibits laws/rules outlawing outside dishes/antennes.

Anyway, I have a "wing" installed just behind my chimney. Its about 3.5' wide, and 1/4 thick. Pulls in FOX, ABC (LOST Yea!) and PBS.

Or look into an attic attenna. If they have a high roof, it may work as well.


PS. Make SURE the antenna is labeled HD READY. They are about $50 more expensive. Cheaper antenna are not able to receive HD signals...:lol:

[Mr Peabody]

I don't know if it had a model number but Radio Shack had a pair of rabbit ears that does HDTV for around $30.00. But it may be the same scenario as Wooch already had. HD stations are either there or not, and sometimes being in a urban area is as bad or worse than being a little out of the city.

[PeruvianSkies]

While thinking back over this past year and the two formats (Blu-ray and HD-DVD) making their debuts and going strong even a year later, it seems to me that it's a good thing that both formats were able to break water and hold their own. Some are already speculating the demise of one format over the other, but at this point that remains to be seen.

Having both formats, and this is just my theory, has caused a bigger ripple than if just ONE format were issued. Because of this 'battle' both formats floored it to the max to get their stuff out there and the exposure of having both formats rather than just one format has made consumes much more aware. Now, I agree that having both also causes some complications and such with people who do not want to be an early adopter to a format that may or may not live a very long life, but at the same time both formats are keeping each other sharp at this point. It's kinda like this...

If you put two race car drivers out on a track together and have them go head to head you get the best out of each driver, but if you just run them one at a time it's harder to know what pace you need to set. Going head to head (as Blu-ray and HD-DVD has done) certainly has kept each format on top of things and they are both making sure that they prevail. Now whether they both will is most likely not going to happen, you can't have two winners in this type of war, but maybe a hybrid that takes the best of both and then we can get full studio support on board.

I'll root for the format that Criterion eventually goes with. Why you ask? Well, they were one of the first companies to really invest in both Laserdisc and DVD and they are holding off on HD-land for a reason...we shall see why in the next years to come.

[pixelthis]

I'll have to look but I'll bet the development bylaw is unenforceable in court. I seem to rember reading in the Chicago Tribune Home section a while back a Condo owner was having some difficulty erecting a DirecTV dish. Seems there is some sort of law that specifically prohibits laws/rules outlawing outside dishes/antennes.

Anyway, I have a "wing" installed just behind my chimney. Its about 3.5' wide, and 1/4 thick. Pulls in FOX, ABC (LOST Yea!) and PBS.

Or look into an attic attenna. If they have a high roof, it may work as well.


PS. Make SURE the antenna is labeled HD READY. They are about $50 more expensive. Cheaper antenna are not able to receive HD signals...:lol:
If you live in the united states there is federal law that prohibits such bylaws,
it was intended for pizza pan sats but applies to every type antenna.
And the HD READY on an antenna just lets em boost the price.
Any ANtenna that is UHF will pick up HD signals fine.
My fav is a radio shack uhf outdoor antenna that is shaped like a V and cost about 39 bucks.
And PERUVIAN I know you love citerion but they just dont see a market yet for such discs.
Trust me, its over for HDDVD, indeed the battle was probably over before it started:1: