Spidey BluRay sales disapointing.

[Groundbeef]

Sony said that Spiderman 3 sold 130K units in the first 6 days. Apparently this doesn't take into acount any of the 40GB bundled units of the PS3 that included a copy of the web crusader.

This is less than the 190K of Transformers, although there is some dispute to those actual sales #'s as well.

Article here:

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6498744.html

[PeruvianSkies]

Sony said that Spiderman 3 sold 130K units in the first 6 days. Apparently this doesn't take into acount any of the 40GB bundled units of the PS3 that included a copy of the web crusader.

This is less than the 190K of Transformers, although there is some dispute to those actual sales #'s as well.

Article here:

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6498744.html

Being as just how bizarre, wacky, and disappointing this third entry was, it's not that surprising.

[bobsticks]

Perhaps the relatively sluggish sales could be thought of not as a resultant of any format issues but a sign that Topher Grace shouldn't ever be cast as anything more manly than his Mr. 70's Cotton Candy Ass role.

[PeruvianSkies]

Perhaps the relatively sluggish sales could be thought of not as a resultant of any format issues but a sign that Topher Grace shouldn't ever be cast as anything more manly than his Mr. 70's Cotton Candy Ass role.

That was just one of the several problems with the film, compliment that with the awkward moments where we see Toby dancing, if he would have done a Saturday Night Fever impression one more time I was about to vomit on the screen.

[bobsticks]

Absolutely, blech...

[PeruvianSkies]

Absolutely, blech...

That series went downhill even further than X-MEN.

[Mr Peabody]

According to Blu-ray.com 130,000 in the first 6 days is still 15,000 more than Transformers in the same time frame. 400,000 was shipped to retailers. Sony don't seem to think it's disappointing.

It looks like this is the same article, I wonder where they got the 15k less figure. It really puts things in perspective when you see how many standard DVD's were sold of this movie.

[PeruvianSkies]

According to Blu-ray.com 130,000 in the first 6 days is still 15,000 more than Transformers in the same time frame. 400,000 was shipped to retailers. Sony don't seem to think it's disappointing.

It looks like this is the same article, I wonder where they got the 15k less figure. It really puts things in perspective when you see how many standard DVD's were sold of this movie.

Here is something else to consider....

A movie like SPIDER-MAN 3 has a large demographic of fans, both child and adult. My sense is that people buying the movie now would mainly be adults who have money and can afford to buy the film, but I know that this will be on most kids Christmas list this year, therefore it's more likely that sales on this title in DVD format will peak around that time of year, whereas the adults buying it now are more likely to be going with the Blu-ray, but even so there aren't that many people out there who are solely buying one way or another just yet. If you have a Blu-ray player and a title comes out that you want to buy, you are certainly likely to get it on Blu-ray, especially a title that is more action-oriented. However, if a title is only coming out on DVD and not an HD format just yet, you probably will get it on DVD even if you have HD equipment if you really want the movie.

[Mr Peabody]

I've been there already. I'll have to buy a SD of Transformers and probably will buy movies for the kids on SD. I will probably do more renting than buying until I see what happens with the format. With computer drives, Hitachi's BR camcorder and such, I think BR will be here to stay even as a niche but there are so many other formats that died. I just don't want to get stuck with a bunch of movies I won't be able to watch down the road. If I do buy any movies for, my, collection it will be BR though.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

According to Blu-ray.com 130,000 in the first 6 days is still 15,000 more than Transformers in the same time frame. 400,000 was shipped to retailers. Sony don't seem to think it's disappointing.

They are not disappointed at all. The transformer 115k is an estimate, not an exact figure. Videoscan only reported 73k in a week, which is far short than the 100k Paramount reported in a single day.

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/11598.cfm

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/which-studio-in-hollywood-is-telling-a-big-ass-fat-stupid-lie/

Spiderman has definately sold 130k in one week, and that has been confirmed by videoscan/NDP, sony is pleased by this saying these words in that article

Sony executives said Spider-Man 3 Blu-ray is doing a bang-up job at retail.



It looks like this is the same article, I wonder where they got the 15k less figure. It really puts things in perspective when you see how many standard DVD's were sold of this movie.

They are getting the 15k less from the fact that spidey sold 130k, and transformers sold an estimate(not confirmed) 115k.

Keep in mind, DVD 18 months after it hit the streets was not selling 130k on any title it released. It did not see those kinds of numbers until 2-3 years after it was released.

I do not understand how the OP got the title of this thread off of that article, unless he is talking about DVD sales, not bluray.

[nightflier]

Keep in mind, DVD 18 months after it hit the streets was not selling 130k on any title it released. It did not see those kinds of numbers until 2-3 years after it was released.

This kind of comparison is total hogwash. Not only is the Internet (which wasn't at all what it is today, then) a huge source of sales, but it is also a huge source of info about movies from reviews to promotional materials, and yes, even to sales figures. To compare numbers for this medium to how a product a decade and a half ago progressed is just asinine. Just stop it already - it's just plain childish.

With regard to Spiderman, maybe so many people saw it in the theater, and didn't care for it enough to see it again. I agree that Topher isn't exactly a box-office draw, either. Of course, it's not like Dunst, McGuire, Haden-Church and the bunch are exactly stellar performers either - what is this, a teeny-bopper-child-star-has-been reunion? Mybe lil't should do a cameo in Spidy 4?

[musicman1999]

It was only a decade ago, and i believe he was attempting to show that Bluray is achieving market penetration faster than DVD did.

bill

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

It was only a decade ago, and i believe he was attempting to show that Bluray is achieving market penetration faster than DVD did.

bill

Thanks musicman. After a while you get tired of explaining things to people who cannot grasp even the most basic of information. :rolleyes5:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

This kind of comparison is total hogwash. Not only is the Internet (which wasn't at all what it is today, then) a huge source of sales, but it is also a huge source of info about movies from reviews to promotional materials, and yes, even to sales figures. To compare numbers for this medium to how a product a decade and a half ago progressed is just asinine. Just stop it already - it's just plain childish.

DVD is only a decade old. The internet existed then, there were online stores then, there was online advertising then because we saw it here on this website. DVDfile, the digitalbits as well as the hometheater forum were all doing reviews and promotions, and yes there were even sales figures announced back then. You do not have a good grasp over what is being done today, you sound like you have no idea what was going on back then as well. The only thing you have proven time and time again, is your ignorance has been long term.


With regard to Spiderman, maybe so many people saw it in the theater, and didn't care for it enough to see it again. I agree that Topher isn't exactly a box-office draw, either. Of course, it's not like Dunst, McGuire, Haden-Church and the bunch are exactly stellar performers either - what is this, a teeny-bopper-child-star-has-been reunion? Mybe lil't should do a cameo in Spidy 4?

Oh gosh, another one of your maybe's. If a bluray sells 130k of Spidey on a new format only 18 months old, apparently somebody wanted to see it again. Interestingly enough, the box set sold a little over 54k in a week by itself at an average of $64, which by the way was more than HD DVD sold of matrix in a month.

If I do a cameo, it would feature me uncovering the spread of FUD from an airheaded criminal named nighliar.

[nightflier]

Lil't, you are full of crap. To suggest that the internet was anything like it is today in 1997, is just nonsense. You may wish it to be so for your argument, but that's just ignorant. I was very active in the internet in 1997 and I can tell you the marketing that we see on the internet today didn't exist then. You're full of it. If anyone doubts that they can just look at how many more people are on the internet today than there were then, or how much more sales are generated today, or how much more effective advertising has become, or if you really want to be specific about it, how many more millions of DVD sales occur today than they did back then. The simple fact is people didn't shop online then like they do today. There is nothing you can say to convince anyone that this is a valid comparison, give it up, already.

Regarding your view of Spiderman, it still does not change the very real possibility that this sequel wasn't enough to get people to pay to own it at the same rate that they did for Spiderman 1 or 2. As a sequel it underwhelmed, even if sales were enough to satisfy the studio execs. Let's just say this movie won't go down in history as one of the classics.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Lil't, you are full of crap. To suggest that the internet was anything like it is today in 1997, is just nonsense. You may wish it to be so for your argument, but that's just ignorant. I was very active in the internet in 1997 and I can tell you the marketing that we see on the internet today didn't exist then. You're full of it. If anyone doubts that they can just look at how many more people are on the internet today than there were then, or how much more sales are generated today, or how much more effective advertising has become, or if you really want to be specific about it, how many more millions of DVD sales occur today than they did back then. The simple fact is people didn't shop online then like they do today. There is nothing you can say to convince anyone that this is a valid comparison, give it up, already.

Nightliar, DVD was just starting in 1997, or course they were not selling in the millions back then. And sorry, amazon was selling millions of VHS tapes online. Nobody said the internet was back then what it is now, that is your magic ability to read far into what is said.

Where you here in 1997? No you were not. They were advertising DVD, VHS and Laserdisc titles on this very site. DVDfile, the Digitalbits and HTF were all around. All had advertising of VHS, DVD and Laserdisc on their websites. They also did reviews, and had online promotions as well. The same vehicles for marketing disc to online customers were there, including the abiltity to order via Amazon.com. Amazon started offering VHS and Laserdisc in 1995.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon.com

The amount of volume generated at that time is immaterial. The vehicles were there, and they were advertised. So before you start another endless debate on manutia, perhaps you need to educate your uneducated butt.


Regarding your view of Spiderman, it still does not change the very real possibility that this sequel wasn't enough to get people to pay to own it at the same rate that they did for Spiderman 1 or 2. As a sequel it underwhelmed, even if sales were enough to satisfy the studio execs. Let's just say this movie won't go down in history as one of the classics.

I do not want to read anymore of you unsupported gut bull crap. The studio is happy with its performance so far, and what you have to say about it is not going to change a damn thing. This is why you are here foaming at the mouth over small crap, and they are running movie studios.

Just when one thinks that you have exahausted all the ways to look like a fool, you invent more by just continually posting uniformed, and unresearched cow plop.

[Woochifer]

This kind of comparison is total hogwash. Not only is the Internet (which wasn't at all what it is today, then) a huge source of sales, but it is also a huge source of info about movies from reviews to promotional materials, and yes, even to sales figures. To compare numbers for this medium to how a product a decade and a half ago progressed is just asinine. Just stop it already - it's just plain childish.

Decade and a half? You mean the DVD was introduced in 1992? Might want to check your facts before you go questioning someone else's.

How is the comparison "asinine"? Looking at market penetration rates for video formats is a very valid measure, especially considering that the exact same sources for tracking sales data were already in place back when the DVD was introduced. We're talking about an apples to apples comparison, since the market data coverage was similarly high in 1997 as it is now.

So what if the Internet has more of a presence now? Consumers still have to make the ultimate decision whether or not to support a format no matter what avenue they choose to make that purchase.

As a purchasing mechanism, there is a greater proportion of commerce that occurs online, but much of that has been at the expense of B&M retailers. In another thread, I indicated that the number of music retailers declined from about 8,000 in 1998 to 5,500 in 2005. In that case, the massive shift of music purchases online has not resulted in an overall growth in the market.

You might have made a better case for yourself if you'd indicated that the home video market has largely shifted from a rental driven business model to one driven by purchases. As it stands, your points about the Internet's influence on the overall market direction are rather tunnel visioned and off base.


With regard to Spiderman, maybe so many people saw it in the theater, and didn't care for it enough to see it again. I agree that Topher isn't exactly a box-office draw, either. Of course, it's not like Dunst, McGuire, Haden-Church and the bunch are exactly stellar performers either - what is this, a teeny-bopper-child-star-has-been reunion? Mybe lil't should do a cameo in Spidy 4?

As with 300, you've chosen to presume that there's some kind of disconnect between box office returns and home video sales. And once again, you've presumed that your opinion of a movie somehow correlates with what other people pay money to rent or purchase.

[bobsticks]

Not for nothing, and I agree with what you're saying about market penetration and timelines Wooch, but isn't hard to actually have any conversation about first-week sales for these two movies specifically? I mean given that there was a shortage of release week units for Transformers it's gotta be hard to gauge consumer intent.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Not for nothing, and I agree with what you're saying about market penetration and timelines Wooch, but isn't hard to actually have any conversation about first-week sales for these two movies specifically? I mean given that there was a shortage of release week units for Transformers it's gotta be hard to gauge consumer intent.

Bob,
When you look at the second week after tranformer was released, there was no sign of pent up sales being released. Transformers sold 40k in the second week. A good portion of the 40k came from vouchers that came along with the purchase of a A2. So most of the units registered as sold, were actually give aways. HD DVD has an world wide install stand alone base of 420k units after the walmart firesale. Here in America it is more like 300k even after the fire sale. So you have 73k in actual over the counter sales(115k was a projected sales amount) and 40k with some purchases and a whole lot of giveaways. So about one third of the HD DVD owners actually bought or voucher traded Transformers.

If you look at how HD DVD titles trend, HD DVD owners tend to purchase big titles in the first week, and then sales fall off rather rapidly after that. If there were no giveaways with the purchase of an A2, then that 40k figure would be alot lower, because they did sell alot of A2 at that $99 price tag. So even with the delayed shipments, Transformers really did okay for sales, not great. Paramount left ALOT of money on the table because transformers would have been huge with the bluray demographic especially with the PS3 fans. Can you just imagine having an installed base of 6 million players world wide with access to this title as opposed to the 420k?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Decade and a half? You mean the DVD was introduced in 1992? Might want to check your facts before you go questioning someone else's.

How is the comparison "asinine"? Looking at market penetration rates for video formats is a very valid measure, especially considering that the exact same sources for tracking sales data were already in place back when the DVD was introduced. We're talking about an apples to apples comparison, since the market data coverage was similarly high in 1997 as it is now.

So what if the Internet has more of a presence now? Consumers still have to make the ultimate decision whether or not to support a format no matter what avenue they choose to make that purchase.

As a purchasing mechanism, there is a greater proportion of commerce that occurs online, but much of that has been at the expense of B&M retailers. In another thread, I indicated that the number of music retailers declined from about 8,000 in 1998 to 5,500 in 2005. In that case, the massive shift of music purchases online has not resulted in an overall growth in the market.

You might have made a better case for yourself if you'd indicated that the home video market has largely shifted from a rental driven business model to one driven by purchases. As it stands, your points about the Internet's influence on the overall market direction are rather tunnel visioned and off base.

And Wooch, I might add along with your comments about the shift from rental to purchases, that sales have also shifted from B&M to online. Somehow he thinks that the world has so drastically changed in the last 10 years, that nothing can be compared to anything. The only thing that has really changed is that folks have moved from purchasing at B&M stores, to purchasing online in big numbers. Everything else has remained pretty much the same.




As with 300, you've chosen to presume that there's some kind of disconnect between box office returns and home video sales. And once again, you've presumed that your opinion of a movie somehow correlates with what other people pay money to rent or purchase.

And he calls me arrogant!

[nightflier]

Nightliar, DVD was just starting in 1997, or course they were not selling in the millions back then. And sorry, amazon was selling millions of VHS tapes online. Nobody said the internet was back then what it is now, that is your magic ability to read far into what is said.

Hey, you're the one who's comparing DVD sales in 97 to BR sales today and wanting to minimize the impact of the Internet in the discussion. Total hogwash. You can spin it any way your want, the fact is that everything from sales methods to advertising to reviews was entirely different back then. There are far too many factors that are different: HDDVD and BR are in a dead heat (DVD wasn't in such a situation), the fact that video piracy is entirely different today then it was then, the many more ways people can buy and/or rent movies today, the speed at which information about movies spreads today (i.e well before release) compared to back then, to just name a few examples. You want something more tangible, how about this one: the number of movie previews that are being watched online compared to back then - there were only a handful of QuickTime downloads back then and the size/quality/speed was far too much trouble for most people to take the time.

To make this comparison is, if not entirely invalid, at the vary least narrow and simplified. This is a comparison that cannot be made because it's not possible to quantify the impact that the Internet has had on any of these formats. To take your counterpoint as an example: if there is more purchasing done online today (which we both agree on) how can you know what factors led to that? Are you including everything? No it's just not possible. It's a weak comparison to make and you know it, everyone knows it. So just give it up already.

Oh, and by the way, I do believe I wandered over here back then too. Didn't set up an account, but I've done my share of browsing around.

Now Wooch, I'm not trying to get into it with you, but you can't possibly support this. I mean I know you and lil't and buddies an all, but you've got to cut your losses when you still can. Apples to apples? More like apples to bananas. It just not possible to compare the two trends considering all the factors you would have to control for in this example. It's just not an argument that be made scientifically or academically.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Hey, you're the one who's comparing DVD sales in 97 to BR sales today and wanting to minimize the impact of the Internet in the discussion. Total hogwash. You can spin it any way your want, the fact is that everything from sales methods to advertising to reviews was entirely different back then. There are far too many factors that are different:

You are just wrong, Wooch and I have both pointed this out to your hard head.

Internet advertising was as widespread then as it is today. It is the exact same model. Now if you are referring to VHS, then you have an arguement. Advertising to reviews was around then, absolutely nothing with the exception of consumers moving to the internet to shop has change. Why are you too stupid to realize this? In case you have lost more of your good brain cells, DVD had VHS to compete with, and DVD was not a certain winner either. Stop trying to re-invent history.



HDDVD and BR are in a dead heat (DVD wasn't in such a situation)

No they are not. BR has sold far more discs and has far larger a player base than HD DVD. HD DVD has a world wide base of 420k players, and 250k in HD DVD drives. Bluray has 5.5 million PS3, and 350k in standalones, and another 200K in Bluray drives sold. BR is leading HD DVD in year to date sales are 64-36% in favor of Bluray, and since inception has bluray at a 61-39 lead. This is not what anyone would call a dead heat. And please do not bring in market share in comparison to the DVD. VHS once had a much larger market share than DVD, and DVD overtook it.


the fact that video piracy is entirely different today then it was then

Video piracy plays no role in this, and there is no evidence that video piracy has effected any sales of any disc. I have already shown links that disprove your theory on this in another thread. The more you harp on a shot down theory, the more foolish you look.


, the many more ways people can buy and/or rent movies today,

What does this have to do with anything? We are talking movie purchases, not renting stop trying to spin. Remember, as I pointed out to you, Amazon was around back then, and so was the ability to purchase online. HTF had an online store, as did Widescreen Review, the Audioholics, AVS, this very website had links to various online stores. You could shop online then,and you can now. You still have not proven your point. Nothing has changed THAT much, except people buying sources, they have moved to the internet, and that is it. Let's see who was around back then and today.

Blockbuster was here back then, and now.
Netflix, started back in 1998 and still here.
Amazon, Started in 1994, and still here today.
Audioreview, HTF, Audioholics, Widescreen review, DVDfile, The digitalbits, all around back then, still here today.
Online advertising, was there back then, and here today.
Online promotions tied to reviews was there back then and here today.
Purchasing online was around back then, and here today.



the speed at which information about movies spreads today (i.e well before release) compared to back then, to just name a few examples

Bull**** nightliar, plain bull. If the internet was around then as it is now, where is your proof that information spread faster? Where is a link that proves this, WHERE IS YOUR PROOF. If you have decided that you do not have to provide proof, then shut the hell up and go about your business, you have no argument. We knew about DVD, VHS and Laserdisc titles before they were released. Advanced copies were sent to review sites then, and they are now. These reviews were posted on review sites long before the title was released just like they are now.
When DIVX died, it was all over the internet the same day they closed shop. When Paramount went HD DVD exclusive, we knew once the ink dried.


. You want something more tangible, how about this one: the number of movie previews that are being watched online compared to back then - there were only a handful of QuickTime downloads back then and the size/quality/speed was far too much trouble for most people to take the time.

There is no evidence that movie previews push sales even today. It just stimulates interest, just the same as a movie review in advance of a release does. Majoring in minors again, damn this is getting old as hell.


To make this comparison is, if not entirely invalid, at the vary least narrow and simplified. This is a comparison that cannot be made because it's not possible to quantify the impact that the Internet has had on any of these formats.

So the internet was not around in 1997? Do you think before you post???


To take your counterpoint as an example: if there is more purchasing done online today (which we both agree on) how can you know what factors led to that? Are you including everything? No it's just not possible. It's a weak comparison to make and you know it, everyone knows it. So just give it up already.

We already know the factors that lead up to it, and the proof is in the fact that there are far fewer B&M stores selling media on disc than there was back then. When people got hip to the fact that they did not have to get into their cars, drive to a store, pick out what they want, wait in line at the register, and come home, all of which takes a great deal of time, they chose the convience of point and click. It was simple convience. You shop online, point and click, and wait for your package. No gas used, no traffic, no crowds, easy peasy. This is tied exactly to the fact that as online purchasing has grown, B&M stores have lost business to online and that is it. The direct tie is there, and only those as blind as Ray Charles could miss it. Oh,but you do not believe in facts and figures, just your gut and what you think.


Oh, and by the way, I do believe I wandered over here back then too. Didn't set up an account, but I've done my share of browsing around.

Right, and I walk the moon with the guys from Appollo 11, they did not see me, but I was in the chair right next to Buzz. He never saw me, and I did not check in with flight control, but I was there though. Sheesh....Right, I do believe.


Now Wooch, I'm not trying to get into it with you, but you can't possibly support this. I mean I know you and lil't and buddies an all, but you've got to cut your losses when you still can. Apples to apples? More like apples to bananas. It just not possible to compare the two trends considering all the factors you would have to control for in this example. It's just not an argument that be made scientifically or academically.

What a whiney plea. Maybe you should follow your own advice, cut your losses, and go back to inventing a history that never happened. Maybe if you took up scuba diving, you could rescue a bunch of soggy bluray or HD DVD players from davy jones locker so prices could stabilize again. LOLOLOL, you are such a joke man.

[Woochifer]

Now Wooch, I'm not trying to get into it with you, but you can't possibly support this. I mean I know you and lil't and buddies an all, but you've got to cut your losses when you still can. Apples to apples? More like apples to bananas. It just not possible to compare the two trends considering all the factors you would have to control for in this example. It's just not an argument that be made scientifically or academically.

If anyone needs to cut their losses, it's your rather questionable grasp of why the market data is indeed comparable. First off, no matter what you say about the shifts in the market, the bottom line remains the same -- how many unit sales are made within a given time period. And the tracking trend data is collected using very much the same point-of-sale methodology that was in use when the DVD was introduced. The very same Videoscan data that was used to track the DVD format's adoption rate is now being used to track the Blu-ray and HD-DVD adoption rates. How's this an invalid comparison? The transaction units are basically the same, and the market coverage is also roughly the same. You say that the internet is now a more important sales avenue than in 1997. Well, guess what the Videoscan data does cover online sales.

Like I said, you can make a market-driven argument as to why the adoption rates are higher now than at the same point in time when the DVD was introduced(i.e., the DVD entered the market when home video revenue was driven by rentals, while Blu-ray and HD-DVD enter a market driven by sales) But, the finding remains the same -- HD optical adoption has occurred at a faster rate than the DVD. Saying that this is not an argument that can be made "scientifically or academically" presumes that adoption rates therefore can only be argued based on hearsay and presumptions. This sounds more like obfuscation when an argument is not supported by facts.

[PeruvianSkies]

. I mean I know you and lil't and buddies an all, but you've got to cut your losses when you still can.

Oh I'd say more than just buddies.

[ldgibson76]

Gentlemen! Just agree to disagree! Damn! No one can predict what's going to happen from day to day in the DVD industry! I just read an article on CE Pro website regarding the state of the HD DVD/Bluray format war and according to a high ranking executive of Sony, it's a stalemate. Please read the article and the replies to the article. It may put things into perspective for "Mr. Wizard, "Nostradamus", and "The Amazing Randy"! on this format war!

http://www.cepro.com/article/sony_blu_ray_hd_dvd_format_war_a_stalemate/

ldgibson76

By the way Peruvian, your last reply was Funny! :lol:

[Groundbeef]

Gentlemen! Just agree to disagree! Damn! No one can predict what's going to happen from day to day in the DVD industry! I just read an article on CE Pro website regarding the state of the HD DVD/Bluray format war and according to a high ranking executive of Sony, it's a stalemate. Please read the article and the replies to the article. It may put things into perspective for "Mr. Wizard, "Nostradamus", and "The Amazing Randy"! on this format war!

http://www.cepro.com/article/sony_blu_ray_hd_dvd_format_war_a_stalemate/

ldgibson76

By the way Peruvian, your last repaly was Funny! :lol:

The "high ranking executive" was Harold Stringer. He's the CEO. I was a bit suprised by his comment as well.

[ldgibson76]

The "high ranking executive" was Harold Stringer. He's the CEO. I was a bit suprised by his comment as well.
Yeah, I know! I didn't want to name-drop!:smilewinkgrin:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Gentlemen! Just agree to disagree! Damn! No one can predict what's going to happen from day to day in the DVD industry! I just read an article on CE Pro website regarding the state of the HD DVD/Bluray format war and according to a high ranking executive of Sony, it's a stalemate. Please read the article and the replies to the article. It may put things into perspective for "Mr. Wizard, "Nostradamus", and "The Amazing Randy"! on this format war!

http://www.cepro.com/article/sony_blu_ray_hd_dvd_format_war_a_stalemate/

ldgibson76

By the way Peruvian, your last reply was Funny! :lol:

I did not think that lex, umm I mean pervruvian comments were all that funny, a little juvenile and immature, but not funny.

Keep in mind, Stringer is referring to a studio stalemate, not a sales stalemate. He is also talking what is happening currently. He also has to balance stockholders expectations with reality.

Even with the Paramount defection, the only gains that have been made is a one or two percentage point shift in sales. HD DVD could not beat bluray in sales even when transformer was released, and Bluray had no exclusive new title released that week. The following week it was back to 71-29% in favor of bluray for weekly sales, pretty much where it has been all year.

[ldgibson76]

I did not think that lex, umm I mean pervruvian comments were all that funny, a little juvenile and immature, but not funny.

Keep in mind, Stringer is referring to a studio stalemate, not a sales stalemate. He is also talking what is happening currently. He also has to balance stockholders expectations with reality.

Even with the Paramount defection, the only gains that have been made is a one or two percentage point shift in sales. HD DVD could not beat bluray in sales even when transformer was released, and Bluray had no exclusive new title released that week. The following week it was back to 71-29% in favor of bluray for weekly sales, pretty much where it has been all year.

Look STT!

All that rhetoric you've just typed means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Both formats are going to be around for a long time. And don't underestimate the American public's intelligence when it comes to economics and their wallets! It's obvious that Blu ray will cost the consumer more money than HD DVD. The problem with that premise is that the quality of Blu ray in most applications is no better than HD DVD. Most of the time, when a movie is offered in both formats, the HD DVD is the better looking
version. The company I work for showcases both formats on very large screens and trust me when I tell you, that in our experience, when a client views both formats on a 92"+ size screen, the majority pick the image of HD DVD over Blu ray. And when I say majority, I mean virtually all! And we use a variety of 1080P projectors and all three HD DVD players from Toshiba and for Blu ray, The Samsung BDP1400; Pioneer Elite entry along with the Playstation 3. I'm not siding with either side. I'm just revealing what I've experienced. Bottom line is the $ will dictate which format emerges victorious in this competition.

And your opinion regarding Peruvian's observation is without a doubt, is how you described it! But it was also funny!:D

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Look STT!

All that rhetoric you are you just typed means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Both formats are going to be around for a long time. And don't underestimate the American public's intelligence when it comes to economics and their wallets!

Well, its does mean something. People do not always attribute cheaper as better do they? Despite HD DVD cheaper price, standalone player sales are pretty much a dead heat in America, and no contest in favor of bluray everywhere else in the world.



It's obvious that Blu ray will cost the consumer more money than HD DVD. The problem with that premise is that the quality of Blu ray in most applications is no better than HD DVD. Most of the time, when a movie is offered in both formats, the HD DVD is the better looking
version. The company I work for showcases both formats on very large screens and trust me when I tell you, that in our experience, when a client views both formats on a 92"+ size screen, the majority pick the image of HD DVD over Blu ray. And when I say majority, I mean virtually all! And we use a variety of 1080P projectors and all three HD DVD players from Toshiba and for Blu ray, The Samsung BDP1400; Pioneer Elite entry along with the Playstation 3. I'm not siding with either side. I'm just revealing what I've experienced. Bottom line is the $ will dictate which format emerges victorious in this competition.

I respect all peoples opinion, but your comments do not mimick the reviews on both bluray and HD DVD on the most popular review sites on the web. A compulation of scores from DVDfile, The digital bits, hometheater spot, Hidefdigest, hometheater forum, DVDtalk shows the following results.

PQ SQ Total Studio
4.18 4.36 4.27 Buena Vista
3.99 4.16 4.08 Sony
3.81 4.08 3.95 Fox
4.01 3.84 3.93 Paramount
3.96 3.66 3.81 Warner
3.63 3.80 3.72 Lions Gate
3.80 3.63 3.71 Weinstein
3.71 3.63 3.67 Universal

These websites represent some of the largest visited websites on the net. As you can see these results do not mimick yours at all. The top three studios are all bluray exclusive. You are one source, showing a few movies, these are websites that have reviewed just about every HD DVD and Bluray movie released. I own both formats, and nobody can tell me that the PQ offered on Universal titles looks better than my Disney or Sony titles. Nobody can convince me of that period. When it comes to audio, bluray has over 200+ titles with lossless uncompressed audio. HD DVD has 57.



And your opinion regarding Peruvian's observation is without a doubt, is how you described it! But it was also funny!:D

How could I miss, its a pretty consistant behavior that is very easy to describe.

[pixelthis]

Look STT!

All that rhetoric you've just typed means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Both formats are going to be around for a long time. And don't underestimate the American public's intelligence when it comes to economics and their wallets! It's obvious that Blu ray will cost the consumer more money than HD DVD. The problem with that premise is that the quality of Blu ray in most applications is no better than HD DVD. Most of the time, when a movie is offered in both formats, the HD DVD is the better looking
version. The company I work for showcases both formats on very large screens and trust me when I tell you, that in our experience, when a client views both formats on a 92"+ size screen, the majority pick the image of HD DVD over Blu ray. And when I say majority, I mean virtually all! And we use a variety of 1080P projectors and all three HD DVD players from Toshiba and for Blu ray, The Samsung BDP1400; Pioneer Elite entry along with the Playstation 3. I'm not siding with either side. I'm just revealing what I've experienced. Bottom line is the $ will dictate which format emerges victorious in this competition.

And your opinion regarding Peruvian's observation is without a doubt, is how you described it! But it was also funny!:D

So when I get a 92+ screen I need to look into HDDVD:crazy:

HDDVD proponents can't get past one main point, HDDVD has NO place to go, its storage capacity is already maxed out, meanwhile corporate is already getting 200 gigs
out of blu based storage devices.
A recession is coming on, maybe a depression , no way can the economy support two
formats when gas is four to five bucks a gallon.
Look for this "format" war to be pretty much over in a year.
Sorry groundbeef, FROM reading the description of your system I know you like cheap crap, but you're gonna haveta pay a little more for a disc player
(I mean, JBL? Get outta the seventies, man):15:

[PeruvianSkies]

Look STT!

All that rhetoric you've just typed means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Both formats are going to be around for a long time. And don't underestimate the American public's intelligence when it comes to economics and their wallets! It's obvious that Blu ray will cost the consumer more money than HD DVD. The problem with that premise is that the quality of Blu ray in most applications is no better than HD DVD. Most of the time, when a movie is offered in both formats, the HD DVD is the better looking
version. The company I work for showcases both formats on very large screens and trust me when I tell you, that in our experience, when a client views both formats on a 92"+ size screen, the majority pick the image of HD DVD over Blu ray. And when I say majority, I mean virtually all! And we use a variety of 1080P projectors and all three HD DVD players from Toshiba and for Blu ray, The Samsung BDP1400; Pioneer Elite entry along with the Playstation 3. I'm not siding with either side. I'm just revealing what I've experienced. Bottom line is the $ will dictate which format emerges victorious in this competition.






And your opinion regarding Peruvian's observation is without a doubt, is how you described it! But it was also funny!:D



HD-DVD also is improving with time as well, check out these screen captures from TROY HD-DVD....the one is the theatrical cut released a year ago, the other is the directors cut released one year later. You can see clearly by these two screen caps that the directors cut (which is lighter) gives more detail and better contrast.

[drseid]

So when I get a 92+ screen I need to look into HDDVD:crazy:

HDDVD proponents can't get past one main point, HDDVD has NO place to go, its storage capacity is already maxed out, meanwhile corporate is already getting 200 gigs
out of blu based storage devices.
A recession is coming on, maybe a depression , no way can the economy support two
formats when gas is four to five bucks a gallon.
Look for this "format" war to be pretty much over in a year.
Sorry groundbeef, FROM reading the description of your system I know you like cheap crap, but you're gonna haveta pay a little more for a disc player
(I mean, JBL? Get outta the seventies, man):15:

Well, while I don't believe we are heading for a depression in the forseeable future... if there is a relatively moderate economic downturn in the short-run, those who still can afford to buy HD players will likely look to price more than normal. Advantage HD DVD.

Oh, and HD DVD has its own testing going on too for the future... "Stalemate" is the correct word for the format war... Sony's CEO got it right. Then again, I have been saying that all along. That is the reason I own both formats.

---Dave

[ldgibson76]

So when I get a 92+ screen I need to look into HDDVD:crazy:

HDDVD proponents can't get past one main point, HDDVD has NO place to go, its storage capacity is already maxed out, meanwhile corporate is already getting 200 gigs
out of blu based storage devices.
A recession is coming on, maybe a depression , no way can the economy support two
formats when gas is four to five bucks a gallon.
Look for this "format" war to be pretty much over in a year.
Sorry groundbeef, FROM reading the description of your system I know you like cheap crap, but you're gonna haveta pay a little more for a disc player
(I mean, JBL? Get outta the seventies, man):15:

Hello "pixelthis"!

I will start by saying that your response to my statement regarding the 92"+ screen is appreciated. But when I refer to that larger screen size, it's because if a person really wants to see the true capabilities of a either format, the larger screen offers the consumer better platform than a 50" flat panel. Believe me when I tell you that video-noise is prevalent in most of the Blu Ray movies I've seen. On a smaller surface, like a flat panel or RPTV, you can't see it as much. but on the big screen, it's there! HD DVD seems to be a much cleaner transfer. And no, my company may not view every hi def format movie that becomes available and then write a synopsis on the quality, but we know what our average client thinks and sees! And HD DVD has the better showing.
By the way, HD DVD is improving on the storage capacity. It's at 30GB now because that's all that is needed for now. Do your research before you make a definitive statement.
With Microsoft backing, you better believe that if storage capacity is the only thing holding HD DVD back from dominating the market, Gates and company, not to mention Toshiba, will find a way to overcome that obstacle.

http://arstechnica.com/journals/hardware.ars/2007/09/13/hd-dvd-whips-out-51gb-discs-surpasses-blu-ray-in-storage-capacity

Regards.

[ldgibson76]

Ok STT.

You made your point, and like you I respect anyone's opinion. I can only go by what I and my colleagues experience everyday in our design center. Yes I read the websites and the magazines, and one thing is apparent, it's all subjective! Both formats are great! But for anyone to say that HD DVD will be gone in a year is asinine at best! I'll tell you what, If HD DVD players are available for under $200.00 for the holiday's and we've already seen the response to that type of pricing already, and Blu Ray fails to counter the aggressive pricing.....the people who purchase the HD DVD players, and there will be many that do, will without a doubt purchase HD DVD software. With gas reaching $4-5 dollars per gallon, consumers will be compelled to stay home for entertainment, and will want to be entertained at home the least expensive way they can. The so called advantages/benefits
that Blu ray may present does not justify the higher price point. Yes there may be more Bluray movies purchased as of right now, but that can change quickly especially during the holidays. The only reason why Blu ray movies has the advantage is because of the Playstation 3. Make no mistake, if more games were available at the PS3's inception, blu ray movies would not have sold as much as they did. Most people purchased movies because they had to in order to justify dropping $600.00 on a gaming system. And if you think that stand alone blu ray players are on pace with the HD DVD players, I want some of whatever you're trippin' on. There's no contest when it comes to stand alone players. Toshiba sells more players than Samsung, Sony, Panasonic, and Pioneer combined.

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/943

[nightflier]

Internet advertising was as widespread then as it is today.

Is that really true? No it's not - not by any measure.


Now if you are referring to VHS, then you have an arguement.

Of course I have an argument. Thanks for agreeing.


Advertising to reviews was around then, absolutely nothing with the exception of consumers moving to the internet to shop has change.

I'm not saying those factors were not around back then, but they had far less market penetration. The internet today accounts for far more sales than it did then. It's quite simple math really.


BR has sold far more discs and has far larger a player base than HD DVD....This is not what anyone would call a dead heat.

This is just your interpretation. Apparently the execs at Sony don't even agree with you. DVD's competition with DIVx was nothing like the competition between BR & HDDVD. So yes, this current format war makes the comparison with DVD very weak indeed.


Video piracy plays no role in this, and there is no evidence that video piracy has effected any sales of any disc.

Well, not if you listen to the MPAA and RIAA. Yes, there are articles that say that piracy has had little impact, perhaps even boosting sales, but there is no way to know for sure because piracy isn't measured. There are no Nielsen's or NDP ratings for how much video is not purchased because of piracy. And since movie piracy via the internet is far more prevalent today than it was in 1997, one can't make the argument that the adoption rate of BR/HDDVD is or is not being impacted more than DVD was. Piracy is an unknown that makes the comparison between the formats murky.


What does this have to do with anything? We are talking movie purchases, not renting stop trying to spin.

When people rent, it's pretty much a try-before-you-buy option for them. If the movie is very entertaining people will buy it too, but movies that don't measure up won't have the same sales figures. So the real question is how much have rentals affected the sale of DVDs and also the sale of HDDVD/BR? Another factor that sales figures really don't account for. Sales figures only give us so much information.


Remember, as I pointed out to you, Amazon was around back then, and so was the ability to purchase online.

Amazon was selling far more books than movies back then. Today, the opposite is true. This is a perfect example proving my point that the Internet has had a substantial impact on movie sales so that the comparison with 1997 is weak.


HTF had an online store, as did Widescreen Review, the Audioholics, AVS, this very website had links to various online stores. You could shop online then,and you can now.

So? I never said they were not around. But if you look at sales figures, you'll also see quite obviously that people are buying a whole lot more movies through these sites now than they did then. You're only proving my point that the Internet invalidates your comparison between DVD and BR/HDDVD.


Nothing has changed THAT much, except people buying sources, they have moved to the internet, and that is it.

And that is significant to the comparison, or do you not see that?

Blockbuster was here back then, and now. - they were not online, were they?

Netflix, started back in 1998 and still here. - they were just starting out. Their current business has mushroomed now, hasn't it?

Amazon, Started in 1994, and still here today. - See above.

Audioreview, HTF, Audioholics, Widescreen review, DVDfile, The digitalbits, all around back then, still here today. - Yes, and if you look at website traffic, you'll also notice how much more popualr those sites are now than they were in 1997.

Online advertising, was there back then, and here today. - Far more pervasive today and also much more sophisticated using back-end technologies that were not even developed then.

Online promotions tied to reviews was there back then and here today. - See my last comment.

Purchasing online was around back then, and here today. - Never said otherwise, but look at sales figures: exponential growth.


If the internet was around then as it is now, where is your proof that information spread faster?

Well the most obvious is that more people have broadband now than they did then. Also, websites are programmed in ways that target and conform to user preferences and cross-linking-licensing-advertising is far more sophisticated and pervasive today than it was then. This makes information, especially sales-driven information much faster to get to intended audiences. Server hardware and software also makes the Internet faster and more commercially responsive, even if it may seem from your perspective that the Internet has slowed down (and actually even on your desktop, it hasn't).

One very simple example from Amazon is the inclusion of the "would-you-like-fries-with-that" suggestive sales technologies that the site has added that tell you what you might also like to purchase. Amazon has done extensive research into this and found that this is a substantial source of additional sales. That technology was not half as sophisticated in 1997.

Finally, searches are far more sophisticated today using code that is more geared towards sales than you actually finding the relevant information. When you type a search term in Google today, do you know how much is being tracked about that search and subsequent clicks as a result of that search? Well, I can tell you in no uncertain terms that this is far more complex than it was in 1997.

So if you can't see this, and I doubt this is an area you have much interest in anyhow, why don't you "shut the hell up and go about your business." You may know a thing or two about movie sales figures and have some insider secrets, but don't try to lecture me about the Internet and the underlying technologies. That's what I do on a daily basis.


We knew about DVD, VHS and Laserdisc titles before they were released. Advanced copies were sent to review sites then, and they are now. These reviews were posted on review sites long before the title was released just like they are now.

Well here's a perfect example of how piracy has a major impact on the dissemination of information about new movies. The number of popular movies that are bootlegged and distributed over the internet well before even the reviewers get their hands on them is far greater than it was in 1997. Oh, and no they are not HD quality at that point either, but the plot lines, character development, and conclusions are known to the hacker community well before they are to the public.

You don't travel in those circles, so you don't know about this. Heck, you would rather believe this doesn't even exist, I'm guessing. Well, sorry to drive another truck through the hole in your argument again - it's just that you don't want to consider anything that doesn't agree with it. Just ask yourself how many people saw 300 before it was released? Do you really think that your tiny circle of privileged reviewers were the only ones? 'Come on, this is a movie that was at the top of the hacker lists everywhere. Now the next question is how much did that affect sales? You'll probably say something like hardly at all, right? Well how would you know? After all, you are so far removed from that crowd... Well I'm not. I may not be pirating movies (no real desire to), but I do read what's online - and it's not what you're reading.


There is no evidence that movie previews push sales even today.

Then why do they keep making them? That's like saying there is no evidence that advertising works. Are you really going to go out on that limb?


So the internet was not around in 1997?

How the hell did you get that from what I wrote? I was there, and probably a lot more active than you were. And don't give me any more of your stupid crap about how I wasn't on AR back then. I was very much here, I just didn't have a tremendous interest in HiFi back then. Hell, I've been reading stuff online before you even had a computer, so don't try and one-up that one. I've been reading posts online when the whole Internet was text-only and it had just been made available to my school. Don't tread where you don't have an advantage, lil't, you'll get squashed.


When people got hip to the fact that they did not have to get into their cars, drive to a store, pick out what they want, wait in line at the register, and come home, all of which takes a great deal of time, they chose the convience of point and click. It was simple convience. You shop online, point and click, and wait for your package. No gas used, no traffic, no crowds, easy peasy.

You're proving my point.


This is tied exactly to the fact that as online purchasing has grown, B&M stores have lost business to online and that is it.

Oh, don't even go there. You're arguing from the gut, now, and you know it. If this is the crux of your argument, show me some sales figures that B&M sales dropped off at the same rate as online sales grew. I seriously doubt you'll find them. I'd wager that online sales grew much faster for the simple reason that it's a lot easier. Don't agree? Then show me the numbers.


Oh,but you do not believe in facts and figures, just your gut and what you think.

Well, show me some sales figures. If I'm wrong about this, I'll cop to it. I don't have a problem doing that, unlike you.


Right, and I walk the moon with the guys from Appollo 11, they did not see me, but I was in the chair right next to Buzz. He never saw me, and I did not check in with flight control, but I was there though. Sheesh....Right, I do believe.

Yeah, real mature. I was here. What do I need to do to prove this? I don't remember much. I remember that the forum was called TechTalk or something like that. I vaguely remember someone named Dr. T, I guess that was you (figures)? Some other names that come to mind: Flying Dutchman, Rex, come guy named Vic. I can't remember much else. It's been a long time. Now stop trying to be such a pr*ck and stay on point. You're starting to sound like a child again.


What a whiney plea.

Hey, I'm not trying to get into it with Wooch. At least he doesn't litter his posts with insults and childish remarks. I guess he must be the mature one on your team - do you pick up his laundry, too? I haven't always agreed with Wooch, but I respect his input. I just can't figure out for the life of me why he would hang out with you. It's kind of a mystery really, and apparently others here are wondering the same thing. Do you have something unpleasant on him? Wonder what that's all about.


First off, no matter what you say about the shifts in the market, the bottom line remains the same -- how many unit sales are made within a given time period.

Let's remember what we're talking about. Lil't said that BR/HDDVD sales had grown faster than DVD sales. Of course the numbers bear that out, but to suggest that this is somehow an indication of the strength of these new formats compared to DVD is nonsense. The environment is entirely different.


And the tracking trend data is collected using very much the same point-of-sale methodology that was in use when the DVD was introduced. The very same Videoscan data that was used to track the DVD format's adoption rate is now being used to track the Blu-ray and HD-DVD adoption rates. How's this an invalid comparison?

Look I never argued against those numbers, but I'm arguing that this is not only an indication of the superiority of these formats in the marketplace (over DVD). There are far more factors involved - most importantly the impact of the Internet.


You say that the internet is now a more important sales avenue than in 1997. Well, guess what the Videoscan data does cover online sales.

No argument here.


Like I said, you can make a market-driven argument as to why the adoption rates are higher now than at the same point in time when the DVD was introduced (i.e., the DVD entered the market when home video revenue was driven by rentals, while Blu-ray and HD-DVD enter a market driven by sales)

That's one of my premises, yes, thanks for repeating it.


But, the finding remains the same -- HD optical adoption has occurred at a faster rate than the DVD.

Again, no argument here.


Saying that this is not an argument that can be made "scientifically or academically" presumes that adoption rates therefore can only be argued based on hearsay and presumptions.

You're not reading what I posted. I said that the internet affected sales to a far greater extent - even if you consider the decline in B&M stores. If that is what you and lil't are trying to argue, I challenge you to point out the opposite. The impact of the internet, including those factors that are not accounted for in official sales figures, make the comparison with DVDs, when internet sales/advertising/technologies were in their infancy, a stretch. I really don't think this is hard to understand:

The growth of sales of DVDs cannot be accurately compared with the growth in HDDVD/BR.

We're talking about 15 years for technologies to change/mature/improve. There are just too many factors that muddy the comparison. You want to argue otherwise, be my guest. You may be able to make a tacit approximation, but it is far from a complete picture of what is and will be happening in the current format war. The disagreements about BR or HDDVD standings, notwithstanding.

Are you both really going to tell us that the growth of DVDs 15 years ago is comparable to the growth in BR/HDDVD today? You've got to be kidding me.

[Mr Peabody]

Even if Toshiba's numbers were correct the fact that Blu-ray is even that close with a significantly more expensive machine says something. Toshiba is practically giving their units away which means there must not be that much of a demand. Only an idiot would drop the price on a product they are selling good at a current price. Blu-ray prices have dropped some as you'd expect for a new product as new generations come out. Blu-ray is able to compete with HD-DVD while keeping their product profitable. HD-DVD is desperate and afraid of a level playing field which is proved by their buy off of Paramount.

The $99.00 HD-DVD player sure got people off the fence but on the other hand that's not much of a loss if one has to switch. Also, as owning a HD disc player access and prices of softward counts too, but not much if it's a title you wouldn't watch.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Ok STT.

You made your point, and like you I respect anyone's opinion. I can only go by what I and my colleagues experience everyday in our design center. Yes I read the websites and the magazines, and one thing is apparent, it's all subjective!

Yes you are correct, it is subjective. However when your findings are so polar opposite to reviewers, one has to conclude one of two things, the deck is getting stacked against bluray by purposely using titles that are inferior, or you are playing the same inferior title over and over, and playing the superior HD DVD titles over and over. There is just no way in heck with the video quality scores that bluray has been getting, and the fact that Paramount and Universal are squarely under all three bluray exclusive(Warner does not count since they use identical encodes for both) that your customers would choose HD DVD all the time. Something does not square.


[quote] Both formats are great! But for anyone to say that HD DVD will be gone in a year is asinine at best! I'll tell you what, If HD DVD players are available for under $200.00 for the holiday's and we've already seen the response to that type of pricing already, and Blu Ray fails to counter the aggressive pricing.....the people who purchase the HD DVD players, and there will be many that do, will without a doubt purchase HD DVD software.

Here is the problem with your theory. HD DVD has always been a cheaper alternative to Bluray. However player sales are so close, it does not appear this has been an advantage. Also you have to keep in mind that some of the most popular HD titles in terms of sales come from the bluray side. And when it comes to day and date exclusive titles, Bluray has HD DVD beat through the floor boards. Cheaper price is not helpful unless you have the widespread support from both studios and manufacturers, DVD has shown this. Toshiba has neither.

Currently Toshiba is the only manufacturer making HD DVD drives. They are making them for the computer manufacters, and for themselves. A price breakdown of the cost of making the A2 show it cost about $300 in parts. If they sell it for $199, they are taking a loss on every player. Keep in mind that the Venturer player was also priced at $199, but currently nobody wants to put it on their shelves when Toshiba already has that price point. You have just shoved another manufacturer to the curb here when you have already pissed off so many before. What is good for the consumer(in this case) is very bad for the manufacturer, and the format. A format that is supported by loses, is not something that can be built on. Those five free HD DVD's that comes along with the players, that comes from the HD DVD PG coffers of which Toshiba is the chair. Losses after losses just to support a format with very limited CE support. I cannot see that as a receipe for success. If a manufacturer cannot make money for producing a player, what incentive does that manufacturer to make the player. History has already shown that when a single entity attempts to launch a format by itself, it is a failure in the long run. Beta is that example.

The bluray side does not have to price match HD DVD downward push. They have the marketing prowess to sell their product at a price so everyone in the pipeline makes a profit, and still be cheaper than DVD was at this point in its life. By pricing themselves so a manufactucter can make a profit, more manufactuers are going to produce players at different price points. Next year 4 more manufactucters will join those who already produce bluray players. More computer companies have joined up to put bluray drives in their laptops and desktops. Bluray is spreading to the broadcast community via storage drives in cameras. With such widespread support(much like VHS had) you are pretty much guaranteeing a degree of success already.



With gas reaching $4-5 dollars per gallon, consumers will be compelled to stay home for entertainment, and will want to be entertained at home the least expensive way they can.

That is a statement not supported by current events. HD DVD is not outselling bluray right now, not by a long shot when you count all players with internal drives.





The so called advantages/benefits
that Blu ray may present does not justify the higher price point. Yes there may be more Bluray movies purchased as of right now, but that can change quickly especially during the holidays. The only reason why Blu ray movies has the advantage is because of the Playstation 3.

Well, it could change. But Universal has already closed the door on any new titles for the remainder of the year. Paramount could announce more, but given the fact that catalogue titles are not selling very well, I highly doubt they will announce any additional titles beyond what they already have. The Playstation can play bluray movies right? If Microsoft had chosen to put a internal HD DVD drive in the XBOX, then the field would be quite level.



Make no mistake, if more games were available at the PS3's inception, blu ray movies would not have sold as much as they did. Most people purchased movies because they had to in order to justify dropping $600.00 on a gaming system. And if you think that stand alone blu ray players are on pace with the HD DVD players, I want some of whatever you're trippin' on. There's no contest when it comes to stand alone players. Toshiba sells more players than Samsung, Sony, Panasonic, and Pioneer combined.

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/943

First, the PS3 does not cost $600. The 40GB version costs $399, and the 80GB $499. There is no evidence that what you say is true concerning disc sales and the PS3. There are plenty of people just like me who wanted the most advanced and upgradeable bluray player out there, and the PS3 fit the bill. I do not play games at all, but it plays SACD, and that was the thing that pushed me over to it. Many owners of the PS3 do not play games, but wanted the cheapest way into bluray.

Sorry, but the standalone arguement no longer stands. The PS3 has completely changed the old model and has flipped it on its head. Since it has a internal bluray drive just like any standalone, it cannot be excluded. So the standalone arguement is a red herring uncooked. Every since the PS3 has been released, this standalone argument has cropped up. Unfortunately it has not helped software sales, and neither has the Paramount defection at this point. Worldwide, Toshiba is getting its clock wiped in disc sales as a result of the PS3. The only competitive market, is in America. Everywhere else, its no contest.

[ldgibson76]

Well, it could change. But Universal has already closed the door on any new titles for the remainder of the year. Paramount could announce more, but given the fact that catalogue titles are not selling very well, I highly doubt they will announce any additional titles beyond what they already have. The Playstation can play bluray movies right? If Microsoft had chosen to put a internal HD DVD drive in the XBOX, then the field would be quite level.




First, the PS3 does not cost $600. The 40GB version costs $399, and the 80GB $499. There is no evidence that what you say is true concerning disc sales and the PS3. There are plenty of people just like me who wanted the most advanced and upgradeable bluray player out there, and the PS3 fit the bill. I do not play games at all, but it plays SACD, and that was the thing that pushed me over to it. Many owners of the PS3 do not play games, but wanted the cheapest way into bluray.

Sorry, but the standalone arguement no longer stands. The PS3 has completely changed the old model and has flipped it on its head. Since it has a internal bluray drive just like any standalone, it cannot be excluded. So the standalone arguement is a red herring uncooked. Every since the PS3 has been released, this standalone argument has cropped up. Unfortunately it has not helped software sales, and neither has the Paramount defection at this point. Worldwide, Toshiba is getting its clock wiped in disc sales as a result of the PS3. The only competitive market, is in America. Everywhere else, its no contest.

I guess you guys told me!!!! What the hell was I thinking about?! STT, you really put alot of thought into your last reply, not to mention time and effort. I really don't mind having a healthy debate, but geez! OK, it's your "Blu ray world" and the rest of us are just living in it! To tell you the truth, I could care less which format wins out. As I said before, both are great technologies and both will be around a long time. By the way, when the PS3 was first introduced, it was $600.00!....for several months. If I'm wrong I'm sure you will write a thesis on how wrong I am. Anyway, the debate was entertaining.

Regards!

[PeruvianSkies]

I guess you guys told me!!!! What the hell was I thinking about?! STT, you really put alot of thought into your last reply, not to mention time and effort. I really don't mind having a healthy debate, but geez! OK, it's your "Blu ray world" and the rest of us are just living in it! To tell you the truth, I could care less which format wins out. As I said before, both are great technologies and both will be around a long time. By the way, when the PS3 was first introduced, it was $600.00!....for several months. If I'm wrong I'm sure you will write a thesis on how wrong I am. Anyway, the debate was entertaining.

Regards!

You've pretty much summed up how most of us are feeling, which is that a debate with someone who refuses to acknowledge that their opinion could be wrong or that it's not a fact is pretty much a useless debate that in the end only exhaust time, energy, and you may as well just go post somewhere else and have a more productive time.

[L.J.]

you may as well just go post somewhere else and have a more productive time.

Great advice!!!!! Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.

[PeruvianSkies]

Great advice!!!!! Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.

By posting elsewhere I meant somewhere else on this site, but nice try. It would seem that you'll do just about anything to get rid of me, but I am not going anywhere, so you may as well get used to my presence.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You've pretty much summed up how most of us are feeling, which is that a debate with someone who refuses to acknowledge that their opinion could be wrong or that it's not a fact is pretty much a useless debate that in the end only exhaust time, energy, and you may as well just go post somewhere else and have a more productive time.

This pretty much sums up what you post about. Nothing. The problem you are having with me is that you cannot debate me on the facts, and that is why you try and attack me personally. You are a gutless wonder who has nothing more to do than to talk about movie trivia(of which nobody appears all that interested) and when you can get a dig in, you do it. Well pervian, nobody is all that interested in either. You cannot hurt me with your infantile comments, you are only shining a spotlight on how bankrupt you are about most things audio and video.

What you need to do is hop back into your crip with you bottle, and wait till the next changing time. You are boring far too many to absolute tears with this juvenile bunch of mess. Since when have you been graced with special powers that tell you exactly what most folks are feeling?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I guess you guys told me!!!! What the hell was I thinking about?! STT, you really put alot of thought into your last reply, not to mention time and effort. I really don't mind having a healthy debate, but geez! OK, it's your "Blu ray world" and the rest of us are just living in it! To tell you the truth, I could care less which format wins out. As I said before, both are great technologies and both will be around a long time. By the way, when the PS3 was first introduced, it was $600.00!....for several months. If I'm wrong I'm sure you will write a thesis on how wrong I am. Anyway, the debate was entertaining.

Regards!

Look, if you do not like the heat, stay away from the fire. If you do not like water, stay away from the shower. If you do not like to debate, then do not throw your hat in the ring.

The PS3 has not been $600 since August. We are not at introduction period anymore.

This took no time or effort. Just a little homework over the years, some careful analysis, and a clear look at the obvious. For some, this is time and effort, for me, its nothing more than fun, and an exchange of information.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Great advice!!!!! Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.

Heck no, I want the door to hit him. Maybe it will propel him into an alternate universe where people are actually interested in his 1 million word analysis complete with movie trivia.

[PeruvianSkies]

What you need to do is hop back into your crip with you bottle, and wait till the next changing time. You are boring far too many to absolute tears with this juvenile bunch of mess. Since when have you been graced with special powers that tell you exactly what most folks are feeling?

What's a crip??? Where are the bloodz???

[ldgibson76]

Look, if you do not like the heat, stay away from the fire. If you do not like water, stay away from the shower. If you do not like to debate, then do not throw your hat in the ring.

The PS3 has not been $600 since August. We are not at introduction period anymore.

This took no time or effort. Just a little homework over the years, some careful analysis, and a clear look at the obvious. For some, this is time and effort, for me, its nothing more than fun, and an exchange of information.

So if it's nothing more than fun, then act like it's exactly that. To respond with the heat/fire; water/shower analogies was in a word, unnecessary. I work in the industry. And I'm sure I hear and read about the subject as much as you do. I speak with Manufacturer reps from Toshiba, Samsung, Marantz, Denon, Optoma, Epson, JVC, Mitsubishi, Stewart, Planar, Key Digital, Panasonic, Pioneer, etc,.....distributors and R&D people constantly. So I believe I have an intimate knowledge of the industry. Just because someone has a different perspective doesn't make them wrong. And just because a website makes a prediction or states an opinion or states a claim, does not make it gospel. So get a grip, it's not that critical. Opinions vary!
By the way, for every factoid you or anyone else submits onto this site, anyone can find a fact that can counter the said entry and be just as accurate and credible.
Have a good evening!

[pixelthis]

I guess you guys told me!!!! What the hell was I thinking about?! STT, you really put alot of thought into your last reply, not to mention time and effort. I really don't mind having a healthy debate, but geez! OK, it's your "Blu ray world" and the rest of us are just living in it! To tell you the truth, I could care less which format wins out. As I said before, both are great technologies and both will be around a long time. By the way, when the PS3 was first introduced, it was $600.00!....for several months. If I'm wrong I'm sure you will write a thesis on how wrong I am. Anyway, the debate was entertaining.

Regards!

Both are not "great tech" both are the SAME tech, which is why one will die a painfull death, and pretty soon.
I think Blu ray simply because it has more storage, more support, more versatility,
and more sales.
But the similarities between the two types of player are more than the differences.
Which is why one will fall, no reason to keep two different ways of doing the same thing
around long.
A recession will speed things up somewhat, this "format" war is expensive, bleeding
red ink out the ying yang the two camps will HAVE to either come to an understanding,
or one will have to eat cake and throw in the towel

[L.J.]

It would seem that you'll do just about anything to get rid of me,

There you go thinking your all important again. It's not all that serious. I mean, what would a team be without it's mascot, a king without his jester? What would a village be, without it's idiot? AR.............well, we have Lex, AKA PeruvianSkies. What would we be without ya?

[Groundbeef]

The Playstation can play bluray movies right? If Microsoft had chosen to put a internal HD DVD drive in the XBOX, then the field would be quite level. .

I doubt that very much. Sales for the PS3 for the last year have at best been "anemic". Not until the much ballyhooed price drop in the last 2 months has the PS3 started to move units even close to initial projections. Remeber last Christmas? Sony had units sitting on the shelf collecting dust, as consumers rejected the high price point.

If MS HAD included an HD-DVD drive in the 360, I think sales would have taken a similar track. By giving consumers a choice, (and keeping costs lower than Sony) MS was able to make a much more palatable price point.

I do think that MS stumbled a bit by not initially offering HDMI out of the box, but that is neither here nor there.

Sony has taken a gamble, and at least initially the PS3 has driven the BluRay player into millions of homes. HOWEVER, as a GAMING machine, I think that this advantage will begin to wane as "GAMERS" can now begin to actually use their "GAMING" machines. Of course there are those who have purchased PS3's specifically for the "media" side, but those are a minority of owners. Read the game rags, and PS3 owners are begging for games. Now that they are starting to come out, I think those $$ availble for BluRay movies is going to dry up.



First, the PS3 does not cost $600. The 40GB version costs $399, and the 80GB $499. There is no evidence that what you say is true concerning disc sales and the PS3. There are plenty of people just like me who wanted the most advanced and upgradeable bluray player out there, and the PS3 fit the bill. I do not play games at all, but it plays SACD, and that was the thing that pushed me over to it. Many owners of the PS3 do not play games, but wanted the cheapest way into bluray.

Sorry, but the standalone arguement no longer stands. The PS3 has completely changed the old model and has flipped it on its head. Since it has a internal bluray drive just like any standalone, it cannot be excluded. So the standalone arguement is a red herring uncooked. Every since the PS3 has been released, this standalone argument has cropped up. Unfortunately it has not helped software sales, and neither has the Paramount defection at this point. Worldwide, Toshiba is getting its clock wiped in disc sales as a result of the PS3. The only competitive market, is in America. Everywhere else, its no contest.

Technically, you are correct. The PS3 doesn't cost $600. Now, but up to 2 short months ago it DID. For 11 months, Sony held the line on the price, praying for costs to drop, and urging consumers to "get a second job" if they wanted to own a PS3.

As for the highlighed portion of your text, that is nonsense. PS3 owners are BEGGING for games. As I stated earlier, of course there are some PS3 owners that don't want to game, but they are NOT the majority, but a very small minority.
And once the games start rolling in, (and they have begun to) the BluRay advantage will diminish. Consumers (most unlike yourself) have a limited budget. And with games running $60-$70 (special addition) that WILL chew up any money for movies.

As for "flipping" the model on its head, we will see. Sony may have driven the BluRay into the living room, but that is not an indication of how well the format will fare, once the PS3 can actually play games that people want to buy. Again, it comes down to money. Games are expensive, and last longer than a movie. I would suspect this will have a negative impact on BR movie sales. It may not tilt the battle, but I don't have a crystal ball either!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

So if it's nothing more than fun, then act like it's exactly that.

You do not know me well enough to know I am not, right? I do not have to do as you do, I do as I do to make this fun. No one size fits all.



To respond with the heat/fire; water/shower analogies was in a word, unnecessary.

You response can also be looked at as unnecessary, right? This is a matter of perspective.



I work in the industry. And I'm sure I hear and read about the subject as much as you do.

I am not certain you can be sure of this.



I speak with Manufacturer reps from Toshiba, Samsung, Marantz, Denon, Optoma, Epson, JVC, Mitsubishi, Stewart, Planar, Key Digital, Panasonic, Pioneer, etc,.....distributors and R&D people constantly. So I believe I have an intimate knowledge of the industry.

If you have such an intimate knowledge, how can you possibly advance the theory that HD DVD PQ is always better than bluray?. A person with intimate knowledge of this subject would know this is not true at all. Especially if they claim they hear and read about the subject as much as I do.


Just because someone has a different perspective doesn't make them wrong.

Well when they make definative statements that are not supported by facts, then they are wrong. Would you not agree?


And just because a website makes a prediction or states an opinion or states a claim, does not make it gospel.

Who said anyone made a prediction? I just stated facts, no predictions.


So get a grip, it's not that critical. Opinions vary!
By the way, for every factoid you or anyone else submits onto this site, anyone can find a fact that can counter the said entry and be just as accurate and credible.
Have a good evening!

I am going to throw this back at ya. You get a grip. I am well aware that opinion vary. But when a person takes an opinion and tries to present it as fact, then it is not an opinion any more. If you have a factoid that you would like to submit, it is more than welcome. I prefer that to an opinion any day.

Have a good day!

[PeruvianSkies]

So if it's nothing more than fun, then act like it's exactly that. To respond with the heat/fire; water/shower analogies was in a word, unnecessary. I work in the industry. And I'm sure I hear and read about the subject as much as you do. I speak with Manufacturer reps from Toshiba, Samsung, Marantz, Denon, Optoma, Epson, JVC, Mitsubishi, Stewart, Planar, Key Digital, Panasonic, Pioneer, etc,.....distributors and R&D people constantly. So I believe I have an intimate knowledge of the industry. Just because someone has a different perspective doesn't make them wrong. And just because a website makes a prediction or states an opinion or states a claim, does not make it gospel. So get a grip, it's not that critical. Opinions vary!
By the way, for every factoid you or anyone else submits onto this site, anyone can find a fact that can counter the said entry and be just as accurate and credible.
Have a good evening!

I have said this before and I'll say it again, sometimes it's not about who is right and who is wrong, but rather who is more right. Debating back and forth at this point over something that is so inconclusive still is a waste of time. I am glad that you are a civil person and can see that despite your insider knowledge you still respect the opinions, thoughts, and feelings of others, unlike some.

[L.J.]

I am glad that you are a civil person and can see that despite your insider knowledge you still respect the opinions, thoughts, and feelings of others, unlike some.

"Unlike some"........I really hope you are including yourself in the group of disrespectful members you are refering to.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Is that really true? No it's not - not by any measure.

You are quite wrong on this. Back then the internet was an informational source, and not so much a source of commerce. The B&M advertised like crazy on the internet to get folks in their stores. That is a undisputeable fact.




Of course I have an argument. Thanks for agreeing.

We are not referring to VHS are we? So you do not have an arguement, so no need for the thanks.




I'm not saying those factors were not around back then, but they had far less market penetration. The internet today accounts for far more sales than it did then. It's quite simple math really.

And back then the B&M accounted for the most sales, and used online advertising to get folks in their stores. You are not seeing a whole new world as you describe it, we were seeing a shift in commerce from B&M to online. Please do not continually overstate your point, it is becoming tiring.




This is just your interpretation. Apparently the execs at Sony don't even agree with you. DVD's competition with DIVx was nothing like the competition between BR & HDDVD. So yes, this current format war makes the comparison with DVD very weak indeed.

Springer stated that HD DVD/BR are in a stalemate. And in the next sentence he mentions the Paramount defection. You need to learn to read things in context, and not snatch out points(out of contexted) to support your opinion. It is a fact that BR is outselling HD DVD in all areas of the world in both hardware and software, so there is no stalemate there at all.

You do not know your history at all. The competition between DIVX and DVD was just as fierce as this current one. The only difference is that it did not last quite as long because nobody was paying anyone else to support their format back then. The customer decided which won.




Well, not if you listen to the MPAA and RIAA. Yes, there are articles that say that piracy has had little impact, perhaps even boosting sales, but there is no way to know for sure because piracy isn't measured. There are no Nielsen's or NDP ratings for how much video is not purchased because of piracy. And since movie piracy via the internet is far more prevalent today than it was in 1997, one can't make the argument that the adoption rate of BR/HDDVD is or is not being impacted more than DVD was. Piracy is an unknown that makes the comparison between the formats murky.

I have given three different surveys as evidence that you do not know what you are talking about. The word is still out on the effect of piracy and sales of any disc based media whether music or video. One thing that is for certain, there is no evidence that piracy has negatively effected sales at all, survey after survey has proven the exact opposite.

The MPAA and RIAA have chosen to ignore the evidence presented to them, and chosen to take a course to control the spread of the content from the parties they represent. When you analyze their argument up close, it does not square with the results of survey after survey. The bottom line is they want to control how you use your media even after you buy it.




When people rent, it's pretty much a try-before-you-buy option for them. If the movie is very entertaining people will buy it too, but movies that don't measure up won't have the same sales figures. So the real question is how much have rentals affected the sale of DVDs and also the sale of HDDVD/BR? Another factor that sales figures really don't account for. Sales figures only give us so much information.

We have moved from the rental model to the purchasing model. Far more DVD's are sold than rented. People look to theatrical reviews, and later media reviews as a vehicle to make a decision to purchase. This is why websites like HTF, hidefidigest, DVDfile, and the digitalbits have grown so popular. People who rent buy alot less, people you buy rent alot less. Once again, a studio executive is not looking to see how one thing effects another, they are going to look at the bottom line. That would be sales figures. Only you are interested in muddying the water with stuff other than the bottom line.




Amazon was selling far more books than movies back then. Today, the opposite is true. This is a perfect example proving my point that the Internet has had a substantial impact on movie sales so that the comparison with 1997 is weak.

Amazon was selling far more VHS tapes than books in 1998. The internet has had no more impact than the brick and motar did before online commerce took over. The overall market for purchasing media has not substantially grown, it has shifted. Once the B&M dominated, and then they were replaced by online sellers. B&M made hundreds of millions of dollars selling software, and now online sellers are. Once again, overstating your point.




So? I never said they were not around. But if you look at sales figures, you'll also see quite obviously that people are buying a whole lot more movies through these sites now than they did then. You're only proving my point that the Internet invalidates your comparison between DVD and BR/HDDVD.

Sorry, but you are completely out of historical contexted here. The websites were once pointing to the B&M as the source for buying, and then they shifted towards online retailers because that was who was paying for advertising space. A shift in commerce does not invalid any comparison. What would invalid my comparison would be if there was no way to track that shift, and sorry but the same sales reporting companies that are here now, were here then.




And that is significant to the comparison, or do you not see that?

No. A shift is not a fundemental change in the infrastructure as you have eluded to earlier. Its just a shift.


Blockbuster was here back then, and now. - they were not online, were they?

No but Reel.com was.


Netflix, started back in 1998 and still here. - they were just starting out. Their current business has mushroomed now, hasn't it?

Yes at the expense of large B&M and mom and pop rental stores. Once again, a shift in commerce, not an explosion of the market as a result of.


Amazon, Started in 1994, and still here today. - See above.

See above as well


Audioreview, HTF, Audioholics, Widescreen review, DVDfile, The digitalbits, all around back then, still here today. - Yes, and if you look at website traffic, you'll also notice how much more popualr those sites are now than they were in 1997.

Until you know what their traffic was back then as opposed to now, you cannot make that statement. One could argue that with far fewer online websites like them back then, there was far MORE traffic than now. HTF does not have nearly the activity now they had back then, because they did not have other A/V websites to compete with. DVDfile and the bits probably had more traffic then as well because there were not as many review websites then as now. With actual traffic figures, you cannot make this statement.


Online advertising, was there back then, and here today. - Far more pervasive today and also much more sophisticated using back-end technologies that were not even developed then.

I disagree. It has been the same. There is no evidence that back end technology has had any impact of sales online.


Online promotions tied to reviews was there back then and here today. - See my last comment.

Sorry, but no difference. Try again.


Purchasing online was around back then, and here today. - Never said otherwise, but look at sales figures: exponential growth.

Exponential growth for online, exponential decline for B&M. A shift is not explosive new growth. It is just a shift. If you look at the sales of VHS in its heyday, it was making as much money as DVD did at its peak. For a person arguing so forcefully, you have a perspective that is very different from reality.




Well the most obvious is that more people have broadband now than they did then. Also, websites are programmed in ways that target and conform to user preferences and cross-linking-licensing-advertising is far more sophisticated and pervasive today than it was then. This makes information, especially sales-driven information much faster to get to intended audiences. Server hardware and software also makes the Internet faster and more commercially responsive, even if it may seem from your perspective that the Internet has slowed down (and actually even on your desktop, it hasn't).

There is no evidence that any of this has actually caused the market to grow differently than it did back then. B&M used all of this kind of technology(as much as they had then) to steer consumer into their stores, just like online services do to steer traffic to their website. A faster internet has not led to more sales, it has lead to more convience. Information may get here faster, but that does not mean folks respond faster or spend more.




One very simple example from Amazon is the inclusion of the "would-you-like-fries-with-that" suggestive sales technologies that the site has added that tell you what you might also like to purchase. Amazon has done extensive research into this and found that this is a substantial source of additional sales. That technology was not half as sophisticated in 1997.

Amazon got this practice from B&M stores. Just like they do now, B&M salespeople have been instructed to push certain things with a purchase for as far back as I know. This practice was not invented by Amazon, or any other online intity. Drive through fast food has been doing this as well.


Finally, searches are far more sophisticated today using code that is more geared towards sales than you actually finding the relevant information. When you type a search term in Google today, do you know how much is being tracked about that search and subsequent clicks as a result of that search? Well, I can tell you in no uncertain terms that this is far more complex than it was in 1997.

There is no evidence that this has increased sales


So if you can't see this, and I doubt this is an area you have much interest in anyhow, why don't you "shut the hell up and go about your business." You may know a thing or two about movie sales figures and have some insider secrets, but don't try to lecture me about the Internet and the underlying technologies. That's what I do on a daily basis.

Oh, so now I understand your push towards the internet. It is bias driven, not reality driven. Just because you work with the internet, you think everyone shares your enthusiasm. Well, they don't. So now I know why you are so gung ho about the importance of the internet in all things. It does not matter that you do this for a living, you are overselling its importance by a long shot. You can never tell me to shut up and go about my business and expect me to do it. You will be very disappointed.




Well here's a perfect example of how piracy has a major impact on the dissemination of information about new movies. The number of popular movies that are bootlegged and distributed over the internet well before even the reviewers get their hands on them is far greater than it was in 1997. Oh, and no they are not HD quality at that point either, but the plot lines, character development, and conclusions are known to the hacker community well before they are to the public.

No purchaser of movies is going to rely on a download to informed themselves on the quality of the DVD or HD on disc media. It no true gauge concerning quality. As far as the plot lines, character development, theatrical reviews have that tied up before a bootlegged video is even released.


You don't travel in those circles, so you don't know about this. Heck, you would rather believe this doesn't even exist, I'm guessing. Well, sorry to drive another truck through the hole in your argument again - it's just that you don't want to consider anything that doesn't agree with it. Just ask yourself how many people saw 300 before it was released? Do you really think that your tiny circle of privileged reviewers were the only ones? 'Come on, this is a movie that was at the top of the hacker lists everywhere. Now the next question is how much did that affect sales? You'll probably say something like hardly at all, right? Well how would you know? After all, you are so far removed from that crowd... Well I'm not. I may not be pirating movies (no real desire to), but I do read what's online - and it's not what you're reading.

Well, alot of folks saw 300 in the theaters. Do your really believe the masses went online for a bootlegged view before seeing it in theaters? Do you really believe that the majority of purchaser of this movie learned about it from bootlegs on the net? I do not think so.

Do you think you are the only person that can read something online. There have been countless surveys and studies that DO NOT support your point. Most people are not getting their exposure to movies from bootlegs, and if they are, I am sure that since you work in this business, finding actual data to support this will not be a problem for you. I will be waiting for this data.




Then why do they keep making them? That's like saying there is no evidence that advertising works. Are you really going to go out on that limb?

Previews give the title exposure, but there is no evidence that this exposure sells tickets. Alot of movies are previewed, and bomb at the box office.




How the hell did you get that from what I wrote? I was there, and probably a lot more active than you were. And don't give me any more of your stupid crap about how I wasn't on AR back then. I was very much here, I just didn't have a tremendous interest in HiFi back then. Hell, I've been reading stuff online before you even had a computer, so don't try and one-up that one. I've been reading posts online when the whole Internet was text-only and it had just been made available to my school. Don't tread where you don't have an advantage, lil't, you'll get squashed.

I have absolutely no fear of being squashed by you. Bored yes, but not squashed. I do not believe that you lurked here at all. Back then there was about 30 folks that populated this website on a regular basis. You were not one of them. As far as lurking but no joining, how convient this is. So now you make a statement, and do not have to prove it.

You do not know when I got my first computer do you? Stupid statement.

The rest of this is a hunk of bullcrap.




You're proving my point.

I've proved my point. You have to prove your own. So far you are a miserable failure.




Oh, don't even go there. You're arguing from the gut, now, and you know it. If this is the crux of your argument, show me some sales figures that B&M sales dropped off at the same rate as online sales grew. I seriously doubt you'll find them. I'd wager that online sales grew much faster for the simple reason that it's a lot easier. Don't agree? Then show me the numbers.

Now this is rich. Here is a person who has stated that he does not need sales figures or statistic to make his point. Now he is demanding someone provide sales figures to validate their point. Now sales figures are important. If this is the case, I have pointed out all kinds of sales figures and trends to support every comment I have made, he has not. So every point you have made in the other threads is blown out of the water, because now sales figures are important, and required to make a point. Thank you very much for this validation. Now if you do not have any sales figures to support your point, then your arguement is invalid.




Well, show me some sales figures. If I'm wrong about this, I'll cop to it. I don't have a problem doing that, unlike you.

I have pointed out plenty of sales figures and trends. You have rejected them all as "not the entire picture". So why ask for them now. I have already proved you wrong using sales figures, but you will not cop to it. So what makes me think you will now. Your arguments are suffering from a major case of schetzophrenia




Yeah, real mature. I was here. What do I need to do to prove this? I don't remember much. I remember that the forum was called TechTalk or something like that. I vaguely remember someone named Dr. T, I guess that was you (figures)? Some other names that come to mind: Flying Dutchman, Rex, come guy named Vic. I can't remember much else. It's been a long time. Now stop trying to be such a pr*ck and stay on point. You're starting to sound like a child again.

Wow, selective memory. You can remember what the net was like back in 1998, but cannot remember this place and who was here. I was never named Dr. T. I have always been Sir Terrence. And the reality is, you were not around then, and you know good and damn well you weren't. You have really earned the name nighliar. I have never seen a person lie just to save his pride like you have.




Hey, I'm not trying to get into it with Wooch. At least he doesn't litter his posts with insults and childish remarks.

Well you do.


I guess he must be the mature one on your team - do you pick up his laundry, too?

And you were speaking about insults nighliar?


I haven't always agreed with Wooch, but I respect his input. I just can't figure out for the life of me why he would hang out with you. It's kind of a mystery really, and apparently others here are wondering the same thing. Do you have something unpleasant on him? Wonder what that's all about.

Maybe that is none of your business. Has this ever occured to you? You and Pervian have the distinction of being two of the smartest dumb people. Do you wipe his butt or something? I wonder what this is all about.

Wooch can handle himself, and you sure do seem scared as hell to debate with him. He puts the fear of God in ya huh?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

"Unlike some"........I really hope you are including yourself in the group of disrespectful members you are refering to.

Of course he didn't. He is perfect, knows everything, and has created 183 posts(or 183 chances of spreading nonesense)

[PeruvianSkies]

"Unlike some"........I really hope you are including yourself in the group of disrespectful members you are refering to.

Interesting how when I say "unlike some" you immediately go on the defensive, despite the fact that I never singled out anyone, but you singled yourself out, which I guess by doing so you are admitting that you are one of the people that I am referring to and I could agree more. Sir T also took a defensive standpoint as well, so I guess you both feel that way.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Interesting how when I say "unlike some" you immediately go on the defensive, despite the fact that I never singled out anyone, but you singled yourself out, which I guess by doing so you are admitting that you are one of the people that I am referring to and I could agree more. Sir T also took a defensive standpoint as well, so I guess you both feel that way.

Sorry perv, we knew who you meant. You sort of gave it away when you responded to a post by somebody else that was directed to myself. Nobody here rolled out of the wagon, and into your backyard yesterday. Who are you trying to fool?

[ldgibson76]

[QUOTE=ldgibson76]Ok STT.





First, the PS3 does not cost $600. The 40GB version costs $399, and the 80GB $499. There is no evidence that what you say is true concerning disc sales and the PS3. There are plenty of people just like me who wanted the most advanced and upgradeable bluray player out there, and the PS3 fit the bill. I do not play games at all, but it plays SACD, and that was the thing that pushed me over to it. Many owners of the PS3 do not play games, but wanted the cheapest way into bluray.

Sorry, but the standalone arguement no longer stands. The PS3 has completely changed the old model and has flipped it on its head. Since it has a internal bluray drive just like any standalone, it cannot be excluded. So the standalone arguement is a red herring uncooked. Every since the PS3 has been released, this standalone argument has cropped up. Unfortunately it has not helped software sales, and neither has the Paramount defection at this point. Worldwide, Toshiba is getting its clock wiped in disc sales as a result of the PS3. The only competitive market, is in America. Everywhere else, its no contest.

STT, do actually read what you submit before you submit it to the forum?! Man, you have loss all credibility with a statement like the one you made above. "Many owners of the PS3 do not play games, but wanted the cheapest way into bluray." That is without a doubt, an opinion, not a smart opinion, but never the less, an opinion . You noticed, no one submitted a reply agreeing to that assumption! Wanna know why?!!!! Cause you're wrong!
The main reason why consumers purchased the PS3 was because of the gaming benefits, i.e., resolution, graphics, Madden, etc,.....Blu ray was the added bonus! People would have purchase the PS3 regardless of Blu ray capabilities. Why? Because it's all about the gaming! Blu ray playback was an after-thought for the average PS3 buyer. Once it became apparent that the games would not be readily available at the inception, that's when blu ray purchases took off. Yes, I agree that PS3 was the cheapest way to obtain bluray playback, but this may be a shot in the dark, but I'm sure that if the average consumer had their choice between a stand-alone player and the PS3 and the stand alone player was priced, at let's say $399.00 initially, PS3 may have acquired strong numbers, but not the totals it currently has. And for the most part, during the inception of Blu ray and HD DVD, the stand-alone Blu ray player was $1000! The average Blu ray customer was forced to purchase the PS3. And that was hard to swallow ($600.00) in it's own right. Have you ever heard a PS3 while in operation?! It's loud as hell! Cooling fans blowing for days! For the Video and audio purist, that's usually unacceptable. The PS3 is not the best solution for movie playback. That's not my opinion, that's a consensus. All I'm trying to say is if the Bluray players had been introduced at a more reasonable price point, your stand on Blu ray would have more merit.

Now regarding the remark you made about the cost to produce a HD DVD player..."$300.00" and selling the A2 for $99.00 or 199.00 is a big loss for Toshiba.....You're right STT, I don't know you, but with that logic, you do not under stand the Japanese MO when it comes to market penetration! It's a method that was established back in the late eighties with Toyota/Lexus. When Lexus introduced the LS400 at a starting price of $38,500.00, a full size import luxury car with an multivalve 8 cylinder, it turn the luxury automotive world upside down. Why, because Mercedes Benz and BMW, the leaders in that division at that time knew that after disecting the LS400, realized that that car should be 50K all day. At that time, a 6 cylinder E class was 50K and the 5 Series was well over 45K. Now, after Lexus took over the market, they priced the car appropriately, by then it was too late. No matter what BMW and Mercedes did, the damage was done. Name recognition, quality, customer service became the epitome of Lexus. Even today, luxury car manufacturers are still playing catch-up ball! Moral of the story, Toshiba knows exactly what they are doing. A lot of so-called authorities in the industry predicted that the HD DVD camp would close down shop a year ago, wouldn't last 6 months. Now you have the Sony CEO coming out publicly and stating that after all the claims of Blu Ray victory, "It's a stalemate!" No where in that statement did he specify who he was trying to pacify!
Create a perception, and 9 times out of 10, it becomes a reality. But the one time that it doesn't, you know what they say about spitting into the wind?!!! There's always a chance it will fly back into your face! Didn't mean to give you a lesson in Japanese marketing, but it is now the standard of penetration and domination in today's consumer market!

Last but surely not least, let's talk about the people who visit my design center and view HD DVD images and Blu ray images side by side on 80" x 45" and larger screens. STT, we have a healthy collection of Bluray and HD DVD movies. We make sure that if a movie is out in both Blu ray and HD DVD we have them so a fair comparison can be made. Now we try to make sure that the playing field is even, for instance...103" screen, 1080P projectors (3LCD)/(DLP) with same capabilities such as 24fps, HDMI v1.3 capability, similar lumen count, contrast ratio and video processing technology, etc,....And yes, even when reps from Blu ray friendly companies see the comparison, in our venue, guess what? They are wowed by the quality of the HD DVD! Now they all may not admit completely that HD DVD looks better, but we see the expression on their faces, and a lot of times the expression screams out, "We really should be considering HD DVD as a possibility."
STT, have you ever seen HD DVD and Blu Ray movies side by side on the big screen?!
If you have, then you have a unique perspective on the subject, but if you haven't, how can you possibly suggest that what I stated in my previous post was unlikely?! Blu ray has improved no doubt. They have cleaned up alot of the noise in the newer releases, but it's arrogant presumption to think that what I stated was not fact.
I've said my piece. I'm sure you will counter and I welcome it. Having fun yet?!:cornut:

[PeruvianSkies]

[QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible]

STT, do actually read what you submit before you submit it to the forum?! Man, you have loss all credibility with a statement like the one you made above. "Many owners of the PS3 do not play games, but wanted the cheapest way into bluray." That is without a doubt, an opinion, not a smart opinion, but never the less, an opinion . You noticed, no one submitted a reply agreeing to that assumption! Wanna know why?!!!! Cause you're wrong!
The main reason why consumers purchased the PS3 was because of the gaming benefits, i.e., resolution, graphics, Madden, etc,.....Blu ray was the added bonus! People would have purchase the PS3 regardless of Blu ray capabilities. Why? Because it's all about the gaming! Blu ray playback was an after-thought for the average PS3 buyer. Once it became apparent that the games would not be readily available at the inception, that's when blu ray purchases took off. Yes, I agree that PS3 was the cheapest way to obtain bluray playback, but this may be a shot in the dark, but I'm sure that if the average consumer had their choice between a stand-alone player and the PS3 and the stand alone player was priced, at let's say $399.00 initially, PS3 may have acquired strong numbers, but not the totals it currently has. And for the most part, during the inception of Blu ray and HD DVD, the stand-alone Blu ray player was $1000! The average Blu ray customer was forced to purchase the PS3. And that was hard to swallow ($600.00) in it's own right. Have you ever heard a PS3 while in operation?! It's loud as hell! Cooling fans blowing for days! For the Video and audio purist, that's usually unacceptable. The PS3 is not the best solution for movie playback. That's not my opinion, that's a consensus. All I'm trying to say is if the Bluray players had been introduced at a more reasonable price point, your stand on Blu ray would have more merit.

Now regarding the remark you made about the cost to produce a HD DVD player..."$300.00" and selling the A2 for $99.00 or 199.00 is a big loss for Toshiba.....You're right STT, I don't know you, but with that logic, you do not under stand the Japanese MO when it comes to market penetration! It's a method that was established back in the late eighties with Toyota/Lexus. When Lexus introduced the LS400 at a starting price of $38,500.00, a full size import luxury car with an multivalve 8 cylinder, it turn the luxury automotive world upside down. Why, because Mercedes Benz and BMW, the leaders in that division at that time knew that after disecting the LS400, realized that that car should be 50K all day. At that time, a 6 cylinder E class was 50K and the 5 Series was well over 45K. Now, after Lexus took over the market, they priced the car appropriately, by then it was too late. No matter what BMW and Mercedes did, the damage was done. Name recognition, quality, customer service became the epitome of Lexus. Even today, luxury car manufacturers are still playing catch-up ball! Moral of the story, Toshiba knows exactly what they are doing. A lot of so-called authorities in the industry predicted that the HD DVD camp would close down shop a year ago, wouldn't last 6 months. Now you have the Sony CEO coming out publicly and stating that after all the claims of Blu Ray victory, "It's a stalemate!" No where in that statement did he specify who he was trying to pacify!
Create a perception, and 9 times out of 10, it becomes a reality. But the one time that it doesn't, you know what they say about spitting into the wind?!!! There's always a chance it will fly back into your face! Didn't mean to give you a lessen in Japanese marketing, but it is now the standard of penetration and domination in today's consumer market!

Last but surely not least, let's talk about the people who visit my design center and view HD DVD images and Blu ray images side by side on 80" x 45" and larger screens. STT, we have a healthy collection of Bluray and HD DVD movies. We make sure that if a movie is out in both Blu ray and HD DVD we have them so a fair comparison can be made. Now we try to make sure that the playing field is even, for instance...103" screen, 1080P projectors (3LCD)/(DLP) with same capabilities such as 24fps, HDMI v1.3 capability, similar lumen count, contrast ratio and video processing technology, etc,....And yes, even when reps from Blu ray friendly companies see the comparison, in our venue, guess what? They are wowed by the quality of the HD DVD! Now they all may not admit completely that HD DVD looks better, but we see the expression on their faces, and alot of times the expression screams out, "We really should be considering HD DVD as a possibility."
STT, have you ever seen HD DVD and Blu Ray movies side by side on the big screen?!
If you have, then you have a unique perspective on the subject, but if you haven't, how can you possibly suggest that what I stated in my previous post was not likely?! Blu ray has improved no doubt. They have cleaned up alot of the noise in the newer releases, but it's arrogant presumption to think that what I stated was not fact.
I've said my piece. I'm sure you will counter and I welcome it. Having fun yet?!:cornut:

Not too worry he will certainly attempt to twist around everything that you just said with a 30 page quote by quote dissection of useless rhetoric that will somehow try to counter what you said and/or take what you said out of context in yet another attempt to diminish a members credibility by attacking it with a ego problem.

[Mr Peabody]

Although I found the lesson on Japanese marketing sincerely interesting, one question comes to mind, isn't Sony and Panasonic Japanese as well.

[ldgibson76]

Although I found the lesson on Japanese marketing sincerely interesting, one question comes to mind, isn't Sony and Panasonic Japanese as well.

Well, your ability to state the obvious is at an epic level!:) (only kidding)
Well of course they are both Japanese companies and market conditions sets the terms when it comes to strategic marketing. Like Lexus in the past, Toshiba has a lot to prove. Yes introducing a new concept is risky to say the least. Think about it......When Toyota considered entering that segment of the market, they knew that for them to be successful, they would have to create a brand new mind set for the public at large. Perception! Same luxury & prestige, but with better service, reliability and lower price! Toshiba's quest is very similar. Before HD DVD, they accepted their place in the market behind the big boys.....Sony, Panasonic, Philips, and more recently, Samsung and LG. But introducing HD DVD, sole proprietary technology against the masses, to swing market share, the quality had to on par with the competition at half the price. I believe they have accomplished that. Along with a little business savvy, i.e. Paramount/Dreamworks. And don't give me that tired, worn out, "they paid Paramount off" excuse. What do you think Sony/Blu ray did in the beginning with Target, Blockbuster, Disney, etc.....
My point is that all of the companies at one time or another follow this strategy when the market demands that type of execution and when they are trying to change a mind set. Hey, when they don't follow the Lexus model, failure is inevitable.....check Sony with the Qualia line! Utter failure! If the Qualia product been priced reasonably, it would a sold like hotcakes and Sony would have the Flat panel market in the palm of it's hands....but that's not the case is it?! Companies like Vizio and Maxent, Samsung and LG, have stolen the market. The standard has been established. Lowball, sell, capture, maintain!
It's now the American way! Holla!:cornut:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

[QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible]

STT, do actually read what you submit before you submit it to the forum?! Man, you have loss all credibility with a statement like the one you made above. "Many owners of the PS3 do not play games, but wanted the cheapest way into bluray." That is without a doubt, an opinion, not a smart opinion, but never the less, an opinion . You noticed, no one submitted a reply agreeing to that assumption! Wanna know why?!!!! Cause you're wrong!

Well Mr Gibson, maybe instead of posting FUD like HD DVD looks better than Bluray, you should go out a visit other sites. Bluray.com is full of people just like me who bought the PS3 at the $499 price because A) it was the cheapest way into bluray, B) it is a full profile player capable of fully fullfilling the 2.0 profile, C) Can playback SACD's with the best of them D) allow me to remove a laptop computer I was using to stream and store music. That is not an opinion, that is a fact. If you go to Bluray.com and ask who owns the PS3 and is not a gamer, you will be very surprised. So why don't you do that instead of sitting here thinking that someones opinion is smart or dumb, because I must say, without doing so, you look pretty silly making this comment. This is a challenge to you, except it, and prove me wrong, or stay here in an ignorant pool of your own thoughts.

Unlike you, I do not need anyone to co-sign to what I say.



The main reason why consumers purchased the PS3 was because of the gaming benefits, i.e., resolution, graphics, Madden, etc,.....Blu ray was the added bonus! People would have purchase the PS3 regardless of Blu ray capabilities. Why? Because it's all about the gaming!

Did you not know that there are not many games for the PS3 at this moment Mr. know everything? Nobody is buying the PS3 for the games they are currently offering, because there are not that many that would warrant the price. GroundBeef can tell you that!

Bluray is an integral part of the PS3, that is why(unlike the XBOX360) the drive is built in. If it was meant for just gaming, then why include a bluray drive? Why include the capability to play SACD? Why include upscaling of standard DVD's? Why support 1080p at 24fps? Why even bother with making it a full profile player? The XBOX360 does not including any audio support but CD. It does not offer lossless audio like the PS3. The manual states that it is a digital entertainment center, so what does that tell you?

The XBOX360 uses a external HD DVD drive, so its addition is an afterthought. The PS3's bluray drive is internal, which mean the drive was part of the original design, not an after thought.



Blu ray playback was an after-thought for the average PS3 buyer. Once it became apparent that the games would not be readily available at the inception, that's when blu ray purchases took off.

This is common HD DVD fanboy FUD. This is not an educated statement. You are guessing this. Gamers knew long before launch that there was not going to be any decent games to play on the PS3. There is no indication at all that many of them where not going to purchase movies even if there was. If you read the gaming boards at Bluray.com, the opposite is more accurate.



Yes, I agree that PS3 was the cheapest way to obtain bluray playback, but this may be a shot in the dark, but I'm sure that if the average consumer had their choice between a stand-alone player and the PS3 and the stand alone player was priced, at let's say $399.00 initially, PS3 may have acquired strong numbers, but not the totals it currently has.

Your shot in the dark missed its target. This is speculative because it did not happen that way did it? I choose to stick with facts, not what COULD have happened. I personally think you are wrong. The reality is, there is no bluray player at any price that has the same capabilities as the PS3. None have the ease of upgradablility, none have the SACD playback capability, and none have the ability to stream or store music. These things were big selling points to us non gamers who purchase the PS3. You can underestimate this at your intellectual peril.



And for the most part, during the inception of Blu ray and HD DVD, the stand-alone Blu ray player was $1000! The average Blu ray customer was forced to purchase the PS3. And that was hard to swallow ($600.00) in it's own right.

Nobody held a gun to anyones head and made them purchase a PS3. There were plenty of folks who purchased the BD-1000 when it was released. Both Panasonic and Phillips released standalones before the introduction of the PS3. So much for that theory.

So now you have become the expert of the minds of PS3 owners. Wow, you areeither brillant, or foolish as hell. We are not at inception anymore, and there is no point in bringing it up, things are the way they are right?


Have you ever heard a PS3 while in operation?! It's loud as hell! Cooling fans blowing for days! For the Video and audio purist, that's usually unacceptable.

In case you have not checked my sig, I own a PS3. I have never heard the fan in my player go off not even once. Not even when performing Folding@home calculations which are processor intensive. The problem with fan noise is not widespread, and only effected the earliest of PS3 models. So either you are completely out of touch with current PS3 operation, or you are following Nightliar pattern of overstating an old issue. I think its both personally. The reality is, in the typical home, the background noise of refridgerators, fans, other electronics, cars going down the street, and various other external noise could easily mask any fan noise coming from the PS3 if the problem still existed. You are overblowing your point AGAIN!!



The PS3 is not the best solution for movie playback. That's not my opinion, that's a consensus. All I'm trying to say is if the Bluray players had been introduced at a more reasonable price point, your stand on Blu ray would have more merit.

Well your consensus is somewhat suspect. This sounds more like your uneducated opinion. Sound And Vision rated the PS3 over the Panasonic DMP-BD 10, and the firmware upgraded Samsung BP-1000. This was before all of the major firmware upgrades to the video.

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/hd-dvd-bluray/1927/shootout-3-blu-ray-disc-players-shootout-wrap-up-page6.html

Ultimate AV does not agree with you.

http://www.ultimateavmag.com/hddiscplayers/1206ps3blu/

Cnet does not agree with you.

http://reviews.cnet.com/consoles/sony-playstation-3-60gb/4505-10109_7-31355103.html

Now all of these reviews are dated. Since these review that PS3 has had several firmware upgrades that have really improved performance. If it could compete (and beat) with other bluray players that cost almost twice it price, then it must be as suitable to a videophile as any other player. The fan noise was a product of the 90 nano chips. All players released after March of 2007 have the 65 nano chipset. They run much cooler, and do not need the fan nearly as much.



Now regarding the remark you made about the cost to produce a HD DVD player..."$300.00" and selling the A2 for $99.00 or 199.00 is a big loss for Toshiba.....You're right STT, I don't know you, but with that logic, you do not under stand the Japanese MO when it comes to market penetration! It's a method that was established back in the late eighties with Toyota/Lexus. When Lexus introduced the LS400 at a starting price of $38,500.00, a full size import luxury car with an multivalve 8 cylinder, it turn the luxury automotive world upside down. Why, because Mercedes Benz and BMW, the leaders in that division at that time knew that after disecting the LS400, realized that that car should be 50K all day. At that time, a 6 cylinder E class was 50K and the 5 Series was well over 45K. Now, after Lexus took over the market, they priced the car appropriately, by then it was too late. No matter what BMW and Mercedes did, the damage was done. Name recognition, quality, customer service became the epitome of Lexus. Even today, luxury car manufacturers are still playing catch-up ball! Moral of the story, Toshiba knows exactly what they are doing. A lot of so-called authorities in the industry predicted that the HD DVD camp would close down shop a year ago, wouldn't last 6 months. Now you have the Sony CEO coming out publicly and stating that after all the claims of Blu Ray victory, "It's a stalemate!" No where in that statement did he specify who he was trying to pacify!

Sorry, but the A2 is no Lexus, and this is not the car industry. Your comparison is apples and oranges. And if the Japanese have such a specific way to do things, then why aren't Panasonic, Sony, and Sharp following the Toshiba modell? This is bull****. The CE companies make products for profit. There is no Japanese model in the CE industry that supports producing products for losses. Toshiba is trying to flood the HD market with cheap player with the hope of getting Bluray exclusive Studio to go neutral. They want to create a larger player base so the studio cannot ignore leaving money on the table. Unfortunately the plan is not going to work. Disney and Fox have asked Toshiba and the DVD forum to include extra protection on disc, and region coding. They refused, and now they do not have their support. It is just that simple.

If year to date sales where any indication, before the Paramount deal, it would have been over. Bluray has outsold HD DVD in every week this year. The only time disc sales have been even close, was when Transformers was released, and Bluray had no exclusive titles released in that week. Bluray still beat HD DVD in sales that week, and have maintain a 2-1 sales lead over the entire year. Before Paramounts defection, Bluray sales were pulling away from HD DVD. Even after the Paramount defection, Bluray has maintained that 2-1 margin. Had Paramount stayed neutral, there would have been no way for HD DVD to ever catch up.

The CEO comments were taken completely out of context, and this easily clear that up.

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/mytwocentsa146.html#stringer

As you can see his stalemate comments were referring to studio support, not disc sales, and not player sales.



Create a perception, and 9 times out of 10, it becomes a reality. But the one time that it doesn't, you know what they say about spitting into the wind?!!! There's always a chance it will fly back into your face! Didn't mean to give you a lesson in Japanese marketing, but it is now the standard of penetration and domination in today's consumer market!

You call that a lesson. You are trying to explain why a company that does not sell software sells players at a loss? If this is a Japanese lesson, then why aren't all the Japanese companies following this model. I know of no Japanese car company producing cars to sell at a loss.(the Lexus you mention certainly didn't for Lexus) I know of no Japanese CE company(with the exception of Toshiba) that creates any product to sell at a loss. I understand creating a cheap player to acheive greater market penetration, but at a loss, and with no other revenue stream to counter it, I do not think you taught me anything but bull**** 101.

History has already taught us a lesson. If you attempt to support a format by yourself, you will fail. Beta has provided that lesson. If Toshiba knew what they were doing, then why did they have to spend $150 million dollars to get a studio to go exclusive their way?

Your lesson is for idiots.




Last but surely not least, let's talk about the people who visit my design center and view HD DVD images and Blu ray images side by side on 80" x 45" and larger screens. STT, we have a healthy collection of Bluray and HD DVD movies. We make sure that if a movie is out in both Blu ray and HD DVD we have them so a fair comparison can be made. Now we try to make sure that the playing field is even, for instance...103" screen, 1080P projectors (3LCD)/(DLP) with same capabilities such as 24fps, HDMI v1.3 capability, similar lumen count, contrast ratio and video processing technology, etc,....And yes, even when reps from Blu ray friendly companies see the comparison, in our venue, guess what? They are wowed by the quality of the HD DVD!

Wow, you really are full of it. If what you say is true, then why doesn't HD DVD video and audio scores reflect this? These scores come from five different websites with reviewers equipment all above average in quality, all ISF calibrated. Some have screen sizes as large as 130" and review both formats. Why has one of the largest installation networks come out in favor of Bluray? If what you say is true, then they should all be following after you right?

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=532

The only studio releasing to both formats is Warner. They use identical encodes for video for both formats. So can you tell me with identical encodes, how can the HD DVD look better? And if what you say is true, then why does review after review of identical releases produces simular scores?

I have over 140 HD DVD titles, and over 230 bluray titles. This is enough to compare both formats pretty well. My experience on my high end ISF calibrated display does not mimick yours. My display supports 1080p and beyond, 24fps, deep color, and I have a 15K HD definition broadcast quality audio/video processor in front of it. I am sorry, but what you are telling me is that you are nothing more than a HD DVD shill. You are not an objective source at all.



Now they all may not admit completely that HD DVD looks better, but we see the expression on their faces, and a lot of times the expression screams out, "We really should be considering HD DVD as a possibility."

Right, not only can you read minds, but you read expressions as well. This is thick. I think this is more like "I hope they are thinking that" than a reality. I am sorry, and with all due respect, this kind of anecdotal crap does not impress me. The scores do not lie, they do not agree with a damn thing you say. They may not admit completely because they do not believe its true.

http://www.dvdfile.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6326&Itemid=11



STT, have you ever seen HD DVD and Blu Ray movies side by side on the big screen?!

I have seen them side by side in real time on my screen. I sit at the THX recommeded closeness that allows me to see every detail there is in the picture. The size of the screen is not important, its the quality of the display, the quality of the internal processing, and how far you sit that determines quality. I have seen several bluray movies blown up on a 30ft screen at both Panasonics mastering lab, and on Sony's lot.


If you have, then you have a unique perspective on the subject, but if you haven't, how can you possibly suggest that what I stated in my previous post was unlikely?!

Because every one of the reviewers I mentioned has screen sizes larger than yours, and the score they give to each formats video would agree with yours. They don't, and that is what makes your previous suggestions unlikely. I prefer more objective opinions on the quality of each formats video, not the word from a person who sells HD DVD players. If your business was on the line, or your profits, you would say anything. These reviewers have nothing to gain for just saying anything, they do not profit from their reviews. I know, I am a reviewer.


Blu ray has improved no doubt. They have cleaned up alot of the noise in the newer releases, but it's arrogant presumption to think that what I stated was not fact.
I've said my piece. I'm sure you will counter and I welcome it. Having fun yet?!:cornut:

Well, Universal still has yet to clean up the noise in their newer releases. They still have yet to support lossless audio consistantly. That can be said for Paramount as well.

It would be foolish for me to believe what you state. You have no proof to offer but your anecdotal responses. That means nothing to me unless the video scores from reviewers supported what you state. They don't, so I must be arrogant as hell, because I do not believe you. I own, and have viewed enough titles from both format to know that you are just not telling the truth.

Anyone who comes here, and states they own a business that sells HD DVD players, they are automatically discounted as an objective source. Just like the BDA, and the HD DVD PG. Anyone that stands to gain financially from this war, is a paid shill, and nothing more IMO. You are the last person I would listen to. No offense, and nothing personal.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

[QUOTE=ldgibson76]

Not too worry he will certainly attempt to twist around everything that you just said with a 30 page quote by quote dissection of useless rhetoric that will somehow try to counter what you said and/or take what you said out of context in yet another attempt to diminish a members credibility by attacking it with a ego problem.

It only takes less than a paragraph to shoot you down, so Mr Gibson has alot on you my pervious friend

[PeruvianSkies]

[QUOTE=PeruvianSkies]

It only takes less than a paragraph to shoot you down, so Mr Gibson has alot on you my pervious friend

I just won't indulge you with fodder, i've learned to not feed trolls around here.

[Mr Peabody]

Low balling prices is not the way to gain your company name prestige. Not that I entirely agree but you take a poll and I bet most see Sony as synonomus with quality. I don't think they would gain much by getting in the basement to see who can give a product away for the cheapest price. Samsung and Toshiba were both known as entry level gear. What changed that perception was when they both started putting out quality TV's that got rave reviews. Their DLP's weren't cheap when they first came out but they took off big because of picture quality, Toshiba and Samsung were among the top. They're DLP's performed and created a buzz that caught on. I believe that if it hadn't been for Toshiba's DLP's coming out first, before the HD-DVD players, that they wouldn't have gotten as far as they are now.

Let's take the Lexus scenario for a moment. Why did Toyota have to put out a high end car under a new name? I'd say it's because Toyota as a name could not compete with Benz or BMW in that high dollar market. So they had to create a new line and to get it attention they did what you mentioned. I don't think this is similar to the HD disc war at all.

I'm not familiar with the Qualia line or what happened but Sony suffered some QC set backs that hurt them. But no one expects to get a cheap TV from Sony. What they expect is one that in performance is one of the best. Wegas were always more expensive and Sony had no problem selling them. Price is not always an issue as the HD disc wars show. Sony is battling back with the Bravia line but did struggle to gain market share in other technologies when tubes went by the wayside. They did get some traction in the Plasma arena. I haven't seen a Vizio, nor do I know if anyone carries them locally. I have seen articles claiming they are very good but they don't seem to be hurting the Bravia line and they aren't becoming a household name.

I really don't know how this war will pan out. You never know what might happen. I saw where MGM has put a halt on some BR titles with no date for future release, what does this mean, if anything. Samsung who put out the first BR player now has a dual format. When I way the evidence I wouldn't call the war a draw. Especially if all the overseas figures are correct. I'd say the scale is still tipped toward BR. It's the continual introduction to market new products that gives me this feeling. If BR goes down though it will hurt a lot of companies who have products on the market. I'd be interested to see if Onkyo are selling any of there expensive HD-DVD players, I think it was going to run $899.00.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Well, your ability to state the obvious is at an epic level!:) (only kidding)
Toshiba's quest is very similar. Before HD DVD, they accepted their place in the market behind the big boys.....Sony, Panasonic, Philips, and more recently, Samsung and LG. But introducing HD DVD, sole proprietary technology against the masses, to swing market share, the quality had to on par with the competition at half the price.

Ummm, you call lip sync'ing issues quality? You call freezing and skipping quality. These problems do dog HD DVD. It dogged my A1, and my XA-2. When I downloaded the firmware to upgrade to 24fps, it made the problems worse. So much for quality.



I believe they have accomplished that. Along with a little business savvy, i.e. Paramount/Dreamworks. And don't give me that tired, worn out, "they paid Paramount off" excuse. What do you think Sony/Blu ray did in the beginning with Target, Blockbuster, Disney, etc.....

Paying a studio to not support a format is unprecedented. The price for doing so is also unprecedented. What the BDA did with Target and Blockbuster has been done so many time before its not funny. Buying end caps is nothing new, the DVD forum did it with the DVD for years. Disney is a member of the BDA, and has to pay dues just like any other member. Disney did not take any other payouts to support bluray. This I know for a fact.


My point is that all of the companies at one time or another follow this strategy when the market demands that type of execution and when they are trying to change a mind set. Hey, when they don't follow the Lexus model, failure is inevitable.....check Sony with the Qualia line! Utter failure! If the Qualia product been priced reasonably, it would a sold like hotcakes and Sony would have the Flat panel market in the palm of it's hands....but that's not the case is it?! Companies like Vizio and Maxent, Samsung and LG, have stolen the market. The standard has been established. Lowball, sell, capture, maintain!
It's now the American way! Holla!:cornut:

The push to the bottom only supports substandard products. The A1, the A2 are prime examples of that. So are the cheap chinese DVD players. Apex did what you mentioned, they are no longer around. You have not mention the Bravia line, nor the SXRD line right?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

[QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I just won't indulge you with fodder, i've learned to not feed trolls around here.

Your gonna starve to death perv type individual.

[ldgibson76]

STT!

Must you be so hostile!?! The name calling is so juvenile. Guy, it's ok to disagree. You have your opinion, and I have mine. Do I favor the HD DVD format over Blu ray? Yes I do. Am I so blinded that I can't recognize the Blu ray technology. No I'm not. I've acknowledged BD advantages. But I've also witnessed it's shortcomings. You can chop up dice and slice my statements all you want. That's your time and prerogative. I know what I've seen and experienced. And by the way, I never said I owed my place of employment, but I am the Manager of the Design center. And unless you are there, you really do not have a perspective, and contrary to your belief, we do sell both format players. Usually when a client is interested in a 1080P capable Home Theater, the rule of thumb is to include both types in the package unless the client has a preference for one or the other. Why am I explaining this to you. Continue to read your websites of choice and get someone else's opinion and adopt it as your own, like you've been doing, and I'll continue to live in the real world and deal with real people in a real way. Have fun with your PS3. No matter how this format war concludes, it was fun getting you riled up. It's not that critical man! And by the way, Toyota did sell the LS400 at a loss for the first 2-3 years to achieve market penetration and just because you've never heard of something happening doesn't mean that it didn't, "Mr. Wizard", "Nostradamus" or "The Amazing Randy"! pick one! I could swear that I was debating with one of them!
Have a nice evening!

[PeruvianSkies]

STT!

Must you be so hostile!?! The name calling is so juvenile. Guy, it's ok to disagree. You have your opinion, and I have mine. Do I favor the HD DVD format over Blu ray? Yes I do. Am I so blinded that I can't recognize the Blu ray technology. No I'm not. I've acknowledged BD advantages. But I've also witnessed it's shortcomings. You can chop up dice and slice my statements all you want. That's your time and prerogative. I know what I've seen and experienced. And by the way, I never said I owed my place of employment, but I am the Manager of the Design center. And unless you are there, you really do not have a perspective, and contrary to your belief, we do sell both format players. Usually when a client is interested in a 1080P capable Home Theater, the rule of thumb is to include both types in the package unless the client has a preference for one or the other. Why am I explaining this to you. Continue to read your websites of choice and get someone else's opinion and adopt it as your own, like you've been doing, and I'll continue to live in the real world and deal with real people in a real way. Have fun with your PS3. No matter how this format war concludes, it was fun getting you riled up. It's not that critical man! And by the way, Toyota did sell the LS400 at a loss for the first 2-3 years to achieve market penetration and just because you've never heard of something happening doesn't mean that it didn't, "Mr. Wizard", "Nostradamus" or "The Amazing Randy"! pick one! I could swear that I was debating with one of them!
Have a nice evening!

I like both formats, which is why I opted to get the LG player first, and I also have a few discs in both formats, including A ROOM WITH A VIEW, GALAPOGOS, and PLANET EARTH. I also own titles on each format and will reap the benefits of both, as long as I can play both I am not in any rush to see either end. There have also been real highlights on both formats, like the STAR TREK HD-DVD original series or Blu-ray's OLDBOY. I also have the Jack Ryan HD-DVD set, which apparently is recalled and will later come with extras. So for me, having both is keeping the product push strong and i'll take what I can get.

[GMichael]

[QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible]

STT, do actually read what you submit before you submit it to the forum?! Man, you have loss all credibility with a statement like the one you made above. "Many owners of the PS3 do not play games, but wanted the cheapest way into bluray." That is without a doubt, an opinion, not a smart opinion, but never the less, an opinion . You noticed, no one submitted a reply agreeing to that assumption! Wanna know why?!!!! Cause you're wrong!
The main reason why consumers purchased the PS3 was because of the gaming benefits, i.e., resolution, graphics, Madden, etc,.....Blu ray was the added bonus! People would have purchase the PS3 regardless of Blu ray capabilities. Why? Because it's all about the gaming! Blu ray playback was an after-thought for the average PS3 buyer. Once it became apparent that the games would not be readily available at the inception, that's when blu ray purchases took off. Yes, I agree that PS3 was the cheapest way to obtain bluray playback, but this may be a shot in the dark, but I'm sure that if the average consumer had their choice between a stand-alone player and the PS3 and the stand alone player was priced, at let's say $399.00 initially, PS3 may have acquired strong numbers, but not the totals it currently has. And for the most part, during the inception of Blu ray and HD DVD, the stand-alone Blu ray player was $1000! The average Blu ray customer was forced to purchase the PS3. And that was hard to swallow ($600.00) in it's own right. Have you ever heard a PS3 while in operation?! It's loud as hell! Cooling fans blowing for days! For the Video and audio purist, that's usually unacceptable. The PS3 is not the best solution for movie playback. That's not my opinion, that's a consensus. All I'm trying to say is if the Bluray players had been introduced at a more reasonable price point, your stand on Blu ray would have more merit.

Now regarding the remark you made about the cost to produce a HD DVD player..."$300.00" and selling the A2 for $99.00 or 199.00 is a big loss for Toshiba.....You're right STT, I don't know you, but with that logic, you do not under stand the Japanese MO when it comes to market penetration! It's a method that was established back in the late eighties with Toyota/Lexus. When Lexus introduced the LS400 at a starting price of $38,500.00, a full size import luxury car with an multivalve 8 cylinder, it turn the luxury automotive world upside down. Why, because Mercedes Benz and BMW, the leaders in that division at that time knew that after disecting the LS400, realized that that car should be 50K all day. At that time, a 6 cylinder E class was 50K and the 5 Series was well over 45K. Now, after Lexus took over the market, they priced the car appropriately, by then it was too late. No matter what BMW and Mercedes did, the damage was done. Name recognition, quality, customer service became the epitome of Lexus. Even today, luxury car manufacturers are still playing catch-up ball! Moral of the story, Toshiba knows exactly what they are doing. A lot of so-called authorities in the industry predicted that the HD DVD camp would close down shop a year ago, wouldn't last 6 months. Now you have the Sony CEO coming out publicly and stating that after all the claims of Blu Ray victory, "It's a stalemate!" No where in that statement did he specify who he was trying to pacify!
Create a perception, and 9 times out of 10, it becomes a reality. But the one time that it doesn't, you know what they say about spitting into the wind?!!! There's always a chance it will fly back into your face! Didn't mean to give you a lesson in Japanese marketing, but it is now the standard of penetration and domination in today's consumer market!

Last but surely not least, let's talk about the people who visit my design center and view HD DVD images and Blu ray images side by side on 80" x 45" and larger screens. STT, we have a healthy collection of Bluray and HD DVD movies. We make sure that if a movie is out in both Blu ray and HD DVD we have them so a fair comparison can be made. Now we try to make sure that the playing field is even, for instance...103" screen, 1080P projectors (3LCD)/(DLP) with same capabilities such as 24fps, HDMI v1.3 capability, similar lumen count, contrast ratio and video processing technology, etc,....And yes, even when reps from Blu ray friendly companies see the comparison, in our venue, guess what? They are wowed by the quality of the HD DVD! Now they all may not admit completely that HD DVD looks better, but we see the expression on their faces, and a lot of times the expression screams out, "We really should be considering HD DVD as a possibility."
STT, have you ever seen HD DVD and Blu Ray movies side by side on the big screen?!
If you have, then you have a unique perspective on the subject, but if you haven't, how can you possibly suggest that what I stated in my previous post was unlikely?! Blu ray has improved no doubt. They have cleaned up alot of the noise in the newer releases, but it's arrogant presumption to think that what I stated was not fact.
I've said my piece. I'm sure you will counter and I welcome it. Having fun yet?!:cornut:


I bought my PS3 for the BR. I can't speak for the rest of the world.

[L.J.]

And the trophy for longest post goes to.................................:7:


Hmm......I don't remember being handed a survey when I purchased my PS3 :idea:

Person: Excuse me sir, are you purchasing this product for BR movies or gaming?

LJ: Huh, what the heck are you talking about?

Person: Sir, you must either use it for BR or for gaming.....NOW PICK!

LJ: Get out of my face........why are you following me to my car?

Person: Sir, just answer...........Sir, wait........my shirt is caught in your car door!

LJ: Get off my car you idiot!

Person: He drove off with my shirt. 3rd one I lost today.






Yeah, I know I'm freaking crazy. You gotta problem with that :incazzato:

[GMichael]

And the trophy for longest post goes to.................................:7:


Hmm......I don't remember being handed a survey when I purchased my PS3 :idea:

Person: Excuse me sir, are you purchasing this product for BR movies or gaming?

LJ: Huh, what the heck are you talking about?

Person: Sir, you must either use it for BR or for gaming.....NOW PICK!

LJ: Get out of my face........why are you following me to my car?

Person: Sir, just answer...........Sir, wait........my shirt is caught in your car door!

LJ: Get off my car you idiot!

Person: He drove off with my shirt. 3rd one I lost today.






Yeah, I know I'm freaking crazy. You gotta problem with that :incazzato:


Now that's frickin' funny.

Some dumbass in the parking lot with no shirt, holding a clipboard, with a rejected look on his face.

[Groundbeef]

[QUOTE=ldgibson76]


I bought my PS3 for the BR. I can't speak for the rest of the world.

I think the difficultly on this topic about PS3/Game/BluRay is that on THIS board, more than likely the owner of the PS3 DID buy it for BR. However this can be explained because most readers/participants of this board are typically more interested in AV.

But if you go over to the game sites, you would be an anomoly.

There have been several surveys/polls out that indicate that the general populace are really not a) going to use the BR function of the PS3, or b) aware there is even a BR player on the unit itself.

Most reports are suggesting that 40% of PS3 owners don't even know that there is a player on board.

Of those that DO know there is a player, there was only a BR movie in 1 in 10 times the console is used, suggesting that the remaining 60% of PS3 owners are only using the BR movie function 10% of the time.

Heres the link:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070809-report-gamers-largely-clueless-about-next-gen-console-media-capabilities.html

Here's another:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/2007/08/npd_survey_gamers_dont_know_what_their_game_system s_can_do.html

So aside from the anecdotal stories from members here, MOST people that have a PS3 either are unaware of the BR movie function, and of the remaining % don't use it as a BR movie player a majority of the time.

I am not suggesting the PS3 isn't a viable, or good playback device of BR movies, but it's just not the mode of choice for the PS3.

[GMichael]

[QUOTE=GMichael]

I think the difficultly on this topic about PS3/Game/BluRay is that on THIS board, more than likely the owner of the PS3 DID buy it for BR. However this can be explained because most readers/participants of this board are typically more interested in AV.

But if you go over to the game sites, you would be an anomoly.

There have been several surveys/polls out that indicate that the general populace are really not a) going to use the BR function of the PS3, or b) aware there is even a BR player on the unit itself.

Most reports are suggesting that 40% of PS3 owners don't even know that there is a player on board.

Of those that DO know there is a player, there was only a BR movie in 1 in 10 times the console is used, suggesting that the remaining 60% of PS3 owners are only using the BR movie function 10% of the time.

Heres the link:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070809-report-gamers-largely-clueless-about-next-gen-console-media-capabilities.html

Here's another:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/2007/08/npd_survey_gamers_dont_know_what_their_game_system s_can_do.html

So aside from the anecdotal stories from members here, MOST people that have a PS3 either are unaware of the BR movie function, and of the remaining % don't use it as a BR movie player a majority of the time.

I am not suggesting the PS3 isn't a viable, or good playback device of BR movies, but it's just not the mode of choice for the PS3.

But the PS3 comes with BR movies. How could anyone not know that it would play one after buying it?

[Groundbeef]

[QUOTE=Groundbeef]

But the PS3 comes with BR movies. How could anyone not know that it would play one after buying it?

Remeber, these are the same huddled masses that assume that when you buy a HDTV, you are now watching HDTV (regardless of the actual signal).

And, these are the same folks that buy a DVD upconverter "because its the same as HD!"-As heard at BB when asking a customer why they don't buy a HD-DVD or BR player.

[GMichael]

Remeber, these are the same huddled masses that assume that when you buy a HDTV, you are now watching HDTV (regardless of the actual signal).

And, these are the same folks that buy a DVD upconverter "because its the same as HD!"-As heard at BB when asking a customer why they don't buy a HD-DVD or BR player.

These are the same people who will assume that BR is better because it costs more. It will look great next to their Bose.

So, what do you think they are doing with all those BR movies? Maybe we can get them all to send them to me.

Anyone out there with BR movies who don't know your PS3 will play them, please send them to:
PO box Dumbass
1313 Stupid street
Idiot NY OU812

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

STT!

Must you be so hostile!?!

Must you be so overly sensitive?


The name calling is so juvenile.

Its no more juvenile than your claims that HD DVD PQ is always better than bluray.


Guy, it's ok to disagree. You have your opinion, and I have mine. Do I favor the HD DVD format over Blu ray? Yes I do. Am I so blinded that I can't recognize the Blu ray technology. No I'm not. I've acknowledged BD advantages. But I've also witnessed it's shortcomings.

I am not concerned about disagreements. What concerns me is the outrageous claims that facts do not support.

Just what shortcomings have you found on bluray? Are they format based, or printmaster encoding issues?



You can chop up dice and slice my statements all you want. That's your time and prerogative.

Thanks for permission, but I prefer the blender.


I know what I've seen and experienced. And by the way, I never said I owed my place of employment, but I am the Manager of the Design center. And unless you are there, you really do not have a perspective, and contrary to your belief, we do sell both format players.

I am not doubting what you have seen and experienced, I am saying it is biased and not subjective. Even as a manager as opposed to owner, your bias is causing you to make statements that are pretty darn outrageous. It sounds like the typical HD DVD FUD that you see on AVS.



Usually when a client is interested in a 1080P capable Home Theater, the rule of thumb is to include both types in the package unless the client has a preference for one or the other.

I have been doing design and installation for years, I know the drill thanks.


Why am I explaining this to you.

Good question, since it is not new information.


Continue to read your websites of choice and get someone else's opinion and adopt it as your own, like you've been doing, and I'll continue to live in the real world and deal with real people in a real way.

Do you really think making totally untrue and over exaggerated statements is living in the real world? What makes you think what I say was based on what someone else says? I know how to read, research, analyze and come to my own conclusions. I do not have to make rather silly statements such as "my clients prefer HD DVD PQ all of the time, even when they do not know it". I have enough sense to know that some titles will look good on either format. It is all in the compression and encoding.



Have fun with your PS3. No matter how this format war concludes, it was fun getting you riled up. It's not that critical man!

What makes you think I was taking this all that serious, or you were getting me riled up. You can not rile me, I have debated with people on this very website that had far more knowledge than you. This is entertainment for me, and the online emotional analysis on your behalf is rather amusing if not totally off base.



And by the way, Toyota did sell the LS400 at a loss for the first 2-3 years to achieve market penetration and just because you've never heard of something happening doesn't mean that it didn't, "Mr. Wizard", "Nostradamus" or "The Amazing Randy"! pick one! I could swear that I was debating with one of them!
Have a nice evening!

Toyota also had plenty of cars that they were selling at a profit to offset any losses with the LS400. Toshiba does not. Apples and candy.

I hope you are looking in the mirror while making that last comment.

[ldgibson76]

This debate was very entertaining! To GMichael, Peruvian, Groundbeef, L.J. and Peabody, thank you for your thought provoking responses and replies. To STT, man, I have one word for you....THERAPY! You are in dire need of it. You act as if you are the sole authority on this site. You can't even admit when there's a possibility that you could be wrong on any topic. Your arrogance is astounding! Man, I know Blu ray is groundbreaking technology with what seems unlimited potential, but it has just as many obstacles to overcome as HD DVD does. The Bluray players including PS3 has the same freeze up issues and long loading times as the HD DVD players, excluding the PS3, but the PS3 has it's limitations also. Because I favor the HD DVD does not mean I'm a zealot! I own neither technology but I experience both virtually everyday. Breaking down and dissecting each sentence a fellow member of the forum submits, and it's obvious I'm not the first you've done that to, is for the lack of a better term, boring! I guess it's important to you to show everyone that you are the supreme being when it comes to AV culture/technology. What your actually doing is boring the hell out of those who care to read your post. And one more thing, Just because someone has a different perspective, doesn't make them less intelligent about the subject. You have a lot of time on your hands dude! I like I said before, every so called fact that you recite/submit to this forum, with a little time and effort can be countered. Just relax and enjoy the forum. If you lower your arrogance quotion a little, you might learn something.

[musicman1999]

Hey guys

Not getting involved in this HD-Blu debate but i just wanted to mention that the Lexus-Toshiba comparison is way off base.The target customer was not the same at all, if Toshiba was selling a high end high performance product then you might have a valid comparison, but they don't.Btw i worked for Lexus for a number of years and selling at a loss is not in the cards nor has it ever been.

bill

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

[quote] To STT, man, I have one word for you....THERAPY! You are in dire need of it. You act as if you are the sole authority on this site. You can't even admit when there's a possibility that you could be wrong on any topic.

Usually the folks that recommend therapy for others, need it far worse for themselves. You have been on this website 10 minutes, and you think you have seen all of the topics I have participated on?



Your arrogance is astounding!

Thanks! Your lack of truthfulness is as well.


Man, I know Blu ray is groundbreaking technology with what seems unlimited potential, but it has just as many obstacles to overcome as HD DVD does. The Bluray players including PS3 has the same freeze up issues and long loading times as the HD DVD players, excluding the PS3, but the PS3 has it's limitations also.

I have never experienced a freeze on 230 disc viewed. My player goes from the Sony menu, to loading the disc in 15 seconds, and that was even loading BD-J and BD+. No HD DVD player can do this, and remember I own two of them. So when you choose to tell untruths, tell it to somebody who cannot so easily call you out. Cool?



Because I favor the HD DVD does not mean I'm a zealot!

When you make statements like this

The company I work for showcases both formats on very large screens and trust me when I tell you, that in our experience, when a client views both formats on a 92"+ size screen, the majority pick the image of HD DVD over Blu ray. And when I say majority, I mean virtually all!

you are either a zealot, or a fool. I will let you pick which one.


I own neither technology but I experience both virtually everyday. Breaking down and dissecting each sentence a fellow member of the forum submits, and it's obvious I'm not the first you've done that to, is for the lack of a better term, boring!

If you do not own it, then your experiece is nothing more than cursory. Living with, and experiencing is quite different.

If you do not like your posts dissected, do not respond. I have a choice in how I want to comment on your post. If you do not like it, too bad. Harsh, but that is reality.


I guess it's important to you to show everyone that you are the supreme being when it comes to AV culture/technology. What your actually doing is boring the hell out of those who care to read your post.

This sounds alot like sour grapes to me. Booooohoooo. What is important to me is to make sure that HD DVD FUD like what you have spewed, does not go unchecked. I have grown pretty tired of people making unfactual statements that are so out of balance with current information. I am glad you are bored, but I am not.


And one more thing, Just because someone has a different perspective, doesn't make them less intelligent about the subject. You have a lot of time on your hands dude! I like I said before, every so called fact that you recite/submit to this forum, with a little time and effort can be countered. Just relax and enjoy the forum. If you lower your arrogance quotion a little, you might learn something.

And I am sure you could teach me, right? Not! You did not have a different perspective. You were trying to pass off misinformation as accurate and factual. Bully on you man.

You do not know how much time I have on my hands do you?

I have been waiting for you to present these so called facts. Where are they? What is taking you so long? Why are you complaining if you have not supplied any of your own?

I have been enjoying this forum for 11 years. My advice to you is to better educate yourself on the very things you claim you sell and experience. So far your information has been sorely lacking in accuracy, out of context, and filled with HD DVD fanboy bias.

Alot of people have been on this very website had a different perspective than I. However they never had to resort to spreading pure untruths, overblown statements, or just outright foolishness to make their point. They were competent enough to use facts and truths to support their point.

If you believe that I will not admit when I am wrong, then you undoubtedly do not know me, and you have not been around here all that long. My mentor and friend Richard Greene put me in my place so many times, that it was not funny. However he was far more knowledgeable about audio than you are. Prove me wrong, and I will admit it. If you cannot, don't cry about it.

[PeruvianSkies]

Since when did September 2006 to present time equal 10 minutes???

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Hello "pixelthis"!

[quote]I will start by saying that your response to my statement regarding the 92"+ screen is appreciated. But when I refer to that larger screen size, it's because if a person really wants to see the true capabilities of a either format, the larger screen offers the consumer better platform than a 50" flat panel.

While screen size is important, it is not the end all. A 65" screen with good processing and optics, and the viewer sitting the proper distance from the display, is just as good as a 92+ projector in fleshing out detail. Your statement is a half truth.


Believe me when I tell you that video-noise is prevalent in most of the Blu Ray movies I've seen.

Then why haven't reviewers noted this? Why are bluray review scores so much higher than HD DVD if what you say is true? Why are the bluray exclusive studio all scoring better in PQ than HD DVD if this is true? Can anyone say bull****? The noise could be a product of the projector itself, right?


On a smaller surface, like a flat panel or RPTV, you can't see it as much. but on the big screen, it's there! HD DVD seems to be a much cleaner transfer.

And you say you are no zealot? I have no trouble at all spotting colorbanding, mosquito noise, softness in a transfer, crushed black levels and other video artifacts. If you sit at the proper distance, these are not hard to find on a screen size as small as 60"

If HD DVD seems to have much cleaner transfers, then how do you explain the scores HD DVD disc get? All the reviewers cannot be wrong and you right. That is illogical, and quite frankly absurd.


And no, my company may not view every hi def format movie that becomes available and then write a synopsis on the quality, but we know what our average client thinks and sees! And HD DVD has the better showing.

How do you make this determination without a large sample to draw from? How do you explain how your findings are 180 degrees out of phase with everyone elses?


By the way, HD DVD is improving on the storage capacity. It's at 30GB now because that's all that is needed for now. Do your research before you make a definitive statement.

That is all that is needed? If that is all that is needed, then why does King Kong, Transformers, Shrek the Third, The Bourne series, all have DTHD instead of DD+? It is because of the lack of disc space and bandwidth. HD DVD cannot improve its storage capacity because now oneis sure it compatible with all current HD DVD players. TL51 requires re-aiming of the laser. How can that be done with the players already out in the field? It has not even been approved by the DVD forum yet! Toshiba own rep at the IFA show in Germany has already said that TL51 will probably be aimed at the computer industry.


With Microsoft backing, you better believe that if storage capacity is the only thing holding HD DVD back from dominating the market, Gates and company, not to mention Toshiba, will find a way to overcome that obstacle.

Good luck. Toshiba does not think it is compatible, and no one is sure it is. Now if they can just tackle that bandwidth issue...well maybe not, it is a part of the specifications.


http://arstechnica.com/journals/hardware.ars/2007/09/13/hd-dvd-whips-out-51gb-discs-surpasses-blu-ray-in-storage-capacity

Regards.

Do you read the links your post? Did you forget this;

"Toshiba will study the performance of current HD DVD players with the disc after the standard is approved by the DVD Forum. It is premature to speculate about it now."

And that is supported by this;

http://www.betanews.com/article/Toshiba_DVD_Forum_Hasnt_Yet_Approved_Final_51_GB_H D_DVD_After_All/1189716943

See what I mean about not keeping up? And we have not even talked about replication yields. Do you know that Microsoft does not manufacture HD DVD drives? So exactly what influence does a software company have on hardware they do not manufacture? Another overplayed point.

And you are a manger of a design studio? Hmmmm...

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Hey guys

Not getting involved in this HD-Blu debate but i just wanted to mention that the Lexus-Toshiba comparison is way off base.The target customer was not the same at all, if Toshiba was selling a high end high performance product then you might have a valid comparison, but they don't.Btw i worked for Lexus for a number of years and selling at a loss is not in the cards nor has it ever been.

bill

Thanks for clearing this up Bill. It is just what I thought.

[ldgibson76]

Hey guys

Not getting involved in this HD-Blu debate but i just wanted to mention that the Lexus-Toshiba comparison is way off base.The target customer was not the same at all, if Toshiba was selling a high end high performance product then you might have a valid comparison, but they don't.Btw i worked for Lexus for a number of years and selling at a loss is not in the cards nor has it ever been.

bill

Hello "Musicman1999".

Thank you for your input regarding the similarities or in your opinion, the lack of, when it comes to the Lexus/Toyota and HD DVD marketing strategies. I was in that industry(high line auto sales) for 13 years. My comparison was based on the concept of lower price to capture market share. What I stated about Lexus selling the LS400 at a loss, I was basically paraphrasing many in the industry that speculated and later found to be very true. Now when someone says that it costs Toshiba $300.00 in materials to make the HD DVD player, and selling it for $199.00 is a loss, there's no response, no rebuttal from anyone. I'm sure that the individuals that came to this conclusion about the build costs of the the LS400 are just as credible as the folks who determined the cost for the Toshiba player.
I'm sure that Toyota found a way to show profits just like Toshiba will.
Again, thank you for your input.

[Mr Peabody]

I wonder if the people behind either appraisal, HD-DVD or Lexus, what price figures they used for parts. You can take most anything off the shelf dissect it, take the price it would cost for each part and find it would cost several times more than the sticker price. Especially using retail parts prices, and even distributor prices would be much higher than what a manufacturer could buy in bulk or through a savvy business deal.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I wonder if the people behind either appraisal, HD-DVD or Lexus, what price figures they used for parts. You can take most anything off the shelf dissect it, take the price it would cost for each part and find it would cost several times more than the sticker price. Especially using retail parts prices, and even distributor prices would be much higher than what a manufacturer could buy in bulk or through a savvy business deal.

Mr. P,
The people who did the appraisel went to the parts manufacturers(they had to guess the hard drive because Toshiba wouldn't tell) and asked them for the estimate based on a large lot sale. That is how they came to their price appraisal. So the part prices are based on what would be sold to Toshiba to put the player together. The cost of labor was not included.

[dean_martin]

The push to the bottom only supports substandard products. The A1, the A2 are prime examples of that.

Whoa there, Sir T! I have the A2 and it is not a substandard product. The "standard" was not set very high for home video playback when HD players came along anyhow. The only thing I've noticed is its slow loading time and I've already developed a "loading routine" that handles that. Its picture quality with SD dvds beats the crap out of my much more expensive Pioneer Elite dvd player and its sound quality even through my 2.1 rig is cleaner (almost effortless) with deeper bass. Its HDMI output to my Panasonic plasma display has been nothing but superb with both HD-DVDs and SD dvds. Absolutely no glitches to date. There's alot of crap out there, but for the price and its role in my system (I don't use it for music), the HD-A2 ain't "substandard" when compared to the majority of home players. I mean look at what became of dvd players overnight. Almost all of'em are little plastic pieces of **** which I'm almost embarassed to display in my rack. And the remotes? I'd rather get up and press the buttons on the face of the player than use some of the remotes that come with dvdps. (That's a major reason why I went with a Pioneer Elite dvdp and once this HD format war plays out, I'll go for a tank with a decent remote that plays the winning format.) If I needed 5.1 analog outputs and a machine for both movies and music I would've looked elsewhere, but that would not have automatically made the HD-A2 a substandard product in my mind, maybe insignificant or irrelevant for my needs but not substandard. The "standard" already sucks.

I'm sorry you had problems with your A1, but that was to be expected with a first gen entry level player. I am surprised, however, that you had problems with the XA-2. And please don't post any links to sites documenting all the shortcomings and malfunctions of the HD-A2. Ignorance is bliss. If I haven't noticed any problems with mine, then they don't exist.

I found this recommendation for the HD-A30 today while looking for some magazines for my son to look at (not to read, but to look at) after getting his wisdom teeth removed. The most interesting thing Popular Mechanics notes is the problems they've experienced with Blu-Ray players. (Please note my inconsistency with the paragraph above in which I begged you not to post any links to sites documenting problems with my unit, yet I, hypocritically, provide a link to an article referencing problems with BR players in the very next paragraph.) Not many of us around here turn to Popular Mechanics for HD recommendations, I don't think, but it's interesting to see what a well-known mag is saying about our interests.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/upgrade/4230144.html?page=8

Heck, I'm amazed at Blu-Ray's proponents' disdain for Toshiba's paying off Paramount. Isn't that the American way? Maybe if Toshiba owned its own studio, then it wouldn't have to go that route. It seems to me that Toshiba is doing what it needs to do to level the playing field. That's how you combat a competitor's built-in advantage, isn't it? I guess Sony was going to release its titles on both BR and HD-DVD until it heard that Paramount was going to go exclusively HD-DVD, right? I'm trying not to take sides, but this does come across as the biggest WHINE from either side.

I definitely do have a plan if Blu-Ray wins out which I'll repeat - get a tank with a decent remote. But if you want to get in cheap and get in now, HD-DVD is tempting. This is pure consumerism without fanboy loyalty to either camp - get your cheap HD-DVD player now and then maybe two or three years from now get the best Blu-Ray player you can afford (or a PS3) if Blu-Ray wins out. Keep your el cheapo hd-dvdp, which will have long since paid for itself, on hand to play your static collection of hd-dvds for a couple of years then list the player and discs on eBay as "rare vintage video" where some nut job will pay you a huge return on your investment. If HD-DVD wins out, then you've got a disposable player on your hands just like the last little plastic piece of **** dvdp you had to replace. Hell, we're always upgrading or thinking about upgrading anyhow, aren't we?

The deciding factor may come down to whether there is an eventual market for HD home video recording. Since Blu-Ray was originally developed for RECORDING hi-def content, it will have the advantage. As a playback-only format, its higher storage capacity makes little difference to the masses. (How's that for a bold generalization?)

[Mr Peabody]

That Popular Mechanics blirp was a bit vague. I wish they had provided links to a prior story or elaborated. Knock on wood, my BR player has worked fine. I don't like messing with firmware upgrades but that's a problem with both as well as other products.

Besides that Gates probably owns stock in the rag or does major advertising :)

[PeruvianSkies]

That Popular Mechanics blirp was a bit vague. I wish they had provided links to a prior story or elaborated. Knock on wood, my BR player has worked fine. I don't like messing with firmware upgrades but that's a problem with both as well as other products.

Besides that Gates probably owns stock in the rag or does major advertising :)

I have been happy with my LG combo-format player and the only time I get small hitches seem to be when I rapidly switch between using it as a DVD player, a Blu-ray player, or an HD-DVD player, then it likes to be fussy, but otherwise it's a smooth operator. By "fussy" I mean it's almost like the player takes a bit longer as it tries to figure out what to do for a minute, as if it were saying "make up your mind what you want me to play there buddy!"

I am excited to see the new Panasonic camcorder chips that allow you to plug straight into a player for HD experience. My friend saw them at the Blu-ray fest at the end of Oct.

[dean_martin]

That Popular Mechanics blirp was a bit vague. I wish they had provided links to a prior story or elaborated. Knock on wood, my BR player has worked fine. I don't like messing with firmware upgrades but that's a problem with both as well as other products.

Besides that Gates probably owns stock in the rag or does major advertising :)

Yeah, I agree it was vague. I looked around on their site a little. They did a comparison in the July '07 edition where they gave the HD-DVD player the nod and they mentioned the Paramount deal in a previous article, but other than that I couldn't find any extensive reviews or test results. I think in one article earlier this year they proclaimed that BR had taken the lead. Yesterday was the first time in years that I picked up a Popular Mechanics.

[musicman1999]

Hello "Musicman1999".

Thank you for your input regarding the similarities or in your opinion, the lack of, when it comes to the Lexus/Toyota and HD DVD marketing strategies. I was in that industry(high line auto sales) for 13 years. My comparison was based on the concept of lower price to capture market share. What I stated about Lexus selling the LS400 at a loss, I was basically paraphrasing many in the industry that speculated and later found to be very true. Now when someone says that it costs Toshiba $300.00 in materials to make the HD DVD player, and selling it for $199.00 is a loss, there's no response, no rebuttal from anyone. I'm sure that the individuals that came to this conclusion about the build costs of the the LS400 are just as credible as the folks who determined the cost for the Toshiba player.
I'm sure that Toyota found a way to show profits just like Toshiba will.
Again, thank you for your input.

But you are missing my point, the difference is in the target audience.When Lexus started their target was people that could write a big check and not think about it.Clearly
Toshiba is looking at a different market, a better comparison would be a company such a Kia, building quality vehicles at low prices.Further this product that is causing all the fuss is a discontinued product that has been discounted to clear out product that they could not sell.The model that takes its place is more than $199.

bill

[ldgibson76]

But you are missing my point, the difference is in the target audience.When Lexus started their target was people that could write a big check and not think about it.Clearly
Toshiba is looking at a different market, a better comparison would be a company such a Kia, building quality vehicles at low prices.Further this product that is causing all the fuss is a discontinued product that has been discounted to clear out product that they could not sell.The model that takes its place is more than $199.

bill

You are correct regarding the target market difference. But, I do stand by my the marketing philosophy analogy. Your point is a valid one and that's where I will conclude the subject on my end. Now, I noticed in your equipment listing, you have a Sony blu ray player. Have you been happy with it's performance? And which model do you have?

[Mr Peabody]

The question wasn't directed to me but I am happy with the performance of my Samsung, not happy with their customer service. Their firmware upgrades I can't get to work to burn a CD and my unit isn't close to anywhere to access via ethernet. It usually takes a couple calls before I can get them to send out a disc and the assistors act like they either have to burn it themselves or pay for it. One of the HD-DVD owners here says Toshiba sends his out automatically. Only if I had known, I would have waited for the Panasonics to come back in stock or went with the s300. Not to mention out of about 6 emails sent via Samsung's website I've received a grand total of ZERO replies.

Me personally, if Blockbuster would have decided to stock HD-DVD instead of BR, I'd have HD-DVD now. I don't rent movies via the internet, nor would I ever download one. Having access to the software without purchasing it got me off the fence and I went with what was available. Although there is a difference I don't plan to replace my DVD collection either.

[musicman1999]

You are correct regarding the target market difference. But, I do stand by my the marketing philosophy analogy. Your point is a valid one and that's where I will conclude the subject on my end. Now, I noticed in your equipment listing, you have a Sony blu ray player. Have you been happy with it's performance? And which model do you have?

I have the Sony s-300 and so far i am happy with it, i have only had it about 1 month and have only watched about 7-8 movies so far.I find that, like dvd, some are better than others quality wise.I have been most impressed with discs that have the uncompressed pcm audio tracks, fantastic sound, a large step up over DD or DTS.I think that Bluray would have been better off using 5.1 pcm as their audio standard rather than the various forms of DD and DTS.
Mr Peabody try burning the firmware updates on a dvd- disc, i think that may be your problem.

bill

[Mr Peabody]

That could be the problem. It appeared to burn onto the CD though but the machine didn't recognize it. I think it's compressed when downloaded but I never get a prompt to unzip. I don't know if it would do it automaticaly when burning or what. Samsung's instructions aren't that good. Another problem is they recommend Nero which I don't have.

[L.J.]

I have the Sony s-300 and so far i am happy with it, i have only had it about 1 month and have only watched about 7-8 movies so far.I find that, like dvd, some are better than others quality wise.I have been most impressed with discs that have the uncompressed pcm audio tracks, fantastic sound, a large step up over DD or DTS.I think that Bluray would have been better off using 5.1 pcm as their audio standard rather than the various forms of DD and DTS.
Mr Peabody try burning the firmware updates on a dvd- disc, i think that may be your problem.

bill

MC PCM as a standard would be sweet. I've noticed though, that the BR studios are doing an excellent job at supporting lossless audio. I know it wasn't like that when titles first started coming out but things are getting alot better. I own 43 or so BR and most have a lossless track.

[musicman1999]

That could be the problem. It appeared to burn onto the CD though but the machine didn't recognize it. I think it's compressed when downloaded but I never get a prompt to unzip. I don't know if it would do it automaticaly when burning or what. Samsung's instructions aren't that good. Another problem is they recommend Nero which I don't have.

You are right it's not that clear, i had a look at their site.Just as an option however they will send you a disc in the mail.

bill

[musicman1999]

MC PCM as a standard would be sweet. I've noticed though, that the BR studios are doing an excellent job at supporting lossless audio. I know it wasn't like that when titles first started coming out but things are getting alot better. I own 43 or so BR and most have a lossless track.

It would be sweet.All you would need is a receiver or processor with 5.1 inputs and you are good to go.They would however need to build players with proper bass management onboard, my Sony is very basic.Of course if they did that people would not be buying all these new receivers that they may not really need.

bill

[pixelthis]

That could be the problem. It appeared to burn onto the CD though but the machine didn't recognize it. I think it's compressed when downloaded but I never get a prompt to unzip. I don't know if it would do it automaticaly when burning or what. Samsung's instructions aren't that good. Another problem is they recommend Nero which I don't have.


You NEED nero.
Its worth getting a lightscribe dvd burner just to get the Nero suite that is bundled in it.
Its great for CD, dvd , you name it, and it works great, this is abouit my fourth or fifth version of it.
GET NERO


NOW

RIGHT AWAY

[L.J.]

That could be the problem. It appeared to burn onto the CD though but the machine didn't recognize it. I think it's compressed when downloaded but I never get a prompt to unzip. I don't know if it would do it automaticaly when burning or what. Samsung's instructions aren't that good. Another problem is they recommend Nero which I don't have.

Do you have a friend with Nero. Same thing happened to me when I tried to burn a update disc for my 2910. I had a friend do it using Nero and it worked just fine.

[bfalls]

A limited version of Nero is available on-line for free. Just do a search for "Nero download free". Posts above use quotes from Popular Mechanics. I wouldn't use Popular Mechanics, or Consumer Reports as a seroius reference for buying high-end audio gear. Their reports are focused for the general masses with price as a major consideration. Although price is always a consideration, Consumer Reports weighs it more heavily than most if not all high-end reviewers. I care more about performance, reliability, upgradibility than price. If you're looking for a disposable player you don't mind tossing aside at the first hint of trouble, their articles may be of interest, but I feel economy is not a major consideration for those on this forum.

[Mr Peabody]

Thanks. I'll take a look at it. What's one more program, especially if I can find it free.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Whoa there, Sir T! I have the A2 and it is not a substandard product. The "standard" was not set very high for home video playback when HD players came along anyhow. The only thing I've noticed is its slow loading time and I've already developed a "loading routine" that handles that. Its picture quality with SD dvds beats the crap out of my much more expensive Pioneer Elite dvd player and its sound quality even through my 2.1 rig is cleaner (almost effortless) with deeper bass. Its HDMI output to my Panasonic plasma display has been nothing but superb with both HD-DVDs and SD dvds. Absolutely no glitches to date. There's alot of crap out there, but for the price and its role in my system (I don't use it for music), the HD-A2 ain't "substandard" when compared to the majority of home players. I mean look at what became of dvd players overnight. Almost all of'em are little plastic pieces of **** which I'm almost embarassed to display in my rack. And the remotes? I'd rather get up and press the buttons on the face of the player than use some of the remotes that come with dvdps. (That's a major reason why I went with a Pioneer Elite dvdp and once this HD format war plays out, I'll go for a tank with a decent remote that plays the winning format.) If I needed 5.1 analog outputs and a machine for both movies and music I would've looked elsewhere, but that would not have automatically made the HD-A2 a substandard product in my mind, maybe insignificant or irrelevant for my needs but not substandard. The "standard" already sucks.

Dean,
I do not want to knock anyones player, but all one has to do is read other websites and it doesn't take long to realize that the A2 has some real quality control problems. Some work well, other do not. Nothing to be sorry about on my behalf, I just do not think Toshiba did a good job on either of these two players. Yes it upconverts well, but is that why you bought it, or did you buy it to play HD DVD movies. Have you had any trouble with combo disc?


I'm sorry you had problems with your A1, but that was to be expected with a first gen entry level player. I am surprised, however, that you had problems with the XA-2. And please don't post any links to sites documenting all the shortcomings and malfunctions of the HD-A2. Ignorance is bliss. If I haven't noticed any problems with mine, then they don't exist.

Well, my PS3 is a first generation product and I have had zero problems with it. No coughing, freezing, stuttering, or saying there is no disc in drawer when there is. I am not going to kill your spirit like that Dean!!

The only problem I have with my xa-2 is when I ask it to do 24fps. If I do not do that, it works fine. My problem with HD DVD is its poor support of next generation audio.


I found this recommendation for the HD-A30 today while looking for some magazines for my son to look at (not to read, but to look at) after getting his wisdom teeth removed. The most interesting thing Popular Mechanics notes is the problems they've experienced with Blu-Ray players. (Please note my inconsistency with the paragraph above in which I begged you not to post any links to sites documenting problems with my unit, yet I, hypocritically, provide a link to an article referencing problems with BR players in the very next paragraph.) Not many of us around here turn to Popular Mechanics for HD recommendations, I don't think, but it's interesting to see what a well-known mag is saying about our interests.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/upgrade/4230144.html?page=8

I know a majority of the problems with bluray players came when BD+ was implmented, but that was only on two manufacturers players. The quickly put out a firmware update, and the problems were over.


Heck, I'm amazed at Blu-Ray's proponents' disdain for Toshiba's paying off Paramount. Isn't that the American way? Maybe if Toshiba owned its own studio, then it wouldn't have to go that route. It seems to me that Toshiba is doing what it needs to do to level the playing field. That's how you combat a competitor's built-in advantage, isn't it? I guess Sony was going to release its titles on both BR and HD-DVD until it heard that Paramount was going to go exclusively HD-DVD, right? I'm trying not to take sides, but this does come across as the biggest WHINE from either side.

The bellyaching stems from the fact that the public was deciding who was going to win until the payoff. Bluray was pulling away in sales of discs and players, and the Paramount/Dreamworks deal really slowed down the publics momentum, and made the market unsure. That is why the studios were so angry, and why the bluray side got so angry as well.

I always thought the American way was to let the public decide, not a desperate act from a manufacturer and a software company to preserve its royality stream. Anyway, that really is neither here nor there, the deal is for 18 months, well see what happens after that. Paramount really did screw themselves though. The deal really angered Spielberg, and because of that, none of his titles are allowed an exclusive release to HD DVD, and neither are Coppola's. The same goes for Universal. In the absence of these crucial titles, neither Paramount nor Universal really have a knockout punch. Paramount risk losing Spielberg altogether, as Hollywood rumors have him shopping for another studio to work for.


I definitely do have a plan if Blu-Ray wins out which I'll repeat - get a tank with a decent remote. But if you want to get in cheap and get in now, HD-DVD is tempting. This is pure consumerism without fanboy loyalty to either camp - get your cheap HD-DVD player now and then maybe two or three years from now get the best Blu-Ray player you can afford (or a PS3) if Blu-Ray wins out. Keep your el cheapo hd-dvdp, which will have long since paid for itself, on hand to play your static collection of hd-dvds for a couple of years then list the player and discs on eBay as "rare vintage video" where some nut job will pay you a huge return on your investment. If HD-DVD wins out, then you've got a disposable player on your hands just like the last little plastic piece of **** dvdp you had to replace. Hell, we're always upgrading or thinking about upgrading anyhow, aren't we?

Here is the problem with this. Last year the studios lost 1.9 billion dollars because DVD sales no longer support the studios operations. The longer this war lasts, the longer it takes the studio to get back to profitability, and the ability to fund new projects. This is why I believe that a resolution to this will come sooner rather than later. There has to be a successor to the DVD, and downloads is not it yet.


The deciding factor may come down to whether there is an eventual market for HD home video recording. Since Blu-Ray was originally developed for RECORDING hi-def content, it will have the advantage. As a playback-only format, its higher storage capacity makes little difference to the masses. (How's that for a bold generalization?)

LOL. Well when the public realizes that you are not going to get all there is from HD DVD that you are getting from bluray because of storage and bandwidth issues, who knows which direction they will take. All I know is that the movies that are being released on HD DVD carry no interest for me, but I am replacing my DVD collection with blurays because I believe it is really a true step up. Some of my HD DVD movies look no better than their DVD counterparts, especially coming from Universal. And the fact they are still using lossy audio is really a turn off. Once you have heard PCM uncompressed, you get totally spoiled, and nothing else will do. I think Toshiba has a real big problem with their business plan. If HD DVD wins, how will they make money if they have already decimated the market with player giveaways(that is essentially what they did with a $98 sale). Onkyo just released a new HD DVD player, but it costs $899 dollars, and you don't usually find them discounted like Toshiba products are. With the market so bottom heavy, how will a expensive player by HD DVD standards survive? How does any manufacturer survive when Toshiba has already covered the price market with their own players? They are all in this to make money, and Toshiba is making it pretty impossible for them to do so. If HD on disc is going to survive, this war has to be over quickly, or there will be nothing left.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Since when did September 2006 to present time equal 10 minutes???


When you compare it to 1996. Don't be so literal perv.

[dean_martin]

Dean,
I do not want to knock anyones player, but all one has to do is read other websites and it doesn't take long to realize that the A2 has some real quality control problems. Some work well, other do not. Nothing to be sorry about on my behalf, I just do not think Toshiba did a good job on either of these two players. Yes it upconverts well, but is that why you bought it, or did you buy it to play HD DVD movies. Have you had any trouble with combo disc?



Well, my PS3 is a first generation product and I have had zero problems with it. No coughing, freezing, stuttering, or saying there is no disc in drawer when there is. I am not going to kill your spirit like that Dean!!

The only problem I have with my xa-2 is when I ask it to do 24fps. If I do not do that, it works fine. My problem with HD DVD is its poor support of next generation audio.



I know a majority of the problems with bluray players came when BD+ was implmented, but that was only on two manufacturers players. The quickly put out a firmware update, and the problems were over.



The bellyaching stems from the fact that the public was deciding who was going to win until the payoff. Bluray was pulling away in sales of discs and players, and the Paramount/Dreamworks deal really slowed down the publics momentum, and made the market unsure. That is why the studios were so angry, and why the bluray side got so angry as well.

I always thought the American way was to let the public decide, not a desperate act from a manufacturer and a software company to preserve its royality stream. Anyway, that really is neither here nor there, the deal is for 18 months, well see what happens after that. Paramount really did screw themselves though. The deal really angered Spielberg, and because of that, none of his titles are allowed an exclusive release to HD DVD, and neither are Coppola's. The same goes for Universal. In the absence of these crucial titles, neither Paramount nor Universal really have a knockout punch. Paramount risk losing Spielberg altogether, as Hollywood rumors have him shopping for another studio to work for.



Here is the problem with this. Last year the studios lost 1.9 billion dollars because DVD sales no longer support the studios operations. The longer this war lasts, the longer it takes the studio to get back to profitability, and the ability to fund new projects. This is why I believe that a resolution to this will come sooner rather than later. There has to be a successor to the DVD, and downloads is not it yet.



LOL. Well when the public realizes that you are not going to get all there is from HD DVD that you are getting from bluray because of storage and bandwidth issues, who knows which direction they will take. All I know is that the movies that are being released on HD DVD carry no interest for me, but I am replacing my DVD collection with blurays because I believe it is really a true step up. Some of my HD DVD movies look no better than their DVD counterparts, especially coming from Universal. And the fact they are still using lossy audio is really a turn off. Once you have heard PCM uncompressed, you get totally spoiled, and nothing else will do. I think Toshiba has a real big problem with their business plan. If HD DVD wins, how will they make money if they have already decimated the market with player giveaways(that is essentially what they did with a $98 sale). Onkyo just released a new HD DVD player, but it costs $899 dollars, and you don't usually find them discounted like Toshiba products are. With the market so bottom heavy, how will a expensive player by HD DVD standards survive? How does any manufacturer survive when Toshiba has already covered the price market with their own players? They are all in this to make money, and Toshiba is making it pretty impossible for them to do so. If HD on disc is going to survive, this war has to be over quickly, or there will be nothing left.

haven't tried a combo disc yet. In fact I haven't tried many titles. I'm still waiting on my damn freebies! I own and I've watched exactly 2 HD titles - Transformers and 2001: A Space Odyssey which makes me eminently qualified to pontificate on all the ends and outs of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.

I'm not ready for next gen audio.

The American way in the market place is slash and burn and cut-throat tactics rather than democratic principles. Even at this very moment, I'm using a product whose manufacturer has literally crippled and prevented almost all competition. I'm not saying these tactics are in the best interest of consumers.

How did studios survive before the proliferation of VHS and later DVD? How is it that the studios have become so dependent on home entertainment? When 8mm and 16mm were the formats for home movies, were the studios dependent on the home entertainment market? I'm not arguing against your point that studios are losing billions of dollars because dvd sales no longer support their operations. I'm just wondering how they got in such a position.

I have to agree with you on the choice of titles. About once a week, I check all the HD-DVD titles on Amazon (sometimes I check the Blu-Ray titles too) and I've saved maybe 7 to 10 titles to my wishlist. Most of them suck and some are down right embarassing. No foreign films. No cult flicks. Where's all the cool stuff? It didn't take dvd very long to get titles that I could only get from specialty companies on vhs.

Yep, it's gonna be hard for any other manufacturer to come to market with an HD-DVD player. I do know that Arcam was pulling for HD-DVD, but they're not bringing anything to market yet. I think Denon (Blu-Ray) and Onkyo are the only higher-end manufs jumping in. (Yeah, Sony has a great reputation, but they're not above putting out crap.) -- Aww crap, I left out Pioneer Elite (Blu-Ray).

I never had a stake in the hi-res audio format wars, but the HD war seems to be having (and will have when one is finally whipped) more far-reaching consequences. This is a little surprising to me because of the relatively few numbers of consumers who have committed.

[PeruvianSkies]

When you compare it to 1996. Don't be so literal perv.

Right, so you are going by the join date that appears with someone's name, but yours doesn't say 1996, so you can't assume that others (despite seemingly to be new) are actually new, so you can't put someone down and assume they are new when the join date is not 100% accurate, I have been coming around for 3 years, but my status only shows 1 year since I joined. You don't have to join this site to read through everything on here, so that is no indication to what a person knows about you and your posts.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Right, so you are going by the join date that appears with someone's name, but yours doesn't say 1996, so you can't assume that others (despite seemingly to be new) are actually new, so you can't put someone down and assume they are new when the join date is not 100% accurate, I have been coming around for 3 years, but my status only shows 1 year since I joined. You don't have to join this site to read through everything on here, so that is no indication to what a person knows about you and your posts.

I did not mention join date smartness you did. And of course the point I was making flew right past your pointed little head. I made no assumptions on anyones join date, or even alluded to the fact that I knew his join date.

It really does not matter what date is next to my name, people who have been around here a while know I have been here a long time. I never put anyone down, I just made a comment regarding a comparison of time. So next time you want to read farther than my posts actually state, don't. You are just not that smart.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

haven't tried a combo disc yet. In fact I haven't tried many titles. I'm still waiting on my damn freebies! I own and I've watched exactly 2 HD titles - Transformers and 2001: A Space Odyssey which makes me eminently qualified to pontificate on all the ends and outs of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.

LOL. Well I have purchased a little past 140 titles on HD DVD, and I have experienced a host of issues that has tripped up both of my players. Happy Feet(which is supposed to make me happy) caused both of my players to hiccup and stall one time, pause and keep going another, or cause the audio to go out of sync with the video. Most all of the combo disc(Children of Men comes to mind) would not play at all. Others just took forever to load, and then proclaimed there was no disc in the tray. The problems were not the problem, but Toshiba's response to the problems were the problem.



The American way in the market place is slash and burn and cut-throat tactics rather than democratic principles. Even at this very moment, I'm using a product whose manufacturer has literally crippled and prevented almost all competition. I'm not saying these tactics are in the best interest of consumers.

Well, If you slash and burn you market at the onset, what do you have left but charred ruins after all is said. The BDA does not want that to happen, which is why player cost are more expensive, and there are no huge pices slashes, or player giveaways. Toshiba appears not to care about this, and they seem to believe that HD DVD and Bluray can co-exist like the XBOX and the PS franchise. Unfortunately retailers do want this, the CE manufactuers don't want it, and consumers do not want to purchase two boxes. So thiere is a problem with this thought process.


How did studios survive before the proliferation of VHS and later DVD? How is it that the studios have become so dependent on home entertainment? When 8mm and 16mm were the formats for home movies, were the studios dependent on the home entertainment market? I'm not arguing against your point that studios are losing billions of dollars because dvd sales no longer support their operations. I'm just wondering how they got in such a position.

Print rentals to theaters, percentage on concessions and tickets mainly drove the studios business financing of future projects. Sometime in the early nineties, VHS sales overcame theatrical ticket revuenue, and that change the model of how the studio's finance projects. Home entertainment has filled their coffers every since. Every since early 2k, DVD's have been their cash cow as they made profits hand over fist. Well, last year that changed completely. They are running out of titles to release to DVD, and television programs are all they have left, and that is not selling very well. They NEED another disc based medium to drive future projects, and they know this.


I have to agree with you on the choice of titles. About once a week, I check all the HD-DVD titles on Amazon (sometimes I check the Blu-Ray titles too) and I've saved maybe 7 to 10 titles to my wishlist. Most of them suck and some are down right embarassing. No foreign films. No cult flicks. Where's all the cool stuff? It didn't take dvd very long to get titles that I could only get from specialty companies on vhs.

The titles, and the quality of those titles is what has turned me off on HD DVD. Paramount seems to be reaching for the lowest common denominator in terms of next gen audio support, and Universal is just spitting out titles without any attention to PQ or AQ. Then I turn to bluray and look at the quality of Ratatouille and Cars, Spiderman, ad even older titles such as Stargate and the first Fantastic Four, and I am astounded at both the picture quality and audio quality. For me as a videophile, the choice is pretty simple. I have done a considerable amount of upgrading to all of my video systems, and have done a great deal of homework to figure out what I need to get everything ready for the best performance of my system. HD DVD is just not stepping up to the plate.


Yep, it's gonna be hard for any other manufacturer to come to market with an HD-DVD player. I do know that Arcam was pulling for HD-DVD, but they're not bringing anything to market yet. I think Denon (Blu-Ray) and Onkyo are the only higher-end manufs jumping in. (Yeah, Sony has a great reputation, but they're not above putting out crap.) -- Aww crap, I left out Pioneer Elite (Blu-Ray).

When you consider that the best selling HD DVD player is the A2, and everything else is trailing so far behind its not funny, Onkyo is going to have a real problem here. This is why Toshiba's rush to the bottom strategy is not sustainable, and not really good for the market as a whole. If history tells us anything, going it alone leads to failure. Ask Sony about beta in the consumer market. However, because the bluray market is so healthy, and has plenty of room, look for Sharp, LG, and a huge surprise Daewoo who is going to release the first fully featured bluray to hit the market. Philips is releasing a new model, Samsung is releasing two new models, and from what I get from my sources, a bunch of manufacturers in China are also working on lower priced models that meet the extended view profile.


I never had a stake in the hi-res audio format wars, but the HD war seems to be having (and will have when one is finally whipped) more far-reaching consequences. This is a little surprising to me because of the relatively few numbers of consumers who have committed.

Its pretty early in the game, but you are seeing things happening that should not this early in any formats life. Giving away movies is nothing new, but practically giving away players is a new strategy that I think will backfire in the long run. However, Toshiba seems to be content with being the "other" format, and that may be just what they end up being. Much like UMD is to DVD. I do not think the public will go for dual format players, because their price will never make it down to mass market levels. Retailers will not support two formats with floor space, and they have said so. The CE manufacturers have already decided which to support, so it will be interesting to see what happens going forward

[PeruvianSkies]

LOL. Well I have purchased a little past 140 titles on HD DVD,

Sure you have. You've spent $3000 on a format that you don't think is going to win. Right. Or did you get those HD-DVD's for $4 each?

[L.J.]

I'm still waiting on my damn freebies!

Dean, I was gonna ask you about that. I was reading at some other forums and it seems that some people haven't received their free discs after like 6 or more months. Some also reported getting a post card after several months that stated there was a delay and it would take a few more months to process the discs.

The good news is that some have reported getting theirs in as little as 5 weeks, so hopefully we both get lucky.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Sure you have. You've spent $3000 on a format that you don't think is going to win. Right. Or did you get those HD-DVD's for $4 each?

This is why I tell you not to read any farther than I posted. I got all of my titles before I even thought about bluray, whether HD DVD would win or lose, or even became interested in the format war. I bought my A1 three months after the HD DVD launch, and bought disc like crazy. I got into bluray just this year, well after my continued frustration with my HD DVD players, extensive research into many areas of both formats, and my own desire to get the best out of my investment that I could.

I knew that you were not bright enough to follow good advice. I wish I could say that you are just jealous, but I do not believe that you are smart enough to be even that!

[dean_martin]

Dean, I was gonna ask you about that. I was reading at some other forums and it seems that some people haven't received their free discs after like 6 or more months. Some also reported getting a post card after several months that stated there was a delay and it would take a few more months to process the discs.

The good news is that some have reported getting theirs in as little as 5 weeks, so hopefully we both get lucky.

Your optimism is always refreshing, LJ. I appreciate that!

When I sat down to fill out my order and to read the instructions I noticed the "fine print":

1. If you don't include everything they ask for, including copy of receipt, upc code and order form, I don't think your order is even processed. In other words, they don't even notify you that you didn't follow instructions. Some people may be waiting for a very long time. I'm not sure I included the correct upc code/label. My box had a upc label sticker over the place on the box that probably had the original upc label. I cut out that part of the box and left the sticker on because it didn't look like it was placed on the box by the retailer. I have no idea whether that screwed me or not.

2. 8-10 weeks for delivery.

3. The choices - one from each of five groups - weren't all that great. For example, if I followed the instructions, I will have Blazing Saddles on vhs, dvd and hd-dvd. That's not a bad thing but I really didn't want to duplicate anything I already had with my freebies. From another group, I selected Pitch Black not because I think its a good movie but because I read somewhere that on HD-DVD the details in the dark scenes come across really well - that was a "visual over content" pick. From another group I picked Casablanca because none of the newer films in that group appealed to me. I picked We Were Soldiers from another group. The rest of that group must have been really bad. My last pick must be less than memorable. I can't remember what it was. I made copies of everything I sent in, but rather than looking it up, I think I'll let it be a surprise.

Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours and to everyone who's participated in this thread. I just returned from my local rental store and discovered that they carry both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD titles. I'll take that as a sign to sit back, enjoy and be thankful for what I have, at least for a day.

[PeruvianSkies]

I knew that you were not bright enough to follow good advice. I wish I could say that you are just jealous, but I do not believe that you are smart enough to be even that!

Jealous? Hardly. Just because I know more about movies that you do despite being much younger than you isn't any reason for you to try and flip things around and make me seem like the one who is jealous. I already told you that I'd take you on any day in a movie trivia contest.

[drseid]

Its pretty early in the game, but you are seeing things happening that should not this early in any formats life. Giving away movies is nothing new, but practically giving away players is a new strategy that I think will backfire in the long run. However, Toshiba seems to be content with being the "other" format, and that may be just what they end up being. Much like UMD is to DVD. I do not think the public will go for dual format players, because their price will never make it down to mass market levels. Retailers will not support two formats with floor space, and they have said so. The CE manufacturers have already decided which to support, so it will be interesting to see what happens going forward

I don't think Toshiba is content to being the "other" format at all. I think they plan to be the dominant format and plan on Blu-ray being a niche format for people who are willing, and have the disposable income to buy it as well. Long-term, they are willing to let *Blu-ray* be the "other" format, while Toshiba takes the mass market with $100 and under players. I think the strategy is actually a brilliant one by Toshiba, and they have completely surprised me by their sharp business sense (exactly the kind of move I would have made myself). I am now interested to see what their next move is. This current move is just starting to take effect. Longer-term I believe it will gain more and more momentum until it shifts the paradigm completely in Toshiba's favor with the mass market once they really start paying attention to this.

That said, even *longer-term*, I believe the strategy will shift to inexpensive dual-format players. Once that occurs, the format war will in effect be over and both sides can co-exist. Certainly I argue the consumer has benefited greatly from the format war with respect to price. Blu-ray has not lowered its price anywhere near HD DVD, but lower their price considerably they have indeed. That is due to the competition. Quite frankly *both* sides have lowered their prices much faster than planned due to the competition. This is great news for the consumer, IMO and I have taken advantage of it by buying $100 HD DVD players for my extended family members as holiday gifts. If someone would have asked me a year ago if we would see $100 players of either format this holiday season I would have said they were crazy. The CE manufacturers may not like it, but I could care less. $100 Toshibas are here now, so why should I care what the other CEs are thinking? Eventually they will jump on board as cost of materials come down, and Blu-ray will *have* to follow suit. In the meantime the consumer can "go to town."

Quality has also had its ups and down on both sides, but it has also benefited by the competition. I remember the original BR version of "The Fifth Element" and look at titles BR titles coming out nowadays in comparision. Just think without the competition we might still be getting regular duds like that one now. I just love competition. :-)

The format "war" has caused hostility on both sides, but I as a consumer (and somewhat of a "business strategy observer") am loving every minute of it.

---Dave

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I don't think Toshiba is content to being the "other" format at all. I think they plan to be the dominant format and plan on Blu-ray being a niche format for people who are willing, and have the disposable income to buy it as well. Long-term, they are willing to let *Blu-ray* be the "other" format, while Toshiba takes the mass market with $100 and under players. I think the strategy is actually a brilliant one by Toshiba, and they have completely surprised me by their sharp business sense (exactly the kind of move I would have made myself). I am now interested to see what their next move is. This current move is just starting to take effect. Longer-term I believe it will gain more and more momentum until it shifts the paradigm completely in Toshiba's favor with the mass market once they really start paying attention to this.

Here is the problem with your theory. Manufacturers are not making any money from DVD players, so they need another format to profit off of. For years (and I mean a long time) they made very good profits off of VHS until the ultra cheap players from China came. When that happen, profits dried up like the Sahara. Then there was the push to DVD, and in the early stages, and for quite a few years afterward, manufacturers made a nice bit of change from each player. Then came the ultra cheap Korean, and Chinese players from Apex, Liteon, and several other, once again profits dried up. In both of these two cases manufacturers were able to recoup R&D, and make a nice profit for years down the road. Now comes Toshiba and HD DVD. In case you didn't know this there several CE companies that were going to join toshiba in making players for the market. However when Toshiba announced their pricing structure for the first generation players, all of its other partners(and Onkyo was one of them) pulled out, because they realized there was no way they could recoup R&D, and compete with toshiba at those early price levels. So now you see Toshiba going it alone with the complete burden and risk for an entire format. It is widely known that they are selling players at a loss, and the Onkyo player that is going to be released is a XA-2 rebadged with a few improvements. Onyko decided not to release its own design, but to purchased a design liscensed from Toshiba so they have no R&D to recover. So there is not a wide variety of design ideas from different manufacturers. Even RCA had to drop out of the HD DVD side, because they could not sell players and make a profit. In fact, they just could not sell players period.

On the other side of coin, you have manufacturers making bluray players. They are currently priced so that everyone within the manufacture to sales chain all make a profit from players, and are able to recoup R&D investments. You have players from Panasonic, Pioneer, Sony, Samsung, and Philips all with different abilities for upgrading, chipsets for audio and video, and at different price levels covering the high end, to the mid level. Next year you have Sharp, LG, Funai, Liteon, and several other already announced as joining the previous mentioned supporting bluray with more mid to lower end players, all supporting the full view profile(as opposed to the profile 1.1 of current players). Everyone entering next year has priced their players so they can make a profit, and the first generation products from the first manufacturers have fallen significantly in price. When you look at the success of VHS, and DVD, it was because the entire CE consortium aligned themselves behind the successful format. The ones that chose to go it alone(Sony with Beta) failed. If Toshiba plan is so succesful, then why did they have to pay such a enormous amount to Paramount/Dreamworks NOT support the other side? Easy answer, they were being left behind in disc sales, and needed a way to survive through the holiday. Why are they selling players at a $200 loss? Because the A2 was not selling as well as they thought it would. They had alot of players sitting in warehouses they had to move before releasing another generation of players.


That said, even *longer-term*, I believe the strategy will shift to inexpensive dual-format players. Once that occurs, the format war will in effect be over and both sides can co-exist. Certainly I argue the consumer has benefited greatly from the format war with respect to price. Blu-ray has not lowered its price anywhere near HD DVD, but lower their price considerably they have indeed. That is due to the competition. Quite frankly *both* sides have lowered their prices much faster than planned due to the competition. This is great news for the consumer, IMO and I have taken advantage of it by buying $100 HD DVD players for my extended family members as holiday gifts. If someone would have asked me a year ago if we would see $100 players of either format this holiday season I would have said they were crazy. The CE manufacturers may not like it, but I could care less. $100 Toshibas are here now, so why should I care what the other CEs are thinking? Eventually they will jump on board as cost of materials come down, and Blu-ray will *have* to follow suit. In the meantime the consumer can "go to town."

Here is the problem with your dual format players. The will not reach the pricing level that will spur mass market adoption. While at the Bluray festival, I got a chance to talk to the reps from both LG and Samsung. Both told me the cost of producing a dual format player will always be alot higher than a single format player because everything is doubled, including the manufacturing process. Neither one was going to sell at a loss, so until the price of parts drops significantly(something they said would not happen for years) the player prices will remain quite high. HD DVD has so lowered the bar and decimated their market, that yes consumers have benefitted, but manufacturers will suffer because of that benefit. Your assumption that the bluray side has dropped prices faster than they wanted to is just not factual. They ave allowed(just like market forces would dictate) the value of the first generation players to drop naturally while improving manufacturing processes to be more efficent, and allowing price of the parts to drop naturally by sheer market forces. That is a huge difference from selling purposefully at a loss, something that is not sustainable, nor good for the market as a whole. It may have benifitted you in the short run, but it is to the detriment of the market in the long run, as nobody is going to want to enter a market that has bottomed out less than two years after inception. There is nowhere to go but further down, and that is not going to get CE companies to join your side. Aside from Onyko, when is the last time you heard a manufacturer announce a HD DVD player to be released?


Quality has also had its ups and down on both sides, but it has also benefited by the competition. I remember the original BR version of "The Fifth Element" and look at titles BR titles coming out nowadays in comparision. Just think without the competition we might still be getting regular duds like that one now. I just love competition. :-)

The format "war" has caused hostility on both sides, but I as a consumer (and somewhat of a "business strategy observer") am loving every minute of it.

---Dave

When it comes to players, I do not think the Bluray side has had nearly the issues that the HD DVD side has. Aside from the rushed to the market Samsung BP-1000, no other player has had the quality control issues that the A1, A2, XA1 and XA2 have had. Especially when you combine them with the issues surrounding the combo disc. I know quite a few folks who have stated on AVS that they will not purchase the combo disc anymore because of the issues with it, and their players.

On to the software side, TFE was more of a miscue than a norm. According to my inside sources at Sony, nobody paid attention to QC on that title, and a few more Sony ones as well. As judge by the combined audio and video scores of the major review sites, bluray exclusive studios occupy the top three, with paramount, and Universal sitting at the very bottom, 18 months after launch. Universal is trailing so far behind even paramount that its not funny. Aside from Transformers, Paramount has not scored a single 5 out of 5 on either video or sound. Universal has not had a 5 on either since King Kong. It wasn't the competition that got bluray there, it was the early critisizm from reviewers that got them there. Disney is sitting at the top, and has scored more 5 on both PQ and AQ than any studio out there, followed by Sony and Fox. I do not think competition got them there, I think the public desire for the best PQ and AQ has got them there. In these areas I do not think HD DVD has presented much of a challenge, and that is born out of the scores they have received in comparison to bluray.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Jealous? Hardly. Just because I know more about movies that you do despite being much younger than you isn't any reason for you to try and flip things around and make me seem like the one who is jealous. I already told you that I'd take you on any day in a movie trivia contest.

You know more about movie trivia than I do, because that is not where my interest is. Now when you talk about movie production, and soundtrack creation specifically, you do not know more than my cats. That is why you have never come back to debate Dracula, because even your cursory adventure in that area got you trampled. If you know so much, they why are you not smart enough to know not to compare a theaterical print with a video disc?

You are jealous, that is why you have stooped to such classless acts as insulting me racially, and posting pictures and making negative comments about Woochifer. You are below trailer trash in my opinion, and that is why everyone and their grandmother does not mind kickin your classless butt. You are the only person here that requires a huge fire ladder to see over the curb. The best thing I can call you is gutter snipe. Now go back to your under the trailer house.

[drseid]

Here is the problem with your theory. Manufacturers are not making any money from DVD players, so they need another format to profit off of. For years (and I mean a long time) they made very good profits off of VHS until the ultra cheap players from China came. When that happen, profits dried up like the Sahara. Then there was the push to DVD, and in the early stages, and for quite a few years afterward, manufacturers made a nice bit of change from each player. Then came the ultra cheap Korean, and Chinese players from Apex, Liteon, and several other, once again profits dried up. In both of these two cases manufacturers were able to recoup R&D, and make a nice profit for years down the road. Now comes Toshiba and HD DVD. In case you didn't know this there several CE companies that were going to join toshiba in making players for the market. However when Toshiba announced their pricing structure for the first generation players, all of its other partners(and Onkyo was one of them) pulled out, because they realized there was no way they could recoup R&D, and compete with toshiba at those early price levels. So now you see Toshiba going it alone with the complete burden and risk for an entire format. It is widely known that they are selling players at a loss, and the Onkyo player that is going to be released is a XA-2 rebadged with a few improvements. Onyko decided not to release its own design, but to purchased a design liscensed from Toshiba so they have no R&D to recover. So there is not a wide variety of design ideas from different manufacturers. Even RCA had to drop out of the HD DVD side, because they could not sell players and make a profit. In fact, they just could not sell players period.

On the other side of coin, you have manufacturers making bluray players. They are currently priced so that everyone within the manufacture to sales chain all make a profit from players, and are able to recoup R&D investments. You have players from Panasonic, Pioneer, Sony, Samsung, and Philips all with different abilities for upgrading, chipsets for audio and video, and at different price levels covering the high end, to the mid level. Next year you have Sharp, LG, Funai, Liteon, and several other already announced as joining the previous mentioned supporting bluray with more mid to lower end players, all supporting the full view profile(as opposed to the profile 1.1 of current players). Everyone entering next year has priced their players so they can make a profit, and the first generation products from the first manufacturers have fallen significantly in price. When you look at the success of VHS, and DVD, it was because the entire CE consortium aligned themselves behind the successful format. The ones that chose to go it alone(Sony with Beta) failed. If Toshiba plan is so succesful, then why did they have to pay such a enormous amount to Paramount/Dreamworks NOT support the other side? Easy answer, they were being left behind in disc sales, and needed a way to survive through the holiday. Why are they selling players at a $200 loss? Because the A2 was not selling as well as they thought it would. They had alot of players sitting in warehouses they had to move before releasing another generation of players.



Here is the problem with your dual format players. The will not reach the pricing level that will spur mass market adoption. While at the Bluray festival, I got a chance to talk to the reps from both LG and Samsung. Both told me the cost of producing a dual format player will always be alot higher than a single format player because everything is doubled, including the manufacturing process. Neither one was going to sell at a loss, so until the price of parts drops significantly(something they said would not happen for years) the player prices will remain quite high. HD DVD has so lowered the bar and decimated their market, that yes consumers have benefitted, but manufacturers will suffer because of that benefit. Your assumption that the bluray side has dropped prices faster than they wanted to is just not factual. They ave allowed(just like market forces would dictate) the value of the first generation players to drop naturally while improving manufacturing processes to be more efficent, and allowing price of the parts to drop naturally by sheer market forces. That is a huge difference from selling purposefully at a loss, something that is not sustainable, nor good for the market as a whole. It may have benifitted you in the short run, but it is to the detriment of the market in the long run, as nobody is going to want to enter a market that has bottomed out less than two years after inception. There is nowhere to go but further down, and that is not going to get CE companies to join your side. Aside from Onyko, when is the last time you heard a manufacturer announce a HD DVD player to be released?



When it comes to players, I do not think the Bluray side has had nearly the issues that the HD DVD side has. Aside from the rushed to the market Samsung BP-1000, no other player has had the quality control issues that the A1, A2, XA1 and XA2 have had. Especially when you combine them with the issues surrounding the combo disc. I know quite a few folks who have stated on AVS that they will not purchase the combo disc anymore because of the issues with it, and their players.

On to the software side, TFE was more of a miscue than a norm. According to my inside sources at Sony, nobody paid attention to QC on that title, and a few more Sony ones as well. As judge by the combined audio and video scores of the major review sites, bluray exclusive studios occupy the top three, with paramount, and Universal sitting at the very bottom, 18 months after launch. Universal is trailing so far behind even paramount that its not funny. Aside from Transformers, Paramount has not scored a single 5 out of 5 on either video or sound. Universal has not had a 5 on either since King Kong. It wasn't the competition that got bluray there, it was the early critisizm from reviewers that got them there. Disney is sitting at the top, and has scored more 5 on both PQ and AQ than any studio out there, followed by Sony and Fox. I do not think competition got them there, I think the public desire for the best PQ and AQ has got them there. In these areas I do not think HD DVD has presented much of a challenge, and that is born out of the scores they have received in comparison to bluray.

Keep in mind Sir T, I as a consumer am not concerned with the manufacturers. I only care about getting the most bang for the buck for *me*. That said, the $200 loss that Toshiba allegedly is taking has never been proven and will never be proven. Venturer as I have stated in the past (which is pretty much an HD-A3 clone) seems to disprove it, unless they are taking a $200 loss on their player as well (and they have no incentive to do so). Like I have said before, never underestimate what some sharp negotiation coupled with manufacturing efficiencies by a given company can do... I say this as an expert in the field -- one who has heard people say "the going rate for this widget is X." I knew I had negotiated a price far below it for my company, but could not announce the relatively low number for obvious reasons. Only Toshiba knows what they are paying. I am not saying I am positive the $200 loss figure is incorrect, but I am saying it is highly unlikely.

At the end of the day, the CE companies will have to come along to the party or they will be left out. They may say they can't afford to now, but I am pretty confident you will see at least a couple more join in next year, and then most of the rest the following year as production costs continue to come down and their desperation increases. Manufacturing efficiencies will play a major role here in convincing others to join. Toshiba is following a very rational business model for themselves, and I think it is working brilliantly for the consumer. They wont be going it alone for much longer if normal business economics play out as I would expect them to. HD DVD is no Beta -- unfortunately I (or my parents to be more specific) bought Beta as an aside... :-(.

As for BR lowering its prices faster than it planned to... Without being a fly on the wall at BR consortium headquarters, I am about as sure of it as can be. Again, not as fast as HD DVD by any stretch, but faster than they planned, yes... A $340 Samsung this holiday season when the original model a year ago cost more than twice that? Again, competition works every time. This is not something to be upset about, I think its great that Samsung is joining the party and lowering their prices to more affordable levels in order to capture market share. Again, it is good business practice, and something that the BR camp *has* to do in order to compete with HD DVD with average income buyers. The PS3 will not support the BR format on its own apart from games. The BR consortium need standalone player sales (I do not count the PS3 as a standalone player for this statement's purposes) and Samsung has taken a great step in the right direction. Only Sony benefits from PS3 sales if the more expensive standalones sit idle at their relatively high price points. Samsung has now drawn first blood on the BR side, and I applaud them.

As for the Paramount deal, while I was completely shocked at that news when it happened, I would guess it was part of Toshiba's overall strategy to ensure sucess. After all, anything that can be done to firm-up studio support (or take it away from your competitors) helps. I guess Toshiba felt it necessary to ensure "victory" or a "stalemate." Price is not the sole factor that consumers look for, of course and Toshiba in another brilliant move played their hand right again. That is the thing I like about HD DVD (and Toshiba in general)... They have made extremely smart business decisions that many (including myself in most cases) did not see coming. I have to admire that tenacity from a company that was the underdog on every level.

Dual format players are rediculously pricey now, but they will come down. Again, a lot of what was thought to be impossible has become possible. Manufacturing costs will come down on both sides, and dual format players will become relatively inexpensive to manufacture. This will again attract more CEs to the mix, driving down costs further.

As for Video/Audio quality... I am not commenting about what they are now (pretty much equal on both sides when the formats' capabilities are both used effectively). I am referring to the early days when Sony was releasing crap titles and HD DVD (Warner primarily) released a number of quality titles that put the early BR titles to shame. That forced BR's hand to improve quality, but I am sure you are correct on your information of "The Fifth Element" and the like. They started paying attention to quality because if they didn't, they would be known as the "inferior quality" format at a price that is double the competition's (not an allegation by me, but rather a faulty perception by early adopters due to the titles at launch). Make no mistake about it, the competition has been good for the consumer on just about every level except studio support (which I grant you is a *big* one).

As for the present, I have gone on record and will reiterate it here that HD DVD *does* need to focus more on the lossless audio codecs like DD TrueHD. That we will have to see -- BR has a few glitches that still need to be wrapped up as well... Both formats have room to improve, but both are excellent when compared to DVD, or HDTV over cable and the like.

One additional edit: I just saw Ratatouille on BR today a moment ago. The disc is a perfect example of what still needs to be improved with the formats as they add new features, but also what has changed over time for the better in other (more important) areas... The load times for the BD Java+ were extremely long (2-3 minutes a couple times on my BDP-S1 -- once to menu and once to the movie itself) and I was getting quite frustrated, when coupled with the many *many* unnecessary previews Disney put on the disc without allowing you to go directly to the movie. That said, the bad ends there... This is a reference quality disc in every way. The picture, sound, and movie itself are all top notch. I am definitely glad I bought this one. What a great example of what the formats can look and sound like at the top of their game. Bravo Disney and Pixar. Anyone who owns a BR player should buy this one, IMO.

---Dave

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Keep in mind Sir T, I as a consumer am not concerned with the manufacturers. I only care about getting the most bang for the buck for *me*. That said, the $200 loss that Toshiba allegedly is taking has never been proven and will never be proven. Venturer as I have stated in the past (which is pretty much an HD-A3 clone) seems to disprove it, unless they are taking a $200 loss on their player as well (and they have no incentive to do so). Like I have said before, never underestimate what some sharp negotiation coupled with manufacturing efficiencies by a given company can do... I say this as an expert in the field -- one who has heard people say "the going rate for this widget is X." I knew I had negotiated a price far below it for my company, but could not announce the relatively low number for obvious reasons. Only Toshiba knows what they are paying. I am not saying I am positive the $200 loss figure is incorrect, but I am saying it is highly unlikely.

Dave, I guess I am not your typical "its about me and mine, how cheap can I get things" American consumer. I have come to understand that the relationship between the consumer, manufacturers, and Studios is symbionic, and if we only think about ourselves, and what we can get for next to nothing, somebody else is going to lose, and in the long run, it may be the consumers themselves. There is a huge difference between bang for you buck(value), and a player that has so many corners cut, and so many player to player discrepancies that consumer do not know whiat they will get.

HD DVD supporters can stick their fingers in their ears and go na na na when it comes to discussing the price to manufactuer HD DVD players. But when the A2 was introduced, no less than four companies I saw on AVS tore it apart, and did extensive price costs on parts, and based on that(not including labor and marketing) the price was $300. Each company's estimate was within $10 of each other. The Venturer player is based on the Broadcom/microsoft solution, quite a few less internal parts, even if the outside looks like a A3. The A2 is not. The venturer is being sold for $199, not $98. Kjack who is an executive from Broadcom has confirm this on Bluray.com. So we can think to ourselves that this is not so, but when you look at the facts and evidence, its a hard notion to continue to support.


At the end of the day, the CE companies will have to come along to the party or they will be left out. They may say they can't afford to now, but I am pretty confident you will see at least a couple more join in next year, and then most of the rest the following year as production costs continue to come down and their desperation increases. Manufacturing efficiencies will play a major role here in convincing others to join. Toshiba is following a very rational business model for themselves, and I think it is working brilliantly for the consumer. They wont be going it alone for much longer if normal business economics play out as I would expect them to. HD DVD is no Beta -- unfortunately I (or my parents to be more specific) bought Beta as an aside... :-(.

No matter what we think, the manufacturers will come to the party on their terms, not ours. It is their bottom line they are concerned with, not ours. While you seem confident that others will join Toshiba, the fact is, they have been absolutely no signs this is true. What we do know is true is the manufacturer that are coming online with Toshiba, are not designing new products, but liscensing already research and produced designs. That is not a sign of a diverse, or healthy market. This is more of a sign the manufacturer is not sure of where things will go. One could argue if what Toshiba is doing is rational, or even wise. The fact that other manufacturers are NOT joining them is a sign it is not rational, or wise. And to even state this is a normal business model is evidence that one does not completely understand just what a smart business model is. It is never a smart business model to start any new format by yourself. A smart business would spread the risk to more than one party, and offer a diverse player design that allows for a profit to be made. Have you ever heard of a car company practically giving away new cars? Have you ever heard of anyone manufacturers making products to sell at a loss? No matter how you slice it, it cost more than $98 to make a player.


As for BR lowering its prices faster than it planned to... Without being a fly on the wall at BR consortium headquarters, I am about as sure of it as can be. Again, not as fast as HD DVD by any stretch, but faster than they planned, yes... A $340 Samsung this holiday season when the original model a year ago cost more than twice that? Again, competition works every time. This is not something to be upset about, I think its great that Samsung is joining the party and lowering their prices to more affordable levels in order to capture market share. Again, it is good business practice, and something that the BR camp *has* to do in order to compete with HD DVD with average income buyers. The PS3 will not support the BR format on its own apart from games. The BR consortium need standalone player sales (I do not count the PS3 as a standalone player for this statement's purposes) and Samsung has taken a great step in the right direction. Only Sony benefits from PS3 sales if the more expensive standalones sit idle at their relatively high price points. Samsung has now drawn first blood on the BR side, and I applaud them.

You may think you are sure about the 1400 price reduction, but your sureity is not supported by facts or reality. A samsung rep told several staff people from Bluray.com that in light of the delay of the 2400, the 1400 will have a price reduction before the end of the year, and a new lower price player that is 1.1 compliant will be introduced in its place early to mid next year along with the 2400. The price reduction is not some firesale like that A2 was, but a natural and anticipated reduction to make room for the new player. The BDA does not have to slash and burn their market just to compete with HD DVD, and any thought they do, is purely uniformed. If the BDA felt they HAD to compete with HD DVD price wise, then you could bet your best pair of shoes earlier models would be firesold in a simular fashion that the A2 was. Your whole perspective on the price reduction is very skewed. Sony knew what Samsung was going to do, and this early in the game all moves by BDA manufacturing members are well know to the others. That will change when one format emerges as the front runner.


As for the Paramount deal, while I was completely shocked at that news when it happened, I would guess it was part of Toshiba's overall strategy to ensure sucess. After all, anything that can be done to firm-up studio support (or take it away from your competitors) helps. I guess Toshiba felt it necessary to ensure "victory" or a "stalemate." Price is not the sole factor that consumers look for, of course and Toshiba in another brilliant move played their hand right again. That is the thing I like about HD DVD (and Toshiba in general)... They have made extremely smart business decisions that many (including myself in most cases) did not see coming. I have to admire that tenacity from a company that was the underdog on every level.

I am not sure I was as shocked about the Paramount deal as I was disappointed. It was hinted this would happen within the insiders at bluray.com, so it was not exactly a shock to me. It was not a brillant move, it was a disperate move. A brillant move would have been to woo them without spending a dime, and based soley on their business plan alone. From what I understand from my ex co-workers at Paramount, the deal was forced on Paramount by Viacom, and it was done purely to boost the bottom line of the studio to please investors. The fact the price was $150 million, and is only for 18 months to me is not a very good bang for the price. The fact the whole deal so angered Paramount's most prominent Director, which pulled his movies out of the deal has really made the deal seem desperate on Toshiba part.



Dual format players are rediculously pricey now, but they will come down. Again, a lot of what was thought to be impossible has become possible. Manufacturing costs will come down on both sides, and dual format players will become relatively inexpensive to manufacture. This will again attract more CEs to the mix, driving down costs further.

This perspective is not based on fact. As I posted previously, I had a conversation with Samsung rep, and he quite clearly stated that the price of dual format players will remain high for the foreseeable future because A) They are not selling well at all, which does not lead to price reduction based on production efficencies, and B) the cost of liscensing, parts and labor will always make it much more expensive than a single format player. The completely understand that while the consumers will not buy two boxes, but it is cheaper to do so than purchase a dual format player. Neither LG or Samsung are selling these players that well, so I cannot concieve that any other manufacturer will produce anything that is not selling. Have you heard why Warner has given up on total HD? Clearly they have learned that consumers will not purchase a disc that has a format they do not want to support on the other side. If manufacturers felt that dual format players and software was the way to go, there would certainly be alot more of them going this direction. Clearly they are not. This is clear, Sony, Disney, and Fox are not going to support HD DVD. My studio has gone so far as to say they will drop all support for HD on disc before they will release anything on a relatively unsecure format such as HD DVD. Clearly BD+ is a big selling point for Fox and Disney, and since the DVD forum has rejected this as part of the HD DVD standard, there is just no chance of their support.


As for Video/Audio quality... I am not commenting about what they are now (pretty much equal on both sides when the formats' capabilities are both used effectively). I am referring to the early days when Sony was releasing crap titles and HD DVD (Warner primarily) released a number of quality titles that put the early BR titles to shame. That forced BR's hand to improve quality, but I am sure you are correct on your information of "The Fifth Element" and the like. They started paying attention to quality because if they didn't, they would be known as the "inferior quality" format at a price that is double the competition's (not an allegation by me, but rather a faulty perception by early adopters due to the titles at launch). Make no mistake about it, the competition has been good for the consumer on just about every level except studio support (which I grant you is a *big* one).

You keep stating that what one studio does forces the hand of another. Sorry, but no matter how many times you keep repeating this, it is just not fact. If this were the case, then Disney and Sony would have forced Paramount and Universal to do much better than they have. Clearly this is not the case is it? Universal just keeps pumping out titles in quantity, with absolutely no mind to quality. They are last in disc sales, and last in PQ and AQ scores. What is driving studios to release titles based on quality clearly comes from the reviewers pressure, who have the power to push sales based on good reviews, or completely sour them based on poor reviews. Warner, who supports both sides, sits exactly in the middle of the pack. We are not at the formats inception anymore. That arguement is basically over, as that time has already passed. What each side is doing now, in real time is what counts. HD DVD is not stepping up, and it is showing.


As for the present, I have gone on record and will reiterate it here that HD DVD *does* need to focus more on the lossless audio codecs like DD TrueHD. That we will have to see -- BR has a few glitches that still need to be wrapped up as well... Both formats have room to improve, but both are excellent when compared to DVD, or HDTV over cable and the like.

---Dave

HD DVD has a handicap that is pre-built into their system. It is called bandwidth and disc space. There is no way on earth POTC 1 or 2 could ever be released on HD DVD, because the encode has a steady bitrate that exceeds HD DVD bandwidth(both video and audio), and the use of lossless PCM would exceed what HD DVD could store on the disc. It seems at this point HD DVD PG believes that gimmicks, such as shop while you watch, PIP, HDi, are much more important than sound quality. They cannot have it all, and lets face it, bluray can. HD DVD has no more room to grow, Bluray has. Now granted, Warner has shown that you can acheive acceptable quality with lower bitrates on video, but they cannot compete with Sony or Disney who use AVC to its fullest degree. When you find that you cannot have DTHD without excluding IME, HDi, PIP or the other way around, then you know that you have already outgrown the format. Bluray has plenty of room to grow, add new things such as D-Box support from Fox titles, HD pip as opposed to SD PIP that HD DVD has, the ability to have lossless with interactive features as well, you know your format is for today, and tomorrow.

Dave, I do not think your opinion is wrong. I just believe that you and I have access to different information, look at this much differently, have different understanding of what smart business practices are, and what benefit the consumer has actually recieved. Price wise HD DVD does have the edge. But it is not clear consumers are only interested in price. Clearly they want access to all the studios HD film library, and I am sure that they are as sick of this war as you and I are.

[drseid]

Dave, I guess I am not your typical "its about me and mine, how cheap can I get things" American consumer. I have come to understand that the relationship between the consumer, manufacturers, and Studios is symbionic, and if we only think about ourselves, and what we can get for next to nothing, somebody else is going to lose, and in the long run, it may be the consumers themselves. There is a huge difference between bang for you buck(value), and a player that has so many corners cut, and so many player to player discrepancies that consumer do not know whiat they will get.

HD DVD supporters can stick their fingers in their ears and go na na na when it comes to discussing the price to manufactuer HD DVD players. But when the A2 was introduced, no less than four companies I saw on AVS tore it apart, and did extensive price costs on parts, and based on that(not including labor and marketing) the price was $300. Each company's estimate was within $10 of each other. The Venturer player is based on the Broadcom/microsoft solution, quite a few less internal parts, even if the outside looks like a A3. The A2 is not. The venturer is being sold for $199, not $98. Kjack who is an executive from Broadcom has confirm this on Bluray.com. So we can think to ourselves that this is not so, but when you look at the facts and evidence, its a hard notion to continue to support.



No matter what we think, the manufacturers will come to the party on their terms, not ours. It is their bottom line they are concerned with, not ours. While you seem confident that others will join Toshiba, the fact is, they have been absolutely no signs this is true. What we do know is true is the manufacturer that are coming online with Toshiba, are not designing new products, but liscensing already research and produced designs. That is not a sign of a diverse, or healthy market. This is more of a sign the manufacturer is not sure of where things will go. One could argue if what Toshiba is doing is rational, or even wise. The fact that other manufacturers are NOT joining them is a sign it is not rational, or wise. And to even state this is a normal business model is evidence that one does not completely understand just what a smart business model is. It is never a smart business model to start any new format by yourself. A smart business would spread the risk to more than one party, and offer a diverse player design that allows for a profit to be made. Have you ever heard of a car company practically giving away new cars? Have you ever heard of anyone manufacturers making products to sell at a loss? No matter how you slice it, it cost more than $98 to make a player.



You may think you are sure about the 1400 price reduction, but your sureity is not supported by facts or reality. A samsung rep told several staff people from Bluray.com that in light of the delay of the 2400, the 1400 will have a price reduction before the end of the year, and a new lower price player that is 1.1 compliant will be introduced in its place early to mid next year along with the 2400. The price reduction is not some firesale like that A2 was, but a natural and anticipated reduction to make room for the new player. The BDA does not have to slash and burn their market just to compete with HD DVD, and any thought they do, is purely uniformed. If the BDA felt they HAD to compete with HD DVD price wise, then you could bet your best pair of shoes earlier models would be firesold in a simular fashion that the A2 was. Your whole perspective on the price reduction is very skewed. Sony knew what Samsung was going to do, and this early in the game all moves by BDA manufacturing members are well know to the others. That will change when one format emerges as the front runner.



I am not sure I was as shocked about the Paramount deal as I was disappointed. It was hinted this would happen within the insiders at bluray.com, so it was not exactly a shock to me. It was not a brillant move, it was a disperate move. A brillant move would have been to woo them without spending a dime, and based soley on their business plan alone. From what I understand from my ex co-workers at Paramount, the deal was forced on Paramount by Viacom, and it was done purely to boost the bottom line of the studio to please investors. The fact the price was $150 million, and is only for 18 months to me is not a very good bang for the price. The fact the whole deal so angered Paramount's most prominent Director, which pulled his movies out of the deal has really made the deal seem desperate on Toshiba part.




This perspective is not based on fact. As I posted previously, I had a conversation with Samsung rep, and he quite clearly stated that the price of dual format players will remain high for the foreseeable future because A) They are not selling well at all, which does not lead to price reduction based on production efficencies, and B) the cost of liscensing, parts and labor will always make it much more expensive than a single format player. The completely understand that while the consumers will not buy two boxes, but it is cheaper to do so than purchase a dual format player. Neither LG or Samsung are selling these players that well, so I cannot concieve that any other manufacturer will produce anything that is not selling. Have you heard why Warner has given up on total HD? Clearly they have learned that consumers will not purchase a disc that has a format they do not want to support on the other side. If manufacturers felt that dual format players and software was the way to go, there would certainly be alot more of them going this direction. Clearly they are not. This is clear, Sony, Disney, and Fox are not going to support HD DVD. My studio has gone so far as to say they will drop all support for HD on disc before they will release anything on a relatively unsecure format such as HD DVD. Clearly BD+ is a big selling point for Fox and Disney, and since the DVD forum has rejected this as part of the HD DVD standard, there is just no chance of their support.



You keep stating that what one studio does forces the hand of another. Sorry, but no matter how many times you keep repeating this, it is just not fact. If this were the case, then Disney and Sony would have forced Paramount and Universal to do much better than they have. Clearly this is not the case is it? Universal just keeps pumping out titles in quantity, with absolutely no mind to quality. They are last in disc sales, and last in PQ and AQ scores. What is driving studios to release titles based on quality clearly comes from the reviewers pressure, who have the power to push sales based on good reviews, or completely sour them based on poor reviews. Warner, who supports both sides, sits exactly in the middle of the pack. We are not at the formats inception anymore. That arguement is basically over, as that time has already passed. What each side is doing now, in real time is what counts. HD DVD is not stepping up, and it is showing.



HD DVD has a handicap that is pre-built into their system. It is called bandwidth and disc space. There is no way on earth POTC 1 or 2 could ever be released on HD DVD, because the encode has a steady bitrate that exceeds HD DVD bandwidth(both video and audio), and the use of lossless PCM would exceed what HD DVD could store on the disc. It seems at this point HD DVD PG believes that gimmicks, such as shop while you watch, PIP, HDi, are much more important than sound quality. They cannot have it all, and lets face it, bluray can. HD DVD has no more room to grow, Bluray has. Now granted, Warner has shown that you can acheive acceptable quality with lower bitrates on video, but they cannot compete with Sony or Disney who use AVC to its fullest degree. When you find that you cannot have DTHD without excluding IME, HDi, PIP or the other way around, then you know that you have already outgrown the format. Bluray has plenty of room to grow, add new things such as D-Box support from Fox titles, HD pip as opposed to SD PIP that HD DVD has, the ability to have lossless with interactive features as well, you know your format is for today, and tomorrow.

Dave, I do not think your opinion is wrong. I just believe that you and I have access to different information, look at this much differently, have different understanding of what smart business practices are, and what benefit the consumer has actually recieved. Price wise HD DVD does have the edge. But it is not clear consumers are only interested in price. Clearly they want access to all the studios HD film library, and I am sure that they are as sick of this war as you and I are.

I guess I look at things purely from the consumer viewpoint when I *am* the consumer. That said, I am a firm believer that consumer buying behavior influences (and sometimes even controls) the other aspects of the supply chain including manufacturer behavior. I have been at this game a long time and I have seen it play out that way time and again. Manufacturers may tell you otherwise, but they are only fooling themselves if they believe otherwise, IMO (if they really disbelieve it at all). Prices will need to be relatively low to attract Joe6pack to the new formats, and I do feel HD DVD has followed exactly the right strategy here. The other manufacturers will have to come aboard... This is not just based on facts on the ground, but rather business supply chain and economics strategy (and yes, reality). I try to be 10 steps ahead of the game when looking at things... not just based on the present facts necessarily (although taking them into account), but rather the probabilities of events happening in the future.

As to the cost (and/or losses) on HD DVD players, I guess we will have to agree to disagree here. I may be an HD DVD supporter (although I support BR too), but I am not basing my viewpoint from ignoring the facts the way you may think. I have spoken at conferences on the subject of cost and ways to reduce it effectively and I know it can be done (and do it regularly myself almost every day). I don't need to see 4 different companies tell me what they believe the cost of product X is, as I know I could beat any of their price estimates by sheer negotiating superiority any day I chose... Now can Toshiba? Well, I don't know... but neither do they. I am obviously not a fan of "cost estimators" (I am not referring to you Sir T, by the way) who try and figure out what a given company pays for things, as frequently they are wrong. Like I said, I respect your opinion and I am not saying you or the other websites are wrong here... It is my "day job" to never believe this price estimation is always valid, and if I did I would be out of a job, so obviously I have to take an opposing viewpoint. :-)

With respect to dual-format players, I again will have to respectfully disagree here. The Samsung rep is telling you what *is*... I am talking about future efficiencies based on an educated guess of *what will be.* Sure, I may be wrong, but I find it unlikely... More players will enter the dual-format field in time and it will bring new efficiencies to all manufacturers. What the Samsung rep told you is not wrong, but it is only based on the present and is not thinking of the future possibilities as I am. Call it speculation if you will, but again, I know this game well and I am quite confident I am right here. This has nothing to do with my preference for either format, or what I hope to happen... but rather simple business supply chain economics. I don't have to be an insider to know general supply chain cost reduction behavior that applies to any industry or company. As for Warner, they gave up Total HD for a completely different reason than the use of dual-format players... Total HD failed IMO because it was asking consumers to pay for a format they did not need (as it had both BR and HD DVD versions on every disc) -- extra money for a superfluous layer. In the case of dual-format players, the consumer *does* need both in order to play all the discs out there (or they need to buy two different players like you and I did, of course). As such, there is a need for the players at the right price. I agree that dual-format players will never be as inexpensive to build as single format players due to the royalty issues you rightly mentioned. They *can* and I believe will be less expensive than buying two different single format players and more practical to boot once cost comes down and functionality goes up.

With reference to your last paragraph above, I agree and say the same thing back... You are looking at this from an industry insider's perspective which can be a great source of information and understanding of how things work that outsiders like myself can't possibly know and frequently can't relate to. The downside can be you are too close to the situation to see external business forces and perspectives at work (not that I am implying that is the case here). In my case, I have an outsider's point of view. I do not have one millionth your expertise on the industry from an inside perspective... I'm just a buyer, plain and simple. What I *do* understand extremely well is general supply chain strategy and business ecomomics. I am applying my skill set here with no inside knowledge to generate likely future outcomes based on my experience as to how companies operate on the aggregate. Which one is the correct view? Probably a bit of both, I would wager. Still, I have enjoyed the discussion and certainly respect your opinion based on your industry experience.

---Dave

[Mr Peabody]

I think dual format players are a temporary fix at best and a foolish thing to invest in for both manufacturers and consumers. There's no way retailers and video rental are going to continue to stock 3 movie disc formats. Some stores have already drawn the line. If manufacturers can't get the cost of a dual software in check I have no hope for a dual machine. The dual software was the most logical resolution, then both HD-DVD and BR could continue to sell machines. HD discs are already coming down in price. I just ordered buy 1 BR get one free from Amazon, 2 major movies for $23.95. If you notice the thread dedicated to software bargains you will notice prices on the software are coming down almost in half. It was stupid for all involved not to continue to pursue a dual format disc. Most of you paid over $20.00 for your movies, I think the consumer would have paid $20.00 for a dual format and that would not be an unreachable price to sell it at retail. Dual format would have been the win win solution. Now either one of the disc formats, or both, will die or always be a nitch product for the video enthusiast. A dual disc would be easy to stock, easy to rent, all movie companies would have their titles available for everyone.

Ever since the government forced manufacturers to include CD playback on DVD players, and even though you have universal players for various discs, I'll never be convinced the quality is as good as a stand alone player. One source will always take a back seat or suffer the cut corner.

I don't think Blu-ray prices have dropped so abnormally. We are into the 3rd generation now. When you consider the price of the first gen SACD players which cost well above a first gen BR and how fast a SACD became affordable it wasn't so different. Toshiba is selling at a low cost hoping more people will buy a cheaper machine and the majority will not abandon their investment and rule the outcome. So far, to my amazement, I don't see that working. I think part of the reason it isn't working is the split of movie company support. When DVD came out every movie company was scrambling to put out their titles on DVD. Now people have to consider who has the most movies I want, where will I be able to buy or rent them, is this even worth my concern.

So in conclusion if consumers during this Christmas had dual format HD discs I think we would have seen a much stronger purchase of the hardware. The hardware companies failure to reach a resolution probably sealed the fate of HD disc a long time ago. In my mind, instead of admiring either sides stradegy, I'm thinking what a lesson on how greed and stubborness can be a disaster.

[drseid]

I think dual format players are a temporary fix at best and a foolish thing to invest in for both manufacturers and consumers. There's no way retailers and video rental are going to continue to stock 3 movie disc formats. Some stores have already drawn the line. If manufacturers can't get the cost of a dual software in check I have no hope for a dual machine. The dual software was the most logical resolution, then both HD-DVD and BR could continue to sell machines. HD discs are already coming down in price. I just ordered buy 1 BR get one free from Amazon, 2 major movies for $23.95. If you notice the thread dedicated to software bargains you will notice prices on the software are coming down almost in half. It was stupid for all involved not to continue to pursue a dual format disc. Most of you paid over $20.00 for your movies, I think the consumer would have paid $20.00 for a dual format and that would not be an unreachable price to sell it at retail. Dual format would have been the win win solution. Now either one of the disc formats, or both, will die or always be a nitch product for the video enthusiast. A dual disc would be easy to stock, easy to rent, all movie companies would have their titles available for everyone.

Ever since the government forced manufacturers to include CD playback on DVD players, and even though you have universal players for various discs, I'll never be convinced the quality is as good as a stand alone player. One source will always take a back seat or suffer the cut corner.

I don't think Blu-ray prices have dropped so abnormally. We are into the 3rd generation now. When you consider the price of the first gen SACD players which cost well above a first gen BR and how fast a SACD became affordable it wasn't so different. Toshiba is selling at a low cost hoping more people will buy a cheaper machine and the majority will not abandon their investment and rule the outcome. So far, to my amazement, I don't see that working. I think part of the reason it isn't working is the split of movie company support. When DVD came out every movie company was scrambling to put out their titles on DVD. Now people have to consider who has the most movies I want, where will I be able to buy or rent them, is this even worth my concern.

So in conclusion if consumers during this Christmas had dual format HD discs I think we would have seen a much stronger purchase of the hardware. The hardware companies failure to reach a resolution probably sealed the fate of HD disc a long time ago. In my mind, instead of admiring either sides stradegy, I'm thinking what a lesson on how greed and stubborness can be a disaster.

I don't think dual format players are foolish from a manufacturer or consumer perspective at all. While I'll agree that they most likely won't be the "be all, end all" in absolute quality in most cases (and I won't be buying one myself), I definitely see a large role for them going forward with many people if and when the cost comes down to a more reasonable level.

Total HD, while not a bad idea, was just not feasible for the consumer because Warner wanted to charge more for it. I don't like HD DVD's combo discs for the same reason and I am a firm believer if HD DVD is going to survive long-term they need to go as well. Why should the consumer pay extra for the other format (BR, HD DVD or DVD in the case of combo discs) that they don't own -- or do own for that matter? It just was not a financial model that would work long-term, IMO. I will grant you that the shelf space issue is a big question mark that will need to be resolved somehow. That part I don't have a guess on... I guess we will have to wait and see. Could be no format neutral studios longer-term and all the studios taking one side or the other? I really have no clue though...

BR player prices definitely have dropped quite fast in relation to other new formats of the past. HD DVD has dropped a heck of a lot faster, however (maybe the fastest I have seen in recent memory). As for Toshiba's strategy of low priced players... it is *way* too soon to assess its impact and success or failure long-term. I have a good idea as to how it will play out, but nothing we are seeing right now can give us that future data. My guess is the bulk of the impact will result in sales for 2008+ if it works.

As for the greed... Well, I should clarify my stance on things here... I admire Toshiba's market penetration strategy *present day* with the lowering of prices on their players to levels most folks can afford. That said, I *don't* admire and absolutely detest the lack of a resolution between the two sides for a unified format to begin with. I don't believe that HD's fate is already sealed as you do, but I certainly think the two camps made it a lot harder for themselves by not working together for the benefit of all. That, I agree is pure greed. I guess they were watching too many re-runs of the film "Wall Street" with the famous (or infamous) quote "Greed is good."

---Dave

[Mr Peabody]

I didn't mean to imply the war was decided yet. I am however pesimistic at this point that there will be a clear winner. And, if there is, it's the consumers who backed the loser who really pay the price.

Your argument for the dual format player can also apply to the dual format disc. It makes more sense to have a dual format disc even if it cost a couple dollars more. I'd rather pay the couple dollars for the softward then to pay hundreds for the hardware. And, as I mentioned, retailers/renters aren't going to stock 3 formats anyway. So it seems if you buy a dual format player at some point you will always have to have one or unload your software and replace it with the winner. Or, be stuck with 2 dead formats opposed to one. Warner may have intended to charge more but if the dual format would have caught on the prices would have dropped due to competition and the natural drop in price that happens once a new product is no longer new. If prices of software wouldn't have dropped and rentals available, I would have never bought an HD player. I will not pay $30.00 or more for a movie. And, most importantly, if there was a dual format disc, we wouldn't be debating a winner of the war, it would be over. Which really has me wondering about the motives behind this whole mess.

[musicman1999]

The problem with dual format players is that they provide no incentive to end the format war.Why end the war when the movie will be available in one format or the other.Sooner or later the war will end and one format will win out and when your dual format player dies you will be stuck with films you cannot watch.
Sooner or later this war will end and we will have one format,IMO it will be Bluray but i have been wrong before.I think Toshiba's recent moves will stretch it out a while(remember Toshiba holds most DVD patents and will want to milk those for all they are worth) but in the end Bluray will win out, at least i hope cause i bought one.

bill

[pixelthis]

The problem with dual format players is that they provide no incentive to end the format war.Why end the war when the movie will be available in one format or the other.Sooner or later the war will end and one format will win out and when your dual format player dies you will be stuck with films you cannot watch.
Sooner or later this war will end and we will have one format,IMO it will be Bluray but i have been wrong before.I think Toshiba's recent moves will stretch it out a while(remember Toshiba holds most DVD patents and will want to milk those for all they are worth) but in the end Bluray will win out, at least i hope cause i bought one.

bill


Nothing to worry about.
"combi players" will never catch on because they arent (and wont be ) nessesary.
Same with hybrid discs, theres just NO reason for an inferiour format (hddvd).
Everybody has picked Blu ray, Bay, director of transformers was so pissed over the fact that Paramount went HDDVD (keeping transformers off of blu) that he threatened to
not make a transformers II. This is because being an industry insider he knows what
they know, BLU RAY is it.
AND this idiotic "format war" isnt saving anybody ANYTHING, it will cost millions,
it will keep the economies of scale from kicking in sooner, it will confuse the
average consumer, causing them to wait. IT WILL MUDDY THE WATERS.
And those who bought HDDVD players will have another very expensive doorstop:1:

[pixelthis]

You know more about movie trivia than I do, because that is not where my interest is. Now when you talk about movie production, and soundtrack creation specifically, you do not know more than my cats. That is why you have never come back to debate Dracula, because even your cursory adventure in that area got you trampled. If you know so much, they why are you not smart enough to know not to compare a theaterical print with a video disc?

You are jealous, that is why you have stooped to such classless acts as insulting me racially, and posting pictures and making negative comments about Woochifer. You are below trailer trash in my opinion, and that is why everyone and their grandmother does not mind kickin your classless butt. You are the only person here that requires a huge fire ladder to see over the curb. The best thing I can call you is gutter snipe. Now go back to your under the trailer house.


OHHHHHH! SNAP!:ihih:

[pixelthis]

I think that would be his MOMS trailer house:1:

[drseid]

Bay, director of transformers was so pissed over the fact that Paramount went HDDVD (keeping transformers off of blu) that he threatened to
not make a transformers II.

Personally, I thought they were doing the Blu-ray folks a favor... I couldn't stand the first one, and definitely don't want to see a *second* piece of cr*p from a whiner that does not know when to shut his mouth. He was also complaining about the quality of the DVD release (that was receiving critical acclaim for its transfer quality) when sales were setting records -- talk about violating the old rule that says "never bite the hand that feeds you"... Honestly, I think his movies don't belong on *either* format as he is not a very good director, IMO and he has shown himself to be a sales killer for his company by working against its Marketing department... but that's just me.

---Dave

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I guess I look at things purely from the consumer viewpoint when I *am* the consumer. That said, I am a firm believer that consumer buying behavior influences (and sometimes even controls) the other aspects of the supply chain including manufacturer behavior. I have been at this game a long time and I have seen it play out that way time and again. Manufacturers may tell you otherwise, but they are only fooling themselves if they believe otherwise, IMO (if they really disbelieve it at all). Prices will need to be relatively low to attract Joe6pack to the new formats, and I do feel HD DVD has followed exactly the right strategy here. The other manufacturers will have to come aboard... This is not just based on facts on the ground, but rather business supply chain and economics strategy (and yes, reality). I try to be 10 steps ahead of the game when looking at things... not just based on the present facts necessarily (although taking them into account), but rather the probabilities of events happening in the future.

When I read this, I can think of some instances were this is not the case at all. When DVD was introduced, alot of analyst thought it would fail because they thought the public (worldwide) was perfectly comfortable with VHS. Then here comes the CE marketing machine telling us that the DVD was a better movie experience, disc had more features, the viewing experience would exceed the Laserdisc, and DVD would be easier to store. It didn't take long for that mantra to sink in, because in five short years after it debut, it overtook VHS in software sales first, then player sales a very short time later. Also consider the fact that in 1997, CE's profits on VHS players were sliding dramatically. Three years later in 2000, not one of the majors was making a dime on players thanks to cheap chinese imports. Now here we are some seven years later, and the CE companies are in the same position, they are not making any money from DVD players, and they are moving on to another more profitable format. If the CE's have abandon both VHS and basically the DVD for lack of profits, what makes you think that HD DVD strategy is necessarily an effective one? Once again I will advance this, what is good for the consumer(low prices) is not exactly good for the CE(which make the players) or for the format (which can die a premature death from lack of support). This is a balance, and if not carefully followed, everyone loses.


As to the cost (and/or losses) on HD DVD players, I guess we will have to agree to disagree here. I may be an HD DVD supporter (although I support BR too), but I am not basing my viewpoint from ignoring the facts the way you may think. I have spoken at conferences on the subject of cost and ways to reduce it effectively and I know it can be done (and do it regularly myself almost every day). I don't need to see 4 different companies tell me what they believe the cost of product X is, as I know I could beat any of their price estimates by sheer negotiating superiority any day I chose... Now can Toshiba? Well, I don't know... but neither do they. I am obviously not a fan of "cost estimators" (I am not referring to you Sir T, by the way) who try and figure out what a given company pays for things, as frequently they are wrong. Like I said, I respect your opinion and I am not saying you or the other websites are wrong here... It is my "day job" to never believe this price estimation is always valid, and if I did I would be out of a job, so obviously I have to take an opposing viewpoint. :-)

While I cannot question your negotiation experience, I can say on this issue you do not have your ducks lined up well at all. You are completely dismissing facts based on your experience, however does this experience apply to consumer electronics? I would fair to say not, since Toshiba themselves have come out saying they are losing money on HD DVD. This is just a snippet describing the Walmart sale.

A person familiar with the matter said that Wal-Mart bought about 55,000 HD-A2s from Toshiba for just under $200 apiece before the early November sale, and that it lost about $100 on each sale.

Robert Zohn from HTF is a HD DVD retailer. On HTF he confirmed that the cost of a A2 to him was $299 per player. He does a pretty high volume of sales of the A2.

This was also in the translated article

Analysts say selling the players to Wal-Mart at such a low cost also likely represented a loss for Toshiba,

So according to the facts, Toshiba sold the players to Walmart at a $100 loss, and Walmart in turn sold them for a $100 loss. Where is the health in this format if everyone is selling at a loss. Those disc giveaways are also costing the HD DVD PG are great deal of money, so much money that even the Toshiba rep had this to say in the article

Toshiba says it didn't sell any players below cost based purely on manufacturing expenses, but once marketing and promotional expenses are factored in, the HD DVD business is operating at a loss. The company expects it to turn profitable in its next fiscal year, beginning April 2008.

How do you expect to turn a profit when you product is continually heavily discounted. This looks like a pretty positive spin on a pretty bad situation. The fact that Walmart purchased 55,000, but only according to NDP sold 30,000 during the sale, instead of the 90,000 that the HD DVD PG mentions, shows that there is a tremedous amount of spin, and misinformation being circulated. You do not have to do this when you market is healthy, and growing. The fact that there hasn't been a real uptick in software sells since the sales means that the players have not reached new buyers, but previous owners looking for second, and perhaps third players. Not exactly the hands the sale was trying to reach.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1195...googlenews_wsj

Back to my point about other manufacturers not wanting to get in, well that new Onkyo player has been pulled from the european market before its launch here. This is a snippet translated from italian to english

The first Onkyo HD DVD player has been available in Italy for a few days now, but it can already be considered as a collector's item, because there are very few units in existence, and Onkyo has stopped its production.

Here is their reason why;

In view of the new marketing policy being applied by Toshiba, consisting of sinking the price of its own players, Onkyo has difficulty in positioning its own player (the Europe list price is 899 euros) and has therefore decided to stop production.

I can provide you with the entire translation if you desire, but just for bevity sake, I lifted the most important parts of the news. Now keep in mind, the players was to be priced at $899 dollars in NA. So once again, aside from the venturer(which not even Walmart is going to carry any time soon) Toshiba is once again alone in producing players. One has got to wonder if the price slashing has hurt the format, or helped it. My guess is it is more hurt than help.



With respect to dual-format players, I again will have to respectfully disagree here. The Samsung rep is telling you what *is*... I am talking about future efficiencies based on an educated guess of *what will be.* Sure, I may be wrong, but I find it unlikely... More players will enter the dual-format field in time and it will bring new efficiencies to all manufacturers. What the Samsung rep told you is not wrong, but it is only based on the present and is not thinking of the future possibilities as I am. Call it speculation if you will, but again, I know this game well and I am quite confident I am right here. This has nothing to do with my preference for either format, or what I hope to happen... but rather simple business supply chain economics. I don't have to be an insider to know general supply chain cost reduction behavior that applies to any industry or company. As for Warner, they gave up Total HD for a completely different reason than the use of dual-format players... Total HD failed IMO because it was asking consumers to pay for a format they did not need (as it had both BR and HD DVD versions on every disc) -- extra money for a superfluous layer. In the case of dual-format players, the consumer *does* need both in order to play all the discs out there (or they need to buy two different players like you and I did, of course). As such, there is a need for the players at the right price. I agree that dual-format players will never be as inexpensive to build as single format players due to the royalty issues you rightly mentioned. They *can* and I believe will be less expensive than buying two different single format players and more practical to boot once cost comes down and functionality goes up.

I do not think you read my post accurately. The Samsung rep said that dual format players prices will not be affordable for a long time, because A) production volume is required to obtain efficiencies, and without that volume, it is impossible to get efficiencies that can actually lower prices. They are not selling very many players at all. From what I understand, LG and Samsung split a less than 5% pie between the two of them when you facture in sales from both formats. Unless that grows significantly in the next 6-12 months, I cannot see this as an alternative at all. Secondly he stated that dual format players are not discounted as there is considerable R&D costs that must be recouped before any discounts on players. Neither LG or Samsung dual format players include the simplified dual head head read system. Each formats requires a different reading head, and that increases costs. Both formats require different chipsets to run HDi and BD-j(the LG does not do HDi), require seperate chipsets for updgrades, and processing. We have already mention the seperate liscensing fees. With Toshiba model of price reductions, and bluray second generation players prices dropping, for the foreseeable future a dual format player will always be more expensive than a single drive player from each format. While I admire your optimistic attitude, facts prove far less than an optimistic view of the pricing situation, and its effect on the health for the format in genral.


With reference to your last paragraph above, I agree and say the same thing back... You are looking at this from an industry insider's perspective which can be a great source of information and understanding of how things work that outsiders like myself can't possibly know and frequently can't relate to. The downside can be you are too close to the situation to see external business forces and perspectives at work (not that I am implying that is the case here). In my case, I have an outsider's point of view. I do not have one millionth your expertise on the industry from an inside perspective... I'm just a buyer, plain and simple. What I *do* understand extremely well is general supply chain strategy and business ecomomics. I am applying my skill set here with no inside knowledge to generate likely future outcomes based on my experience as to how companies operate on the aggregate. Which one is the correct view? Probably a bit of both, I would wager. Still, I have enjoyed the discussion and certainly respect your opinion based on your industry experience.

---Dave

To state there is a downside on my perspective based on being too close to the inside would ignore the fact that I purchased my players, and software as a consumer. Just like you, I can observe what is happening in the stores, and what is happening in the consumer market as a whole, as well as understand what is happening from the inside. Having a two prong perspective IMO, can be nothing but an advantage, as it allows one to see what the manufacters are doing, what the consumer are doing with their dollar, and how the manfacturers respond.

[pixelthis]

Didnt take much marketing to sell DVD, it was so far advanced over VHS.
Which is why I play a waiting game as far as HD on disc is concerned.
DVD was a revolution, HDDVD (or bluray) IS evolutionary
The "CE marketing machine" is going to have their hands full convincing the great unwashed that the incrementally better picture of HD is worth it, however.
I still think Blu will triumph, but they need to cut some prices and "buy" market share
like toshiba is doing.
Or maybe Sony thinks that the HDDVD group will go bankrupt selling players a 100$
below cost.
In any event it will be a much rougher road for both formats than with DVD.
The economy is tanking, I know people who are spending a 120$ a week for gas
Everybody knows we are heading for one of the worst recessions in history, some are even talking the "D" (depression) word.
Think hddvd prices are "low"?
Things might get so bad that they are selling for 10 bucks apiece, if that

[drseid]

When I read this, I can think of some instances were this is not the case at all. When DVD was introduced, alot of analyst thought it would fail because they thought the public (worldwide) was perfectly comfortable with VHS. Then here comes the CE marketing machine telling us that the DVD was a better movie experience, disc had more features, the viewing experience would exceed the Laserdisc, and DVD would be easier to store. It didn't take long for that mantra to sink in, because in five short years after it debut, it overtook VHS in software sales first, then player sales a very short time later. Also consider the fact that in 1997, CE's profits on VHS players were sliding dramatically. Three years later in 2000, not one of the majors was making a dime on players thanks to cheap chinese imports. Now here we are some seven years later, and the CE companies are in the same position, they are not making any money from DVD players, and they are moving on to another more profitable format. If the CE's have abandon both VHS and basically the DVD for lack of profits, what makes you think that HD DVD strategy is necessarily an effective one? Once again I will advance this, what is good for the consumer(low prices) is not exactly good for the CE(which make the players) or for the format (which can die a premature death from lack of support). This is a balance, and if not carefully followed, everyone loses.



While I cannot question your negotiation experience, I can say on this issue you do not have your ducks lined up well at all. You are completely dismissing facts based on your experience, however does this experience apply to consumer electronics? I would fair to say not, since Toshiba themselves have come out saying they are losing money on HD DVD. This is just a snippet describing the Walmart sale.

A person familiar with the matter said that Wal-Mart bought about 55,000 HD-A2s from Toshiba for just under $200 apiece before the early November sale, and that it lost about $100 on each sale.

Robert Zohn from HTF is a HD DVD retailer. On HTF he confirmed that the cost of a A2 to him was $299 per player. He does a pretty high volume of sales of the A2.

This was also in the translated article

Analysts say selling the players to Wal-Mart at such a low cost also likely represented a loss for Toshiba,

So according to the facts, Toshiba sold the players to Walmart at a $100 loss, and Walmart in turn sold them for a $100 loss. Where is the health in this format if everyone is selling at a loss. Those disc giveaways are also costing the HD DVD PG are great deal of money, so much money that even the Toshiba rep had this to say in the article

Toshiba says it didn't sell any players below cost based purely on manufacturing expenses, but once marketing and promotional expenses are factored in, the HD DVD business is operating at a loss. The company expects it to turn profitable in its next fiscal year, beginning April 2008.

How do you expect to turn a profit when you product is continually heavily discounted. This looks like a pretty positive spin on a pretty bad situation. The fact that Walmart purchased 55,000, but only according to NDP sold 30,000 during the sale, instead of the 90,000 that the HD DVD PG mentions, shows that there is a tremedous amount of spin, and misinformation being circulated. You do not have to do this when you market is healthy, and growing. The fact that there hasn't been a real uptick in software sells since the sales means that the players have not reached new buyers, but previous owners looking for second, and perhaps third players. Not exactly the hands the sale was trying to reach.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1195...googlenews_wsj

Back to my point about other manufacturers not wanting to get in, well that new Onkyo player has been pulled from the european market before its launch here. This is a snippet translated from italian to english

The first Onkyo HD DVD player has been available in Italy for a few days now, but it can already be considered as a collector's item, because there are very few units in existence, and Onkyo has stopped its production.

Here is their reason why;

In view of the new marketing policy being applied by Toshiba, consisting of sinking the price of its own players, Onkyo has difficulty in positioning its own player (the Europe list price is 899 euros) and has therefore decided to stop production.

I can provide you with the entire translation if you desire, but just for bevity sake, I lifted the most important parts of the news. Now keep in mind, the players was to be priced at $899 dollars in NA. So once again, aside from the venturer(which not even Walmart is going to carry any time soon) Toshiba is once again alone in producing players. One has got to wonder if the price slashing has hurt the format, or helped it. My guess is it is more hurt than help.




I do not think you read my post accurately. The Samsung rep said that dual format players prices will not be affordable for a long time, because A) production volume is required to obtain efficiencies, and without that volume, it is impossible to get efficiencies that can actually lower prices. They are not selling very many players at all. From what I understand, LG and Samsung split a less than 5% pie between the two of them when you facture in sales from both formats. Unless that grows significantly in the next 6-12 months, I cannot see this as an alternative at all. Secondly he stated that dual format players are not discounted as there is considerable R&D costs that must be recouped before any discounts on players. Neither LG or Samsung dual format players include the simplified dual head head read system. Each formats requires a different reading head, and that increases costs. Both formats require different chipsets to run HDi and BD-j(the LG does not do HDi), require seperate chipsets for updgrades, and processing. We have already mention the seperate liscensing fees. With Toshiba model of price reductions, and bluray second generation players prices dropping, for the foreseeable future a dual format player will always be more expensive than a single drive player from each format. While I admire your optimistic attitude, facts prove far less than an optimistic view of the pricing situation, and its effect on the health for the format in genral.



To state there is a downside on my perspective based on being too close to the inside would ignore the fact that I purchased my players, and software as a consumer. Just like you, I can observe what is happening in the stores, and what is happening in the consumer market as a whole, as well as understand what is happening from the inside. Having a two prong perspective IMO, can be nothing but an advantage, as it allows one to see what the manufacters are doing, what the consumer are doing with their dollar, and how the manfacturers respond.

On the manufacturer support issue we will just have to see how it plays out. I am confident I have called this correctly, but there is no way to prove it until if/when it happens.

As for the Wal-mart deal, there is no way they did not sell all of those 55M players based on my micro-level experience at the Wal-mart I went to to get mine. 90M+ overall sounded about right to me including the non-Wal-mart sales... In my own case, I arrived well before the 8:00 timeframe (about 7 am) and they had a reservation list with a limit of one to a customer. I just made the waiting list, and many, many people were turned away 3 minutes after me. Again, this was with a limit of one per customer. The customers buying had the *appearance* at least of mainstream American buyers... I may have been the most well-off of all of them, and I don't claim to be Bill Gates by any means. I remember leaving that day feeling very good about Toshiba's strategy working at attracting Joe6pack, because 90+% of the buyers at *my* store (located in a relatively affluent area) were indeed Joe6pack buyers (the exact people Toshiba/HD has to win over, as does BR). Of course you are right in your statement that many others buying some of those 55M available that day including myself were indeed current HD DVD owners that bought second+ players at that price... I certainly would have bought more if I could, but Wal-mart wasn't having any of it. :-( What I did *not* see was a lot of movie buying (as my Wal-mart made us pickup the players in the back of the store where they rung them up right there). I thought that a mistake by *Wal-mart* as the point of them taking a loss (if they did indeed) on the players should have been to gain movie sales. I have heard that other Wal-marts acted differently.

With respect to my negotiation experience, it actually *does* apply to consumer electronics. :-) I have been doing it sucessfully for quite a while, but it is only one of the areas I negotiate pricing on professionally.

As for Toshiba losing money on every HD-A3... I never claimed otherwise, I just said I don't believe they are losing $200 on every sale (even the $100 loss estimate to Wal-mart also does not represent "facts" but rather speculation based on one unconfirmed source). I think Sony is losing money on every PS3 sold as well. That said, I would not venture a guess as to how much (as many have done). Just as I said Toshiba could have some sharp negotiators on its side, so could Sony. Neither estimate floating around is probably correct.

As for the Venturer, it is selling for $199 (Canadian) at Wal-mart Canada and other Canadian retailers. Some folks have bought them and opened them up. It is a "remodled" HD-A3. If Venturer can sell it for roughly $200 and make a profit, then Toshiba can't be too far behind, IMO.

As for the Samsung rep's statements, I stand by my comments. He is saying what is, but his statements about not finding efficiencies are way too premature. The efficiencies will be there, plain and simple. Again, there is no way for me to prove this right now, only to say "wait and see."

As to your inside experience versus outside, I never said that you personally *did* have the disadvantages I referred to. They were more generalized statements that could apply to anyone (as were the outsider statements)... No offense was intended.

---Dave

[Mr Peabody]

Pix, that's what I like about you, your positive upbeat narratives.

I need a plan;
1. Turn utility room into food warehouse
2. Stock pile ammo
3. Stock building material for boarding windows etc.
4. Buy bigger meaner dog or two.
5. Get generator and supply of gasoline.
6. Buy safe, empty bank account. "hmmmm, if it's going to be a D maybe I should empty everyone's bank account while I'm at it" he things to himself in a moment of erationality.
Well this is a start :)

[pixelthis]

Pix, that's what I like about you, your positive upbeat narratives.

I need a plan;
1. Turn utility room into food warehouse
2. Stock pile ammo
3. Stock building material for boarding windows etc.
4. Buy bigger meaner dog or two.
5. Get generator and supply of gasoline.
6. Buy safe, empty bank account. "hmmmm, if it's going to be a D maybe I should empty everyone's bank account while I'm at it" he things to himself in a moment of erationality.
Well this is a start :)

YES IT IS, AND A DARN GOOD PLAN
And while you're "stockpilling" ammo get some GUNS to shoot the ammo too, BTW.
Rich in texas got pissed at me for calling him "rich on paper" but I meant no offense,
rich is one of those 401k rich kids who, upon drawing out his money from his 401k will find out that it might buy a loaf of bread, if hes lucky.
If he has a million in his account as of last OCTOBER, in dollars, that "million" is now worth
740,000 DOLLARS. Thats a 260 grand drop in a MONTH.
I like to come to this site to talk about audio, learn something every once in awhile,
forget that the world is literally falling apart, but sometimes thats hard to do.
If the economy gets really bad we will have dvd for decades or longer as both new formats
will die, which is why this "format" war is such a bad idea, if one becomes established
before the bottom drops out it might just surrive, MIGHT.
Not to mention that new HD formats on disc are appearing all over the planet, all you need is a blue laser and a disc to play
Make sure your generator can handle a tube amp, BTW:1:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

On the manufacturer support issue we will just have to see how it plays out. I am confident I have called this correctly, but there is no way to prove it until if/when it happens.

We'll see. I cannot see who you are correct on this one when the evidence is out there for everyone to see. Onkyo was the first casualty, Let's see if anyone else throws their hat in the ring. I seriously doubt it though, not with prices like this. There is no money to be made in HD DVD.


As for the Wal-mart deal, there is no way they did not sell all of those 55M players based on my micro-level experience at the Wal-mart I went to to get mine. 90M+ overall sounded about right to me including the non-Wal-mart sales... In my own case, I arrived well before the 8:00 timeframe (about 7 am) and they had a reservation list with a limit of one to a customer. I just made the waiting list, and many, many people were turned away 3 minutes after me. Again, this was with a limit of one per customer. The customers buying had the *appearance* at least of mainstream American buyers... I may have been the most well-off of all of them, and I don't claim to be Bill Gates by any means. I remember leaving that day feeling very good about Toshiba's strategy working at attracting Joe6pack, because 90+% of the buyers at *my* store (located in a relatively affluent area) were indeed Joe6pack buyers (the exact people Toshiba/HD has to win over, as does BR).

The sales figures were reported to NDP, who released them the next day. Only 30K units were moved through walmart, and another 10k through Amazon. One interesting thing I noted. The day before the sale, there was about 50 A2 on ebay. After the sale there was close to 400 of them on sale. When you move around the various websites( I am registered at AVS, HTF and the Spot), it looks like alot of previous members bought second units for their bedroom etc. While the sale moved some players, it did not come close the the 90k that was estimated.



Of course you are right in your statement that many others buying some of those 55M available that day including myself were indeed current HD DVD owners that bought second+ players at that price... I certainly would have bought more if I could, but Wal-mart wasn't having any of it. :-( What I did *not* see was a lot of movie buying (as my Wal-mart made us pickup the players in the back of the store where they rung them up right there). I thought that a mistake by *Wal-mart* as the point of them taking a loss (if they did indeed) on the players should have been to gain movie sales. I have heard that other Wal-marts acted differently.

I wouldn't count on Walmart as a HD movie sales place, it is fourth in sales, waaaaay behind Amazon, BB, and one more retailer I cannot remember.


As for Toshiba losing money on every HD-A3... I never claimed otherwise, I just said I don't believe they are losing $200 on every sale (even the $100 loss estimate to Wal-mart also does not represent "facts" but rather speculation based on one unconfirmed source). I think Sony is losing money on every PS3 sold as well. That said, I would not venture a guess as to how much (as many have done). Just as I said Toshiba could have some sharp negotiators on its side, so could Sony. Neither estimate floating around is probably correct.

Actually the Walmart loss is a fact. The sale price of $199 to Walmart was confirmed(not in this article but in NDP) and that was a loss for Toshiba which is normally selling the A2-3 for $299 to retailers. So while the article list it as speculation, some facts, some research, and a little math bares it out. As far as the PS3, that is a different ballgame altogether. Losses is "gaming" machines(and I use that real loosely with the PS3 because it is really a entertainment center) is normal. The XBOX franchise has never made a dime on players, but plenty on software. That is the way that model works. Sony is banking that non gamers like myself, will eventually buy a game or two(at $60 i might add) while owning this machine. There emphasis is making a profit on software(games and movies), Toshiba does not have the luxury at is makes neither games nor movies.


As for the Venturer, it is selling for $199 (Canadian) at Wal-mart Canada and other Canadian retailers. Some folks have bought them and opened them up. It is a "remodled" HD-A3. If Venturer can sell it for roughly $200 and make a profit, then Toshiba can't be too far behind, IMO.

You are missing a big detail. The Venturer uses the Broadcom/Microsoft solution. A single reading head, simplfied parts design, fewer parts, less flash memory for upgrades, and cheaper parts in general. This is confirmed by Kjack on Bluray.com as his company supplies the processing circuits for the player. So overall it is a cheaper player to build than the A2, even though it is based on its design. Toshiba has stated that they are losing money on its whole HD DVD operation. With incentives included, they are practically giving away players just to meet their goal of 1 million players. They believe that the studios cannot ignore that large a base, but Disney and Fox have already stated that no matter how many HD DVD players there are out there, they will not release to any format that does not include extra copy protection and region coding.


As for the Samsung rep's statements, I stand by my comments. He is saying what is, but his statements about not finding efficiencies are way too premature. The efficiencies will be there, plain and simple. Again, there is no way for me to prove this right now, only to say "wait and see."

Efficiencies come from mass production. If there is no mass production, then there can be no efficiencies. The players are not selling in big numbers, and therefor not being produced in big numbers. How does one find efficiences if you cannot produce a player in sufficent numbers to realize them? The bottom line is nobody is going to purchase a $1000 player when they can buy both formats players for less than $700. As long as it is cheaper to do it that way, then a $1000 dual format is not going to sell in numbers that realize cost savings. That is simple manufacuturing 101.




As to your inside experience versus outside, I never said that you personally *did* have the disadvantages I referred to. They were more generalized statements that could apply to anyone (as were the outsider statements)... No offense was intended.

---Dave

I wasn't offended at all, the perspective just did not seem logical to me.

[drseid]

We'll see. I cannot see who you are correct on this one when the evidence is out there for everyone to see. Onkyo was the first casualty, Let's see if anyone else throws their hat in the ring. I seriously doubt it though, not with prices like this. There is no money to be made in HD DVD.



The sales figures were reported to NDP, who released them the next day. Only 30K units were moved through walmart, and another 10k through Amazon. One interesting thing I noted. The day before the sale, there was about 50 A2 on ebay. After the sale there was close to 400 of them on sale. When you move around the various websites( I am registered at AVS, HTF and the Spot), it looks like alot of previous members bought second units for their bedroom etc. While the sale moved some players, it did not come close the the 90k that was estimated.




I wouldn't count on Walmart as a HD movie sales place, it is fourth in sales, waaaaay behind Amazon, BB, and one more retailer I cannot remember.



Actually the Walmart loss is a fact. The sale price of $199 to Walmart was confirmed(not in this article but in NDP) and that was a loss for Toshiba which is normally selling the A2-3 for $299 to retailers. So while the article list it as speculation, some facts, some research, and a little math bares it out. As far as the PS3, that is a different ballgame altogether. Losses is "gaming" machines(and I use that real loosely with the PS3 because it is really a entertainment center) is normal. The XBOX franchise has never made a dime on players, but plenty on software. That is the way that model works. Sony is banking that non gamers like myself, will eventually buy a game or two(at $60 i might add) while owning this machine. There emphasis is making a profit on software(games and movies), Toshiba does not have the luxury at is makes neither games nor movies.



You are missing a big detail. The Venturer uses the Broadcom/Microsoft solution. A single reading head, simplfied parts design, fewer parts, less flash memory for upgrades, and cheaper parts in general. This is confirmed by Kjack on Bluray.com as his company supplies the processing circuits for the player. So overall it is a cheaper player to build than the A2, even though it is based on its design. Toshiba has stated that they are losing money on its whole HD DVD operation. With incentives included, they are practically giving away players just to meet their goal of 1 million players. They believe that the studios cannot ignore that large a base, but Disney and Fox have already stated that no matter how many HD DVD players there are out there, they will not release to any format that does not include extra copy protection and region coding.



Efficiencies come from mass production. If there is no mass production, then there can be no efficiencies. The players are not selling in big numbers, and therefor not being produced in big numbers. How does one find efficiences if you cannot produce a player in sufficent numbers to realize them? The bottom line is nobody is going to purchase a $1000 player when they can buy both formats players for less than $700. As long as it is cheaper to do it that way, then a $1000 dual format is not going to sell in numbers that realize cost savings. That is simple manufacuturing 101.





I wasn't offended at all, the perspective just did not seem logical to me.

I would not call the amaount of a potential Wal-mart loss a fact, Sir T at all. The $299 cost to retailers number is ludicrous, as that is the *MSRP* of the units. Why would Toshiba sell a unit to any retailer at full MSRP (and what retailer would be foolish enough to buy/pay it)? The person who is the source of that information obviously is not being honest and no retailer should disclose their cost either. Everyone negotiates their best deal, and Wal-mart is very good at it.

With respect to the Venturer... how less expensive is it to manufacture? My guess is not a whole lot. The costs are almost the same in all likelihood, (and keep in mind Toshiba does not have to pay royalties to itself).

The Toshiba statement saying that they are losing money on the HD DVD operation should come as no surprise to anyone and should be expected by all at this stage of the game. Sony is losing plenty too (and dare I say even more than Toshiba). I would not chastise Sony or Toshiba on this, as both sides view the short-term losses as investments with a goal of long-term profitability. This thinking makes sense to me, and I would be doing the same in their respective positions. For one of the camps it *may* not pan out, but you can hardly blame either side for believing that their investment will pay off. If they don't believe in their respective format, then why be in the game at all? I also should point out that Toshiba gains royalties on the HD DVD format with every software sale, so it has plenty to gain by building player penetration just like Sony does through BR royalties (and game royalties).

As to manufaturing efficiencies coming from mass production... I could not agree more. But that is my point... I firmly believe that there *will* be mass production of the units in time. Not now, mind you... in the future. The same has to happen for any new product until sales grow. This is the classic chicken/egg scenario and I remember it well with respect to DVD and HDTV... Look how both those turned out. :-) I agree that no one will buy a $100 player when the two separate formats can be had for $700 (or even $500 by my counting street price-wise), but what about $200-$250 later on? I dare say there will be plenty of takers at that price, and I don't think that price is a fantasy either. It may be a year or two, but that is not that far out all things considered (especially if a stalemate continues indefinitely as I anticipate).

----Dave

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I would not call the amaount of a potential Wal-mart loss a fact, Sir T at all. The $299 cost to retailers number is ludicrous, as that is the *MSRP* of the units. Why would Toshiba sell a unit to any retailer at full MSRP (and what retailer would be foolish enough to buy/pay it)? The person who is the source of that information obviously is not being honest and no retailer should disclose their cost either. Everyone negotiates their best deal, and Wal-mart is very good at it.

Dave, you can duck you head in the sand all you please, but there have been mutiple comfirmations of the Walmart deal, losses, and all of the fact(and sometimes conjecture) surrounding this. I think you are misunderstanding what I have said. The COST of making the players is estimated to be around $300. Walmart was selling the A2 for $249 six months ago. Even if they paid $250 per player, a dollar is probably a loss to them in floor space alone. The freebie disc offered with the player cost the HD DVD PG some promotion money on the deal as well. When you add it all up, that is a loss to almost everyone involved. Can't put lipstick on a pig on this one man.


With respect to the Venturer... how less expensive is it to manufacture? My guess is not a whole lot. The costs are almost the same in all likelihood, (and keep in mind Toshiba does not have to pay royalties to itself).

Nobody knows how much less, but we do know that it is cheaper to manufacturer, has less parts, and lets face it, royalities do not play a huge cost in most players, its the parts and manufacture that do.


The Toshiba statement saying that they are losing money on the HD DVD operation should come as no surprise to anyone and should be expected by all at this stage of the game. Sony is losing plenty too (and dare I say even more than Toshiba). I would not chastise Sony or Toshiba on this, as both sides view the short-term losses as investments with a goal of long-term profitability. This thinking makes sense to me, and I would be doing the same in their respective positions. For one of the camps it *may* not pan out, but you can hardly blame either side for believing that their investment will pay off. If they don't believe in their respective format, then why be in the game at all? I also should point out that Toshiba gains royalties on the HD DVD format with every software sale, so it has plenty to gain by building player penetration just like Sony does through BR royalties (and game royalties).

You are once again glossing over details. The PS3 has the only distinction of having multiple classification depending on how it is used. The Toshiba stand alones do not. Gaming machines have built in losses to be made up on software sales(and that includes both video and games). A standalone HD DVD player does not have this comfort. If the players cannot make anyone any money over time(and there are no signs at this point they are) then the formats health is in danger. Bluray standalones are making the manufacturers money, the cost they currently sit ensures that. The new PS3's cost less to manufacture than the previous models. They also have less parts in them as well. They are losing far less money on each player than they were.


As to manufaturing efficiencies coming from mass production... I could not agree more. But that is my point... I firmly believe that there *will* be mass production of the units in time. Not now, mind you... in the future. The same has to happen for any new product until sales grow. This is the classic chicken/egg scenario and I remember it well with respect to DVD and HDTV... Look how both those turned out. :-) I agree that no one will buy a $100 player when the two separate formats can be had for $700 (or even $500 by my counting street price-wise), but what about $200-$250 later on? I dare say there will be plenty of takers at that price, and I don't think that price is a fantasy either. It may be a year or two, but that is not that far out all things considered (especially if a stalemate continues indefinitely as I anticipate)

.----Dave

You seem to think that this is going to go one forever, and this is why you think dual players seem practical. You are not correct here at all. There is one component that you are missing here. The studios count on home media to make them money to fund high profile theatrical movie projects. Last year the studios altogether lost 2.9billion dollars because DVD sales have fallen so dramatically since 2005 and operating costs have risen so dramatically. The studios know the DVD gravy train is over, and they need a new way to make revenue to replace it. This stalemate slows mass adoption to another revenue source. The longer it takes, the more money the studios lose. That is why a dual format player is not going to be of any good in the long run. All of the studios are under pressure here, so it is in the best interest of all of them to unite behind one format so mass adoption can allow them to release catalog titles and increase revenue. Right now releasing catalog titles is a losing proposition, only date and day sales with DVD is having any traction. So what is the point of creating a dual format player in large numbers when you know that Universal is doing VERY poorly selling titles exclusively to one format and they are not really all that happy with the HD DVD PG on the Paramount/Dreamworks deal, and Paramount not doing that much better, and has a out on their clause. Warner is doing better than everyone selling to both sides, but Sony and Disney are not that far behind them. Warner is watching very carefully that their titles are selling 2:1 in bluray favor, and the Paramount deal is over after Christmas 2008. There is no way in hell this stalemate will play out long term, too much is at stake for that to happen. When you look at the whole HD DVD package, there is just not much health in it anymore.

[drseid]

Dave, you can duck you head in the sand all you please, but there have been mutiple comfirmations of the Walmart deal, losses, and all of the fact(and sometimes conjecture) surrounding this. I think you are misunderstanding what I have said. The COST of making the players is estimated to be around $300. Walmart was selling the A2 for $249 six months ago. Even if they paid $250 per player, a dollar is probably a loss to them in floor space alone. The freebie disc offered with the player cost the HD DVD PG some promotion money on the deal as well. When you add it all up, that is a loss to almost everyone involved. Can't put lipstick on a pig on this one man.



Nobody knows how much less, but we do know that it is cheaper to manufacturer, has less parts, and lets face it, royalities do not play a huge cost in most players, its the parts and manufacture that do.



You are once again glossing over details. The PS3 has the only distinction of having multiple classification depending on how it is used. The Toshiba stand alones do not. Gaming machines have built in losses to be made up on software sales(and that includes both video and games). A standalone HD DVD player does not have this comfort. If the players cannot make anyone any money over time(and there are no signs at this point they are) then the formats health is in danger. Bluray standalones are making the manufacturers money, the cost they currently sit ensures that. The new PS3's cost less to manufacture than the previous models. They also have less parts in them as well. They are losing far less money on each player than they were.



You seem to think that this is going to go one forever, and this is why you think dual players seem practical. You are not correct here at all. There is one component that you are missing here. The studios count on home media to make them money to fund high profile theatrical movie projects. Last year the studios altogether lost 2.9billion dollars because DVD sales have fallen so dramatically since 2005 and operating costs have risen so dramatically. The studios know the DVD gravy train is over, and they need a new way to make revenue to replace it. This stalemate slows mass adoption to another revenue source. The longer it takes, the more money the studios lose. That is why a dual format player is not going to be of any good in the long run. All of the studios are under pressure here, so it is in the best interest of all of them to unite behind one format so mass adoption can allow them to release catalog titles and increase revenue. Right now releasing catalog titles is a losing proposition, only date and day sales with DVD is having any traction. So what is the point of creating a dual format player in large numbers when you know that Universal is doing VERY poorly selling titles exclusively to one format and they are not really all that happy with the HD DVD PG on the Paramount/Dreamworks deal, and Paramount not doing that much better, and has a out on their clause. Warner is doing better than everyone selling to both sides, but Sony and Disney are not that far behind them. Warner is watching very carefully that their titles are selling 2:1 in bluray favor, and the Paramount deal is over after Christmas 2008. There is no way in hell this stalemate will play out long term, too much is at stake for that to happen. When you look at the whole HD DVD package, there is just not much health in it anymore.

I should point out that I am in no way claiming the Wal-mart deal was a moneymaker. I think that would be a foolish statement indeed. No lipstick or pigs here. ;-) That said, I think that it was the kickoff of a major strategy shift for HD DVD (and Wal-mart to a certain degree) that I personally agree with. You can certainly argue otherwise, and you may prove to be right in the end... I am just calling things as I see them, plain and simple.

As for players making anyone money over time... This I firmly believe can, will, and *is* happening (in the case of Venturer). What things look like today are in my opinion not a reflection of what will be over time (and I am not talking years here). Efficiencies go up with sales volume, and Toshiba has proven that low cost drives sales (no surprise here). As sales increase (and they will), costs will continue to come down. As costs come down, the opportunity for manufacturing profits goes up. With that opportunity of profit will come additional manufacturers ready to feed the demand. This is extremely common. That said, Toshiba has certainly driven costs down much faster than other manufacturers would like them to... but "ces't la vie." :-) Toshiba did it because it was in their best interest, and because they can.

Your point about the studio losses and pressure associated with those losses is well taken. The truth is you name the primary trump card that could topple my theory. I would be lying if I said there was no chance of this occuring (although it *may* play out differently than you think with respect to Warner come February 2008 as I have predicted rightly or wrongly in my previous posts). Studio support is definitely a wildcard in general here for both sides (and of course the future demand/need for dual-format players). I guess we will just have to see how this one plays out one way or the other.

---Dave

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I should point out that I am in no way claiming the Wal-mart deal was a moneymaker. I think that would be a foolish statement indeed. No lipstick or pigs here. ;-) That said, I think that it was the kickoff of a major strategy shift for HD DVD (and Wal-mart to a certain degree) that I personally agree with. You can certainly argue otherwise, and you may prove to be right in the end... I am just calling things as I see them, plain and simple.

I am not sure how you can call this a major strategy shift. Toshiba has been cutting prices since the HD DVD format began. Cutting prices more, having firesales, and under cutting their CE partners is something they have been doing since before HD DVD even hit the streets(Onkyo once again). The Venturer player is being sold in Walmart stores in Canada, selected ones here, and online. However the thunder of being the lowest price HD DVD player has been stolen by Toshiba. You have a rebadged A3 with some parts differences, and the A3 priced within $50 of each others. Do you really think the consumer is going to pick a no name brand over Toshiba?




As for players making anyone money over time... This I firmly believe can, will, and *is* happening (in the case of Venturer). What things look like today are in my opinion not a reflection of what will be over time (and I am not talking years here). Efficiencies go up with sales volume, and Toshiba has proven that low cost drives sales (no surprise here). As sales increase (and they will), costs will continue to come down. As costs come down, the opportunity for manufacturing profits goes up. With that opportunity of profit will come additional manufacturers ready to feed the demand. This is extremely common. That said, Toshiba has certainly driven costs down much faster than other manufacturers would like them to... but "ces't la vie." :-) Toshiba did it because it was in their best interest, and because they can.

Time is not on Toshiba's side here. The big word in Hollywood right now is the slowdown of DVD releases and sales. It was these sales that help make some of the big budget movies possible, and helps run studio operations. Sales are down approximately 20% from last year, and that is pretty dramatic. Studio had operational losses of $2.9 billion dollars last year, and without quick settlement of this war losses will continue. It is in the best interested of the studios that this is settled ASAP. So Toshiba does not have time on its side, and nothing sales wise is even remotely in their favor at this point. Warner has said it will take a look at fourth quarter sales and evaluate its position. So far every titles released to both formats by Warner has shown a 2:1 edge in favor of bluray, and with 300 it is closer to 4:1 now. Warner has sold over 350k copies of this movie on bluray, and I do not think they will leave that on the table a keep 100K in its place.


Your point about the studio losses and pressure associated with those losses is well taken. The truth is you name the primary trump card that could topple my theory. I would be lying if I said there was no chance of this occuring (although it *may* play out differently than you think with respect to Warner come February 2008 as I have predicted rightly or wrongly in my previous posts). Studio support is definitely a wildcard in general here for both sides (and of course the future demand/need for dual-format players). I guess we will just have to see how this one plays out one way or the other.

---Dave

Bluray has 66% of the market in disc sales here in America. It owns 73% of the market in Europe. It owns 94% of the asian market. When a studio sees this, do you really think it will support a format that has 34% here, 27% of the market in Europe, and 6% of the market in asia? That is counter to plain logic if not good business sense. HD DVD has always been the cheaper format. However there are only 450k HD DVD standalones out there vs the more expensive 300K for bluray. 150K more for a format that cost half the price. Then you have the big bomb of 2 million PS3 in American homes, and 5.5 million all over the world. So you have a total worldwide of 750k of HD DVD players and drives, 5.5 million bluray players, and we have not even counted the standalone drives out there. If you owned a studio, which would you choose given these figures? I think both Warner, Paramount, and Universal are taking a very good look at this.

[drseid]

I am not sure how you can call this a major strategy shift. Toshiba has been cutting prices since the HD DVD format began. Cutting prices more, having firesales, and under cutting their CE partners is something they have been doing since before HD DVD even hit the streets(Onkyo once again). The Venturer player is being sold in Walmart stores in Canada, selected ones here, and online. However the thunder of being the lowest price HD DVD player has been stolen by Toshiba. You have a rebadged A3 with some parts differences, and the A3 priced within $50 of each others. Do you really think the consumer is going to pick a no name brand over Toshiba?





Time is not on Toshiba's side here. The big word in Hollywood right now is the slowdown of DVD releases and sales. It was these sales that help make some of the big budget movies possible, and helps run studio operations. Sales are down approximately 20% from last year, and that is pretty dramatic. Studio had operational losses of $2.9 billion dollars last year, and without quick settlement of this war losses will continue. It is in the best interested of the studios that this is settled ASAP. So Toshiba does not have time on its side, and nothing sales wise is even remotely in their favor at this point. Warner has said it will take a look at fourth quarter sales and evaluate its position. So far every titles released to both formats by Warner has shown a 2:1 edge in favor of bluray, and with 300 it is closer to 4:1 now. Warner has sold over 350k copies of this movie on bluray, and I do not think they will leave that on the table a keep 100K in its place.



Bluray has 66% of the market in disc sales here in America. It owns 73% of the market in Europe. It owns 94% of the asian market. When a studio sees this, do you really think it will support a format that has 34% here, 27% of the market in Europe, and 6% of the market in asia? That is counter to plain logic if not good business sense. HD DVD has always been the cheaper format. However there are only 450k HD DVD standalones out there vs the more expensive 300K for bluray. 150K more for a format that cost half the price. Then you have the big bomb of 2 million PS3 in American homes, and 5.5 million all over the world. So you have a total worldwide of 750k of HD DVD players and drives, 5.5 million bluray players, and we have not even counted the standalone drives out there. If you owned a studio, which would you choose given these figures? I think both Warner, Paramount, and Universal are taking a very good look at this.

I can't speak for the rest of the world, but I firmly believe Warner will switch to HD DVD in the US, as they realize that standalone player trends/sales will drive the format long-term in the US, and HD DVD is in a much better position to expand these sales to the average consumer due to their pricing. Bottom line is the software sales right now are truly irrelevant, IMO. The import is where they *will* go. I think Warner is indeed looking at things, but they will not go the way you think... Again, we will see.

---Dave

[Mr Peabody]

I know everyone is wanting Warner to choose, that way we can continue to speculate how this will play out. Unless there's something I missed, if I was Warner I'd continue selling both formats until something gave. Why choose when they can make money on both at this point? I think Warner going HD-DVD would just prolong the war more while going with BR would probably seal HD-DVD's fate. With support like Disney, Sony, Panasonic and all the other companies in the BDA I can't see BR failing, or at least not hanging in as a nitch product. Not only are we talking movie sales but BR has computer drives and camcorders out. I'm sure there are HD-DVD computer products but I haven't seen any camcorders.

It's just a bad deal things had to work out this way and without a dual disc one format has to die. Dual format machines isn't a resolution because we will basically be in the same place we are now. Retailers and renters are not going to stock both formats in software. The internet could help keep the underdog alive longer though.

I think it is wrong to say software and the sales there of is irrelevant. It's really the movie companies that seem to be pulling the strings. That's how we got saddled with HDCP and HDMI, I cannot tell you how much I hate HDMI and those behind it but I digress.

I'm a bit mystified at how one can believe Toshiba's plan is good. By selling their product as cheap as they can they effectively prevented any other manufacturer from putting out HD-DVD gear, hence Onkyo, and helping HD-DVD penetrate the market. Well, one other thing mystifies me as well, and that's why Samsung would put out a dual format machine when LG isn't exactly having their machines fly off the shelves.

Hell, must now be frozen, so much for global warming, although I'm not as adament as Sir T, I think we almost agree on something :)

[drseid]

I know everyone is wanting Warner to choose, that way we can continue to speculate how this will play out. Unless there's something I missed, if I was Warner I'd continue selling both formats until something gave. Why choose when they can make money on both at this point? I think Warner going HD-DVD would just prolong the war more while going with BR would probably seal HD-DVD's fate. With support like Disney, Sony, Panasonic and all the other companies in the BDA I can't see BR failing, or at least not hanging in as a nitch product. Not only are we talking movie sales but BR has computer drives and camcorders out. I'm sure there are HD-DVD computer products but I haven't seen any camcorders.

It's just a bad deal things had to work out this way and without a dual disc one format has to die. Dual format machines isn't a resolution because we will basically be in the same place we are now. Retailers and renters are not going to stock both formats in software. The internet could help keep the underdog alive longer though.

I think it is wrong to say software and the sales there of is irrelevant. It's really the movie companies that seem to be pulling the strings. That's how we got saddled with HDCP and HDMI, I cannot tell you how much I hate HDMI and those behind it but I digress.

I'm a bit mystified at how one can believe Toshiba's plan is good. By selling their product as cheap as they can they effectively prevented any other manufacturer from putting out HD-DVD gear, hence Onkyo, and helping HD-DVD penetrate the market. Well, one other thing mystifies me as well, and that's why Samsung would put out a dual format machine when LG isn't exactly having their machines fly off the shelves.

Hell, must now be frozen, so much for global warming, although I'm not as adament as Sir T, I think we almost agree on something :)

I didn't say software sales were irrelevant, I said *current* software sales are irrelevant. The BR mantra of 2:1 just really does not mean much right now as the base is too small and is being driven by factors that may not play out in the future. Standalone player sales are where it is at long-term, as they will drive *long-term* software sales. The reason why Toshiba's strategy is an excellent one IMO is they are driving standalone sales just as planned. They are in essence agreeing with my analysis. That said, agree or disagree, it does not mean anything will come of it. At the end of the day, the consumer will decide.

As for Warner, there are advantages and disadvantages to a number of different decisions they could make next year. I have made my prediction and stand by it, but I have hedged my bet. ;-)

---Dave

[Mr Peabody]

If I was looking to enter a market or eliminate one of two products I was selling, it would seem the money maker would be the 2x opposed to just x. And, the x, lagging behind would be the obvious one to be eliminated. Unless of course, in Paramount's example, some one pays you enough to make it worth your while. Long term maybe sales will swing but 2 to 1 current sales would indicate BR had more supporters.

Dave, I enjoy the exchange of ideas and hang in there because we need the input or views of HD-DVD supporters to sort of keep things balanced or not let us BR people lose touch with reality. We all can only speculate.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I can't speak for the rest of the world, but I firmly believe Warner will switch to HD DVD in the US, as they realize that standalone player trends/sales will drive the format long-term in the US, and HD DVD is in a much better position to expand these sales to the average consumer due to their pricing. Bottom line is the software sales right now are truly irrelevant, IMO. The import is where they *will* go. I think Warner is indeed looking at things, but they will not go the way you think... Again, we will see.

---Dave

Dave, you are a reasonable person, this response is rediculous. You are sounding less and less logical, and more and more fanboyish. This parsing of standalones vs PS3 is a HD DVD fanboy typical arguement. A standalone(as I explained to Groundbeef) is a player that has all its functions internally. That would describe the PS3 perfectly, and what sets it aside from the XBOX360 external HD DVD drive.

Warner is not looking at sales trends of standalones, they do not sell players. Warner is looking at software sales, and they have stated that publicly on at least two occasions I have witnessed. What you are attempting here is to re-write what Warner has already stated. Warner is in the business of selling movies on disc. Warner I am sure is looking at disc sales for both formats(they have stated this). Warner switching to HD DVD only is not going to end the war, it will just prolong it alot longer. The studio I work for has stated they are not going to release to HD DVD because of lack of region coding and BD+. If HD DVD wins(and I highly doubt it) they will just shift to downloads rather than release high def product to another unprotected format. Fox has also stated they will not release to another unsecure format. Sony, its obvious they are not moving over to HD DVD.

Warner is not looking for a continued stalemate, they are looking for an end to this. Going HD DVD exclusive will not get them to that goal.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I didn't say software sales were irrelevant, I said *current* software sales are irrelevant. The BR mantra of 2:1 just really does not mean much right now as the base is too small and is being driven by factors that may not play out in the future. Standalone player sales are where it is at long-term, as they will drive *long-term* software sales. The reason why Toshiba's strategy is an excellent one IMO is they are driving standalone sales just as planned. They are in essence agreeing with my analysis. That said, agree or disagree, it does not mean anything will come of it. At the end of the day, the consumer will decide.

As for Warner, there are advantages and disadvantages to a number of different decisions they could make next year. I have made my prediction and stand by it, but I have hedged my bet. ;-)

---Dave

Your thinking is outdated. Standalones are where it used to be at, but things have changed. Parsing a difference between a traditional standalone player and the PS3 is foolish since every PS3 has a internal bluray drive just like traditional standalones. You are doing a very typical HD DVD fanboy thing by not counting the PS3 as a player. Not only is that foolish, but it is why Toshiba and HD DVD are behind in disc sales to this day.

[Groundbeef]

Your thinking is outdated. Standalones are where it used to be at, but things have changed. Parsing a difference between a traditional standalone player and the PS3 is foolish since every PS3 has a internal bluray drive just like traditional standalones. You are doing a very typical HD DVD fanboy thing by not counting the PS3 as a player. Not only is that foolish, but it is why Toshiba and HD DVD are behind in disc sales to this day.

And your incessent cries of "All PS3 should be counted as standalone" is just as silly. Thats like trying to count my car as a "Home Theater" because it has 5 speakers in it. Just because the PS3 CAN play Blu-Ray doesn't make it a dedicated player. It just makes it a GAME CONSOLE that can play BluRay movies.

And as more and more GAMES come out for this GAMING machine, you will find less reliance on the PS3 as a Blu-Ray player.

I'm not sayin' that the PS3 isnt a comptent BluRay player. But for sales figures, for the BR industry to count each PS3 as a "player" is silly. Its just not in the same catagory.

In a similar vein, I wonder how the NPD numbers would look if Wal-Mart reported sales figures. For either camp. Doesn't it seem silly that everyone relies on numbers that exclude the worlds largest retailer?

[PeruvianSkies]

Dave, you are a reasonable person, this response is rediculous. You are sounding less and less logical, and more and more fanboyish. This parsing of standalones vs PS3 is a HD DVD fanboy typical arguement. A standalone(as I explained to Groundbeef) is a player that has all its functions internally. That would describe the PS3 perfectly, and what sets it aside from the XBOX360 external HD DVD drive.

Warner is not looking at sales trends of standalones, they do not sell players. Warner is looking at software sales, and they have stated that publicly on at least two occasions I have witnessed. What you are attempting here is to re-write what Warner has already stated. Warner is in the business of selling movies on disc. Warner I am sure is looking at disc sales for both formats(they have stated this). Warner switching to HD DVD only is not going to end the war, it will just prolong it alot longer. The studio I work for has stated they are not going to release to HD DVD because of lack of region coding and BD+. If HD DVD wins(and I highly doubt it) they will just shift to downloads rather than release high def product to another unprotected format. Fox has also stated they will not release to another unsecure format. Sony, its obvious they are not moving over to HD DVD.

Warner is not looking for a continued stalemate, they are looking for an end to this. Going HD DVD exclusive will not get them to that goal.

I think we are all in trouble if you are the person around here who determines what is and isn't logical.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I think we are all in trouble if you are the person around here who determines what is and isn't logical.

And this coming from a person spewing racist comments on this board. Look low life, you have not been around here in a while, why don't you disappear again.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

And your incessent cries of "All PS3 should be counted as standalone" is just as silly. Thats like trying to count my car as a "Home Theater" because it has 5 speakers in it. Just because the PS3 CAN play Blu-Ray doesn't make it a dedicated player. It just makes it a GAME CONSOLE that can play BluRay movies.

Once again you are trying to re-write a definition. A stand alone player is a player with all of its functions internal. That means you do not have to purchase a serperate drive to play movies in high def. The XBOX360 does not count because the HD DVD drive must be purchased seperately. The PS3 has all the same functions as a S300 bluray player, but it just does more, and gaming is just another more.

Your example is whack because there are no 5.1 dolby digital or Dts processors for the car that can process movie audio. The PS3 is a dedicated player because everything you need to play a movie is in its chassis.


And as more and more GAMES come out for this GAMING machine, you will find less reliance on the PS3 as a Blu-Ray player.

Sorry bud, but you can find a "traditional" player for cheaper than a PS3, and they are still flying off the shelves with BR movies in them. And PS3 owners are still buying movies. If you are speaking of the future, that is something you just do not know, and cannot forward in an arguement unless you can predict the future. We know you cannot.


I'm not sayin' that the PS3 isnt a comptent BluRay player. But for sales figures, for the BR industry to count each PS3 as a "player" is silly. Its just not in the same catagory.

The only thing that would take it out of the catagory is the removal of the bluray drive. Since that is an integral part of the machine, it would not be possible. Just because you do not understand the definition of a standalone, does not validate your point at all.


In a similar vein, I wonder how the NPD numbers would look if Wal-Mart reported sales figures. For either camp. Doesn't it seem silly that everyone relies on numbers that exclude the worlds largest retailer?

It would not mean very much since Walmart is not the leading seller of HD players or software. That distinction goes to Best Buy, with Amazon second, then Target. All of those three report to NDP. The is a huge difference between being the largest retailer, and the largest seller of HD players and discs.

The PS was a gaming machine. The PS2 was also a gaming machine. The emphasis on either of these two was not on the ability to play DVD's. However the PS3 is being advertised as a "entertainment center" with all of the ability to play BR disc right out of the box, supports DTHD, DD+, Dts, SACD and Dts MA lossless in the future. It is the most advanced Bluray player on the market. It does many things very well, including playing back Bluray disc in its INTERNAL drive. Fortunately the name "entertainment center" is going to start appearing in our AV vocabulary in the future, and folks are just going to have to get used to it.

[Groundbeef]

I don't have the time or energy to rehash whether the PS3 should be counted as a standalone player or not, but I won't conceed either way. Personally I think that some sort of ratio needs to be factored into the PS3 as it's SOLE use is NOT movies.

Therefore, its not fair to include the PS3 into "standalone" sales. But, I'm not an industry insider, so it probably doesn't matter either way.

Incidently BB has a Sony BluRay player on sale for $399, and this weekend they were throwing in a $100 gift card to boot. Plus the free movies. So, it doesn't appear that BluRay is above buying customers either. It's not entirely clear who is footing the bill for the gift card however. It may be a ploy by BB to get consumers to spend more, and not something that BR is endorsing or underwriting.

Heres the link for the BR player:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=1180743330749&skuId=8403514&type=product

Sony has alread indicated that the PS3 will not be getting another price cut. So, it appears that there are now players on the market cheaper than the PS3. And as games are becoming more prevelant, I think that Sony's reliance on the PS3 to forward the BR cause will be somewhat muted, as consumers can simply pick up a BR player for less money.

Remeber the PS3 was to be the cheap alternative to the $1000 BR players that were out but a few short months ago.

[Mr Peabody]

That' was actually a brilliant move on Sony's part, they're just taking the "universal player" one step further. Unfortunately the gaming division should have shared technology with the stand alone division. If Sony's stand alone was as fast and capable as the PS3 with BR playback they would have owned the market. At least until everyone else caught up.

Sir T, under the HDTV forum, read my post, something like Satelite/cable audio issue, to see if you have any ideas.

[pixelthis]

I don't have the time or energy to rehash whether the PS3 should be counted as a standalone player or not, but I won't conceed either way. Personally I think that some sort of ratio needs to be factored into the PS3 as it's SOLE use is NOT movies.

Therefore, its not fair to include the PS3 into "standalone" sales. But, I'm not an industry insider, so it probably doesn't matter either way.

Incidently BB has a Sony BluRay player on sale for $399, and this weekend they were throwing in a $100 gift card to boot. Plus the free movies. So, it doesn't appear that BluRay is above buying customers either. It's not entirely clear who is footing the bill for the gift card however. It may be a ploy by BB to get consumers to spend more, and not something that BR is endorsing or underwriting.

Heres the link for the BR player:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=1180743330749&skuId=8403514&type=product

Sony has alread indicated that the PS3 will not be getting another price cut. So, it appears that there are now players on the market cheaper than the PS3. And as games are becoming more prevelant, I think that Sony's reliance on the PS3 to forward the BR cause will be somewhat muted, as consumers can simply pick up a BR player for less money.

Remeber the PS3 was to be the cheap alternative to the $1000 BR players that were out but a few short months ago.

I have seen the gift card elsewhere.
you dont want to subtract free movies from the total price, how about the giftcard?
You're denial of reality aside, the free movies, coupled with the gift card, get the price of the blu down to under 200 bucks.
SO its not far off in price to the HD player, is more advanced, has better audio with uncompressed PCM, has more support, and is more advanced technologically,
so why again would anyone buy a HD player? To see transformers?:1:

[drseid]

If I was looking to enter a market or eliminate one of two products I was selling, it would seem the money maker would be the 2x opposed to just x. And, the x, lagging behind would be the obvious one to be eliminated. Unless of course, in Paramount's example, some one pays you enough to make it worth your while. Long term maybe sales will swing but 2 to 1 current sales would indicate BR had more supporters.

Dave, I enjoy the exchange of ideas and hang in there because we need the input or views of HD-DVD supporters to sort of keep things balanced or not let us BR people lose touch with reality. We all can only speculate.

I agree that of those choices I would want the same as you suggest. I guess my thinking is that Toshiba's plans to boost standalone players will swing that ratio the other way to a large degree (although certainly not 2:1) longer-term at Warner. If it doesn't by the end of next year then the strategy failed IMO, and they will have to concede defeat if they are wise. I believe that won't be the case, but I am just guessing like everyone else. The studio payoff aspect is indeed another avenue, but BR can also do that. I think BR would be just as willing as HD DVD to pay Warner off if they will take it. Warner makes money from either camp it chooses in that scenario (so I don't think HD DVD could get them to choose in their favor on a payoff alone).

In the case of BR, no matter what Warner does, there will always be a place for it with the gaming market no matter what happens with relation to HD DVD on movie and player sales (not to imply HD DVD will "win," just a for instance). If BR comes out on top, then at least folks can say they only paid $100 for an HD DVD player. ;-)

---Dave

[drseid]

Your thinking is outdated. Standalones are where it used to be at, but things have changed. Parsing a difference between a traditional standalone player and the PS3 is foolish since every PS3 has a internal bluray drive just like traditional standalones. You are doing a very typical HD DVD fanboy thing by not counting the PS3 as a player. Not only is that foolish, but it is why Toshiba and HD DVD are behind in disc sales to this day.

I think my viewpoint is very much relevant to the what will transpire. Keep in mind that I have nothing against the PS3, and may buy one myself now that they are $399. I am in no way disputing that every one of the players sold is capable of playing BR movies, and if buyers choose to play Blu-ray movies on them, they can and will.

That said, the Sony PS2 can play DVDs... How many people count them as standalone DVD players? Anyone who buys one *can* play DVDs on them, but how many actually do? This is not a standalone player in the same way a dedicated BR only player like my BDP-S1 is. That does not mean the PS3 is an "inferior" player (it isn't by any means), but most won't view it as a movie player for their living room system and as such, it won't drive software sales in the long-run.

Let's be honest here... Attach rates are much lower with game machines like the PS3, and you know this Sir T. If BR (or HD DVD) want to dominate, they have to sell dedicated movie *standalone* players like my Sony BDP-S1. Right now, most of the BR offerings are too expensive for most people to afford, and so they are not buying them. They will, however, once they come down in price. You dislike Toshiba's behavior because they have realized this and are doing it right now -- I on the contrary applaud them for it. BR may not like it, but they are going to have to do the same if they want to succeed long-term. The PS3 will *not* drive any format long-term. This is not a fanboy statement, it is just plain common business sense.

Toshiba and HD DVD are behind disc sales today because they still need to sell many more standalone players before they can turn the tide in their favor. I never said *no one* is buying software who owns a PS3... Obviously many are, especially at this relatively early point in the formats' life cycle. The attach rates are still just not the same, and will continue to decrease as early adopters are a lesser percentage of PS3 buyers over time.

---Dave

[Groundbeef]

I have seen the gift card elsewhere.
you dont want to subtract free movies from the total price, how about the giftcard?
You're denial of reality aside, the free movies, coupled with the gift card, get the price of the blu down to under 200 bucks.
SO its not far off in price to the HD player, is more advanced, has better audio with uncompressed PCM, has more support, and is more advanced technologically,
so why again would anyone buy a HD player? To see transformers?:1:

If you read the post, I DIDN'T subtract the $100 gift card from the price. I only indicated that it was available. Either way, you can't subtract the 'free' movies, nor the gift card from the price of the unit.

I would argue however, that in terms of "Value" the gift card is MORE valuable than the free movies. At least with the gift card you can pick something else you want, versus 5 movies pre-determined for you.

The price of the BluRay player is STILL $399. Not $200. Please don't tell me you work with peoples money for a living. If so, they are in real trouble.

[Mr Peabody]

A friend of mine who rents from Netflix told me that every rental he has gotten from them the disc comes with DVD on one side and the HD version on the other. I thought that was interesting and wonder how they get those. Maybe the expense keeps them off the consumer market.

Not meaning to get into the middle of anything but it would seem logical if I paid $399.00 for something and received $100.00 of it back, that the price then becomes $299.00. The fact that the $100.00 is in a different form doesn't matter. Retailers do the same practice by saying "buy it now for $99.00 after $50.00 rebate". Also, if you donate money to a charity and they give you a gift, let's say you join PBS and get a box set of Peter Paul & Mary, you must subtract the fair market value of that gift before taking the price of the membership as a deduction. So applying tax principles to the situation it would seem we'd also have to subtract the value of the movies from the price. Either way you look at it your $399.00 gets you more with the gift card and movies. But both camps were giving movies and probably still are. On the other hand one still has $399.00 missing from their wallet or bank account. You can't deposit the gift card or movies back into either to bring up your balance. So in conclusion, I have no conclusion.

[pixelthis]

A friend of mine who rents from Netflix told me that every rental he has gotten from them the disc comes with DVD on one side and the HD version on the other. I thought that was interesting and wonder how they get those. Maybe the expense keeps them off the consumer market.

Not meaning to get into the middle of anything but it would seem logical if I paid $399.00 for something and received $100.00 of it back, that the price then becomes $299.00. The fact that the $100.00 is in a different form doesn't matter. Retailers do the same practice by saying "buy it now for $99.00 after $50.00 rebate". Also, if you donate money to a charity and they give you a gift, let's say you join PBS and get a box set of Peter Paul & Mary, you must subtract the fair market value of that gift before taking the price of the membership as a deduction. So applying tax principles to the situation it would seem we'd also have to subtract the value of the movies from the price. Either way you look at it your $399.00 gets you more with the gift card and movies. But both camps were giving movies and probably still are. On the other hand one still has $399.00 missing from their wallet or bank account. You can't deposit the gift card or movies back into either to bring up your balance. So in conclusion, I have no conclusion.

the conclusion is that "groundbeef" is totally lacking in the logic department.
If you buy a standalone player what are you gonna watch on it?
MOVIES.
If you get six at an average cost of 20 bucks thats a real value, same as the gift card.
The total cost of the player will be less than 200 bucks.
Your bank account will be lowered 399 bucks, true, but without these perks it would be lowered 620 bucks or so.
this is typical with bargains that marketers offer.
I got two gallons of ice cream for the price of one, my bank acct is still down five bucks,
but I have an extra tub of black almond.
Its funny that when tosh was doing the same thing HDDVD advocates were saying this lowered the true price of the player, I guess it depends on whose player is being bought
As for the combo discs the new Bourne release is advertising a HD/ DVD combo disc.
I guess it depends on what the studio wants to put out, but I have seen quite a few of these

[drseid]

A friend of mine who rents from Netflix told me that every rental he has gotten from them the disc comes with DVD on one side and the HD version on the other. I thought that was interesting and wonder how they get those. Maybe the expense keeps them off the consumer market.


These are the dreaded combo discs I detest from the HD DVD camp. Many of them (almost all of the earlier releases) cost $5.00 a disc more to the consumer, and most HD DVD users never use the DVD side (except maybe if they have kids for the car/van DVD player). I am beginning to think the combo disc may have been designed more for the rental market to save inventory space more than the direct to consumer sales market. No problem there if there was a no combo alternative at a lower price (and the combos were not so glitchy as they frequently are)... unfortunately there isn't. :-(

I tend to buy BR versions of all combo HD DVD releases if they are available as my personal message to those still offering them and forcing them on the HD DVD consumer. Somehow I guess my buying decisions have not had much of an effect on their thinking as they keep coming out with *more* of them... Grrrrrrrrr

---Dave

[kexodusc]

the conclusion is that "groundbeef" is totally lacking in the logic department.
If you buy a standalone player what are you gonna watch on it?
MOVIES.
If you get six at an average cost of 20 bucks thats a real value, same as the gift card.
The total cost of the player will be less than 200 bucks.
Your bank account will be lowered 399 bucks, true, but without these perks it would be lowered 620 bucks or so.
this is typical with bargains that marketers offer.
I got two gallons of ice cream for the price of one, my bank acct is still down five bucks,
but I have an extra tub of black almond.
Its funny that when tosh was doing the same thing HDDVD advocates were saying this lowered the true price of the player, I guess it depends on whose player is being bought
As for the combo discs the new Bourne release is advertising a HD/ DVD combo disc.
I guess it depends on what the studio wants to put out, but I have seen quite a few of these
If there's a $100 rebate, then yeah, the out-of-pocket, real-world cost of the player is $299.
But incorporating the give-away HD-DVD or BluRay titles at their full retail price as a measure of value added is a poor idea that just doesn't fairly represent the true value of the offer.
Look at the HD-DVD 5 free movie deal. You have to choose from 5 different columns, and most of the selections are pretty weak films. Even the acceptable selections you'd have to question first if the owner would otherwise have purchased that title if it wasn't a promo comp, and what price would that person have paid for that movie. In most cases the answer to the first question will be no, and if it is yes, the price most certainly won't be the assumed retail price assumed when those sales flyers suggest a "value of over $120" or whatever.

To me, in this case the 5 free HD-DVD's would be worth about $5-10 each, depending on the title. Not nearly as big an incentive as they try to convince you it is. Might as well give away "The Facts of Life: Season 1" as well.

Now, if they let you pick any 5 movies of all available selections, then it's reasonable to assume that just about everyone could find 5 titles they'd pay full retail for - in which case I would agree the value is worth $120 or whatever.

[Groundbeef]

Not meaning to get into the middle of anything but it would seem logical if I paid $399.00 for something and received $100.00 of it back, that the price then becomes $299.00. The fact that the $100.00 is in a different form doesn't matter. Retailers do the same practice by saying "buy it now for $99.00 after $50.00 rebate". Also, if you donate money to a charity and they give you a gift, let's say you join PBS and get a box set of Peter Paul & Mary, you must subtract the fair market value of that gift before taking the price of the membership as a deduction. So applying tax principles to the situation it would seem we'd also have to subtract the value of the movies from the price. Either way you look at it your $399.00 gets you more with the gift card and movies. But both camps were giving movies and probably still are. On the other hand one still has $399.00 missing from their wallet or bank account. You can't deposit the gift card or movies back into either to bring up your balance. So in conclusion, I have no conclusion.

Two condtridictory statements.

Your first one would be correct if the $100 was in cash, and handed back to you at the end of the transaction. Then it would be $299.

If you are given a gift card to purchase ADDITIONAL items, then the price is still $399 PLUS free gifts.

Your last statement is correct.

A second way is to inquire about returning the product. For example if I buy the BluRay player, and get the "FREE $100", and then return the BluRay player, do I get to keep the "FREE $100"? No, of course not. So its really not "Free" is it? In fact, if you do return the BluRay player, and decline to return the $100 Free Gift card, guess what? They subtract $100 from your return. So you only get $299 back.

In Pixel math, this would mean that you now have actually paid $499.

See how that works?

[GMichael]

If all a person has in their checking account is $300 then none of these promotions will let them buy a PS3. They still need to shell out $400 even if what they are getting is "worth" $600 or $800. Even the gift card doesn't help with that because it's not cash back. It's just another $100 that you have to spend on games or movies ect. It won't buy food, or pay bills.

Now, the fact that anyone would spend their last penny on a game consol is yet another problem.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I think my viewpoint is very much relevant to the what will transpire. Keep in mind that I have nothing against the PS3, and may buy one myself now that they are $399. I am in no way disputing that every one of the players sold is capable of playing BR movies, and if buyers choose to play Blu-ray movies on them, they can and will.

Dave, you obviously do not know the industry I work in very well. A studio has no interest in player sales, they have a interest in software sales. In this climate(war), the studios are not looking at CE manufacturers game plan, they are looking at how the game plan effects sales of software. Warner is looking at a few things, what titles are selling well, and which side is buying their titles in greater numbers. The only studios interested in Toshiba's game plan are the studios exclusively supporting it.


That said, the Sony PS2 can play DVDs... How many people count them as standalone DVD players? Anyone who buys one *can* play DVDs on them, but how many actually do? This is not a standalone player in the same way a dedicated BR only player like my BDP-S1 is. That does not mean the PS3 is an "inferior" player (it isn't by any means), but most won't view it as a movie player for their living room system and as such, it won't drive software sales in the long-run.

The PS2 is not a PS3. The PS2 was not built with DVD in mind, the DVD drive was used for loading games, and can play DVD's as a result of the drive. It's DVD playback was horrible, and so was its CD playback. This console was optimized for games, and games only. The PS3 is optimized for several things. It upconverts regular DVD's, plays bluray, fully optimized for SACD playback, has the ability to upsample CD and is very good at it. It is obviously optimized for audio and video, streaming and storying. You can swap out the hard drive for a larger size(something the PS2 cannot do). It is obvious that a different approach was given to the PS3 than the PS2. The PS3 can do everything your BDP-S1 can do and more. Your BDP-S1 plays bluray movies, so does the PS3. The only thing on the level that is different is what the external case looks like. I do not know who told you how the PS3 is viewed, but alot of folks are using them in their hometheaters primarily as a bluray player. On Bluray.com I asked how many people use their PS3 soley as a bluray player. In two days I got 10 pages of answers from users that use the PS3 as their primary bluray player in their hometheaters. It is time to rethink your PS3 perspective as obviously PS3 owners are buying movies as evidenced by its release, and the subsequent over taking of HD DVD in disc sales just two months later.


Let's be honest here... Attach rates are much lower with game machines like the PS3, and you know this Sir T. If BR (or HD DVD) want to dominate, they have to sell dedicated movie *standalone* players like my Sony BDP-S1. Right now, most of the BR offerings are too expensive for most people to afford, and so they are not buying them. They will, however, once they come down in price. You dislike Toshiba's behavior because they have realized this and are doing it right now -- I on the contrary applaud them for it. BR may not like it, but they are going to have to do the same if they want to succeed long-term. The PS3 will *not* drive any format long-term. This is not a fanboy statement, it is just plain common business sense.

You and nobody else knows the attach rate of PS3 owners. I own the PS3 and I have over 200 bluray movies. The idea of "you have to have a standalone to be legit" is a false concept, and a HD DVD fanboy talking point(no offense but its true). Entertainment center have changed the game, and BR has proven that you do not need to sell standalones to drive software sales. The entertainment center is a new concept brought on by the PS3. You cannot dismiss it because it does not follow some traditional model. It expands that model. We are not sure of the long term impact of the PS3, so to make a statement that the PS3 will not drive any format long term is premature and uninformed. Its old line thinking.

Toshiba behavior does not concern me. I personally think they have a steep uphill battle against BR, I think their premature cost cutting of their players is going to hurt them in the long run, will chase other manufacturers away(it has already happened) and will not ensure long term health for HD DVD. They should have bargained more faithfully with BR, instead of trying to save face. Cutting prices has not helped their sales all that much in that they only have 150k more "standalones" in the field than BR has. What good is a $199 player when you do not have full studio support, and software prices are still over $20? I personally do not think player price is a problem, software prices are. Alot of folks bought $800 DVD players when they first came out.


Toshiba and HD DVD are behind disc sales today because they still need to sell many more standalone players before they can turn the tide in their favor. I never said *no one* is buying software who owns a PS3... Obviously many are, especially at this relatively early point in the formats' life cycle. The attach rates are still just not the same, and will continue to decrease as early adopters are a lesser percentage of PS3 buyers over time.

---Dave

Dave, you do not know what the true attach rate is. You are listening far to much to the HD DVD PG. Nobody has done a exhastive study on PS3 attach rates. If you listen to the HD DVD PG(and you obviously have) they claim they have a higher attach rate because they add in the PS3 when you talk about attach rates, and take the PS3 out of the equation when you discuss player sales. This is disengenious as it really tells you nothing but spin. Your thought process is way to premature. Since there has never been a entertainment center catagory it is new territory, and nobody knows what influence the PS3 will have going forward. The PS3 has pushed bluray ahead of HD DVD in europe, here in this country, in asia, in Australia and New Zeland. There is no where on this planet that HD DVD is doing better than bluray. As long as the PS3 is outselling HD DVD players, HD DVD will not catch up to bluray. That has been the case in the short history of this war. Any idea the PS3 can be discounted over time, is premature as there is no history of adoption rates or sales or disc sales based on a entertainment center.

[Groundbeef]

On Bluray.com I asked how many people use their PS3 soley as a bluray player. In two days I got 10 pages of answers from users that use the PS3 as their primary bluray player in their hometheaters. It is time to rethink your PS3 perspective as obviously PS3 owners are buying movies as evidenced by its release, and the subsequent over taking of HD DVD in disc sales just two months later. .

And if you go to www.ps3fanboy.com and ask the same question, I would be willing to bet you would get 10 pages of people saying "we don't want no f*cking movies, we want GAMES for our GAME machine!!"




You and nobody else knows the attach rate of PS3 owners. I own the PS3 and I have over 200 bluray movies. The idea of "you have to have a standalone to be legit" is a false concept, and a HD DVD fanboy talking point(no offense but its true). Entertainment center have changed the game, and BR has proven that you do not need to sell standalones to drive software sales. The entertainment center is a new concept brought on by the PS3. You cannot dismiss it because it does not follow some traditional model. It expands that model. We are not sure of the long term impact of the PS3, so to make a statement that the PS3 will not drive any format long term is premature and uninformed. Its old line thinking. .

Clearly you are making a huge pile of FUD right here on this thread. The PS3, in NO WAY "is a new concept". The original XBOX had the same functionality of the PS3 minus the BR 7 years ago. You could link it to a PC, stream video and audio from a media center PC, and playback pictures. The 360 expanded on these capablities a full 13 MONTHS before the PS3 arrived. VOD, Video Streaming, Audio Playback, Ipod playback, and many other "media center" features the PS3 either doesn't have, (except in Australia) or only wishes the features it has were as robust.

Granted the PS3 has integrated BR playback, but that doesn't make it the forerunner in 'entertainment center'. Don't fall all over yourself about the BR playback either. You can add HD-DVD to the 360 (if you choose to).


And attach rates may be more difficult to quantifiy for BR MOVIES, but not gaming software. Unless Sony has no idea how many PS3's its sold and how much gaming software has gone out the door...its not that difficult to figure out attach rates.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I don't have the time or energy to rehash whether the PS3 should be counted as a standalone player or not, but I won't conceed either way. Personally I think that some sort of ratio needs to be factored into the PS3 as it's SOLE use is NOT movies.

You obviously have the time and energy because you are here rehashing. You cannot just make up a ratio off the top of your head. It really does not matter whether YOU conceed anything here. The bottom line is by defintion you are plain wrong. Bluray players can play CD's, so their sole purpose is not just playing movies either.


Therefore, its not fair to include the PS3 into "standalone" sales. But, I'm not an industry insider, so it probably doesn't matter either way.

Its not fair to pay off studios when your side is losing in a fair fight, but it happened didn't it? Fairness is irrelevant, the definition of a standalone is simply this

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/standalone

http://www.techterms.com/definition/standalone

http://www.yourdictionary.com/stand-alone

Three defintions and how it is used is not in any of them.


Incidently BB has a Sony BluRay player on sale for $399, and this weekend they were throwing in a $100 gift card to boot. Plus the free movies. So, it doesn't appear that BluRay is above buying customers either. It's not entirely clear who is footing the bill for the gift card however. It may be a ploy by BB to get consumers to spend more, and not something that BR is endorsing or underwriting.

Heres the link for the BR player:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?id=1180743330749&skuId=8403514&type=product

You are not making a point here. When the DVD was introduced in 1997, these same offers were apart of its release. This is not a new marketing strategy. This is entirely different from selling your players at a $200 loss, plus giving away movies for free. Have you seen the BDA do this? I think not.


Sony has alread indicated that the PS3 will not be getting another price cut. So, it appears that there are now players on the market cheaper than the PS3. And as games are becoming more prevelant, I think that Sony's reliance on the PS3 to forward the BR cause will be somewhat muted, as consumers can simply pick up a BR player for less money.

You do not know what is going to happen in the future. You are just spouting speculation and opinion. It was the BDA strategy to get as many bluray players to the market as quickly as they can. They did it through the PS3, and now that traditional player prices have come down, they do not need to use the PS3 as a launching point anymore.


Remeber the PS3 was to be the cheap alternative to the $1000 BR players that were out but a few short months ago.

Well now you have several players below $500 and the PS3 is still outselling them all. How do you explain that?

[drseid]

Dave, you obviously do not know the industry I work in very well. A studio has no interest in player sales, they have a interest in software sales. In this climate(war), the studios are not looking at CE manufacturers game plan, they are looking at how the game plan effects sales of software. Warner is looking at a few things, what titles are selling well, and which side is buying their titles in greater numbers. The only studios interested in Toshiba's game plan are the studios exclusively supporting it.



The PS2 is not a PS3. The PS2 was not built with DVD in mind, the DVD drive was used for loading games, and can play DVD's as a result of the drive. It's DVD playback was horrible, and so was its CD playback. This console was optimized for games, and games only. The PS3 is optimized for several things. It upconverts regular DVD's, plays bluray, fully optimized for SACD playback, has the ability to upsample CD and is very good at it. It is obviously optimized for audio and video, streaming and storying. You can swap out the hard drive for a larger size(something the PS2 cannot do). It is obvious that a different approach was given to the PS3 than the PS2. The PS3 can do everything your BDP-S1 can do and more. Your BDP-S1 plays bluray movies, so does the PS3. The only thing on the level that is different is what the external case looks like. I do not know who told you how the PS3 is viewed, but alot of folks are using them in their hometheaters primarily as a bluray player. On Bluray.com I asked how many people use their PS3 soley as a bluray player. In two days I got 10 pages of answers from users that use the PS3 as their primary bluray player in their hometheaters. It is time to rethink your PS3 perspective as obviously PS3 owners are buying movies as evidenced by its release, and the subsequent over taking of HD DVD in disc sales just two months later.



You and nobody else knows the attach rate of PS3 owners. I own the PS3 and I have over 200 bluray movies. The idea of "you have to have a standalone to be legit" is a false concept, and a HD DVD fanboy talking point(no offense but its true). Entertainment center have changed the game, and BR has proven that you do not need to sell standalones to drive software sales. The entertainment center is a new concept brought on by the PS3. You cannot dismiss it because it does not follow some traditional model. It expands that model. We are not sure of the long term impact of the PS3, so to make a statement that the PS3 will not drive any format long term is premature and uninformed. Its old line thinking.

Toshiba behavior does not concern me. I personally think they have a steep uphill battle against BR, I think their premature cost cutting of their players is going to hurt them in the long run, will chase other manufacturers away(it has already happened) and will not ensure long term health for HD DVD. They should have bargained more faithfully with BR, instead of trying to save face. Cutting prices has not helped their sales all that much in that they only have 150k more "standalones" in the field than BR has. What good is a $199 player when you do not have full studio support, and software prices are still over $20? I personally do not think player price is a problem, software prices are. Alot of folks bought $800 DVD players when they first came out.



Dave, you do not know what the true attach rate is. You are listening far to much to the HD DVD PG. Nobody has done a exhastive study on PS3 attach rates. If you listen to the HD DVD PG(and you obviously have) they claim they have a higher attach rate because they add in the PS3 when you talk about attach rates, and take the PS3 out of the equation when you discuss player sales. This is disengenious as it really tells you nothing but spin. Your thought process is way to premature. Since there has never been a entertainment center catagory it is new territory, and nobody knows what influence the PS3 will have going forward. The PS3 has pushed bluray ahead of HD DVD in europe, here in this country, in asia, in Australia and New Zeland. There is no where on this planet that HD DVD is doing better than bluray. As long as the PS3 is outselling HD DVD players, HD DVD will not catch up to bluray. That has been the case in the short history of this war. Any idea the PS3 can be discounted over time, is premature as there is no history of adoption rates or sales or disc sales based on a entertainment center.

I am not saying Warner (or anyone else in the industry) cares about player sales in and of themselves. They care about software sales as you mentioned... but in this case the standalone player sales will lead to future software sales. As such, they are interested. The players is a means to an end, but it is an integral part of the supply chain for the studios.

As for "entertainment center" versus "game machine" ... I personally feel that sounds like something coming from Sony's Marketing department. It is true it can perform many functions (as many other computers and game consoles can do), but gaming is its first purpose. That is not to imply you can't use it for other things (and many are), but the average person buying it is buying it for games. The people on bluray.com do not represent the average buyer IMO.

Attach rates are more of a gray area I grant you. It may be early days to make any conclusive statements as you correctly mention, but I don't think I am far from the truth in my statements based on plain old common sense thinking and analysis. Gaming machines or "entertainment centers" are not going to have the same attach rates as dedicated (sole purpose) players, IMO. Again, this is not to demean PS3 owners as I view the PS3 as a superb Blu-ray player (and quite frankly far better than my own). It just is not going to have the same amount of people buying it for Blu-ray movie use, as a dedicated player like my BDP-S1 will (as that is its sole function) or a Toshiba HD DVD player would due to many using it strictly for games. The exact attach rate can't be determined, but attach rate trends can be derived to a degree.

As an FYI, I actually ignore the HD PG's press releases as I consider them biased. I ignore just about anything coming from bluray.com by the same token (even though I confess I am a member), as I would argue most information there is equally biased. Just for the record, I don't go to "hddvd.com" for my information either. ;-)

---Dave

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

And if you go to www.ps3fanboy.com and ask the same question, I would be willing to bet you would get 10 pages of people saying "we don't want no f*cking movies, we want GAMES for our GAME machine!!"

Why don't you do it rather than speculated what they will say. I did it in the gaming section of bluray.com. Rather than channeling other peoples responses, start a thread and ask the question.





Clearly you are making a huge pile of FUD right here on this thread. The PS3, in NO WAY "is a new concept". The original XBOX had the same functionality of the PS3 minus the BR 7 years ago.

So the XBOX can play SACD? The original XBOX could upconvert DVD's? The original XBOX could upsample CD's?


You could link it to a PC, stream video and audio from a media center PC, and playback pictures. The 360 expanded on these capablities a full 13 MONTHS before the PS3 arrived. VOD, Video Streaming, Audio Playback, Ipod playback, and many other "media center" features the PS3 either doesn't have, (except in Australia) or only wishes the features it has were as robust.

You are now admitting that the original XBOX had to be linked to a PC to do what a PS3 does internally. Thanks for making my point. The XBOX360 cannot playback DTHD or Dts MA lossless. It cannot playback SACD. It does not do a good job at upconverting DVD's, and it cannot upsample CD's. And the bottom line is the PS3 CAN support VOD if the service is there. It has all it needs(except the tuner which it could support) to process the video and audio signals.


Granted the PS3 has integrated BR playback, but that doesn't make it the forerunner in 'entertainment center'. Don't fall all over yourself about the BR playback either. You can add HD-DVD to the 360 (if you choose to).

It is a forerunner. It does several things the XBOX cannot do, or requires the XBOX to be hooked up to an external drive to do.



And attach rates may be more difficult to quantifiy for BR MOVIES, but not gaming software. Unless Sony has no idea how many PS3's its sold and how much gaming software has gone out the door...its not that difficult to figure out attach rates.

We are not talking about games, we are talking about movies. Stay with the topic. You were the one attempting to apply some arbitrary number as an attachment rate, or percentage of usage. You can do neither with any credibility.

[Groundbeef]

Why don't you do it rather than speculated what they will say. I did it in the gaming section of bluray.com. Rather than channeling other peoples responses, start a thread and ask the question.

The point is, you can ask your questions anywhere you want, and get an answer to support your theories. People that lurk/post on BluRay.com are by definition "movie" people. They MAY play games, but for the most part they are there for the BR MOVIES. So your source already is biased for movies.

Go to www.ps3fanboy.com and you get GAMERS who may or may not watch BR Movies. So although your PS3 is the same, for those 2 sites your audience is different. But I'm sure your aware of that. Because you are citing a source that supports your theory, while ignoring others that dont.




So the XBOX can play SACD? The original XBOX could upconvert DVD's? The original XBOX could upsample CD's? .

Does it matter? NO. Why? Because those 2 functions are NOT necessary to be considered an "entertainment center". 7 years ago DVD upconverting wasn't even around. SACD isn't required for ANY entertainment center, unless you are trying to cloud the waters to hide your weak base. Could the PS2 do anything that the XBOX could in relation to "media center". NO.




You are now admitting that the original XBOX had to be linked to a PC to do what a PS3 does internally. Thanks for making my point. The XBOX360 cannot playback DTHD or Dts MA lossless. It cannot playback SACD. It does not do a good job at upconverting DVD's, and it cannot upsample CD's. And the bottom line is the PS3 CAN support VOD if the service is there. It has all it needs(except the tuner which it could support) to process the video and audio signals. .

No, actually I wasn't admitting anything. You somehow came to the conclusion that the PS3 is the FIRST "entertainment/media center". Clearly it wasn't, nor is it the definiative "media center" you have deluded yourself about. Did you happen to have Al "I invented the internet" Gore help you write your post?

And your comments on the 360 are subjective. As a BR shill, and a PS3 owner, I wouldn't expect anything less. You are quite the fanboy for not liking games and all.

BTW, you don't need a PC to do those functions, but you CAN. Same as the PS3, so I don't know why your shooting yourself in the foot for me, but keep it up.

As far as the VOD, thats a great arguement to hitch your horse to. Pack your **** up and move to Australia to enjoy it. That and South Korea are the ONLY markets that have it. 360 has had it since inception. And the best part is, the PS3 can't support it in the US, and there are NO plans to bring it here. (At least announced)




It is a forerunner. It does several things the XBOX cannot do, or requires the XBOX to be hooked up to an external drive to do. .

?

It plays SACD, and BR movies. Well, I guess if I wanted those I could get them. The PS3doesn't play HD-DVD, or have VOD, or D/L Movies, TV programs, and other entertainment. So I guess its really not a "media center" either.






We are not talking about games, we are talking about movies. Stay with the topic. You were the one attempting to apply some arbitrary number as an attachment rate, or percentage of usage. You can do neither with any credibility.

I am with the topic. You are only too eager to spout off figures about how the PS3 is driving the movie market for BR. It may be, maybe not. But if its that hard to quantifiy, then perhaps the PS3 shouldn't be considered a standalone player.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I am not saying Warner (or anyone else in the industry) cares about player sales in and of themselves. They care about software sales as you mentioned... but in this case the standalone player sales will lead to future software sales. As such, they are interested. The players is a means to an end, but it is an integral part of the supply chain for the studios.

Once again Dave, your way of thinking is outdated. If standalones lead the future of sales, then why are they not now? Based on your arguement HD DVD should be ahead of bluray in disc sales, but it is not. By your arguement bluray should have never overtaken HD DVD, but it did. The PS3 is as much a player as your BDP-S1 is.


As for "entertainment center" versus "game machine" ... I personally feel that sounds like something coming from Sony's Marketing department. It is true it can perform many functions (as many other computers and game consoles can do), but gaming is its first purpose. That is not to imply you can't use it for other things (and many are), but the average person buying it is buying it for games. The people on bluray.com do not represent the average buyer IMO.

No other "gaming" machine can upsample CD's, playback SACD, or upconvert DVD's. Because the PS3 can do so many things well, its purpose is determined by the end user, not by some perception attached to it. I do not play games, so my PS3 is not a gaming machine. In my hometheater its purpose is not to play games, but movies, CD's and SACD's. If it had a singular purpose, why add the other function in the player? According to the designer of the PS3 it was meant and designed as a entertainment center of the hometheater, and that includes gaming, high resolution music and video.


Attach rates are more of a gray area I grant you. It may be early days to make any conclusive statements as you correctly mention, but I don't think I am far from the truth in my statements based on plain old common sense thinking and analysis. Gaming machines or "entertainment centers" are not going to have the same attach rates as dedicated (sole purpose) players, IMO. Again, this is not to demean PS3 owners as I view the PS3 as a superb Blu-ray player (and quite frankly far better than my own). It just is not going to have the same amount of people buying it for Blu-ray movie use, as a dedicated player like my BDP-S1 will (as that is its sole function) or a Toshiba HD DVD player would due to many using it strictly for games. The exact attach rate can't be determined, but attach rate trends can be derived to a degree.

Dave, you keep making statements you cannot quantify. Entertainment centers have never been apart of the home video landscape, so how can you give it a history that it does not have? How do you know what attach rate the PS2 had? From what I understand the PS2 really helped to drive DVD sales even though it was a terrible DVD player. You cannot derive any attach rate to any degree, you are just making stuff up. Nobody has done a study on attach rates, however Sony has done a survey on what percentage of PS3 are going to purchase movies, and that percentage rate came back at 40%. That still tells you nothing about HOW many movies they will purchase.


As an FYI, I actually ignore the HD PG's press releases as I consider them biased. By the same token, I ignore just about anything coming from bluray.com by the same token (even though I confess I am a member), as I would argue most information there is equally biased. Just for the record, I don't go to "hddvd.com" for my information either. ;-)

---Dave

For a person that ignores the HD DVD PG press releases, you have argued their talking points word for word. Funny thing is, the stuff I have read in the insider forum has come true word for word. So perhaps I trust the insiders there more than I do the opinion of some folks here. I actually agree with you about the bluray.com bias, but the insiders information has been factually spot on. So how do you claim bias when the information has actually come to pass.

[drseid]

For a person that ignores the HD DVD PG press releases, you have argued their talking points word for word. Funny thing is, the stuff I have read in the insider forum has come true word for word. So perhaps I trust the insiders there more than I do the opinion of some folks here. I actually agree with you about the bluray.com bias, but the insiders information has been factually spot on. So how do you claim bias when the information has actually come to pass.
Maybe they should hire me as their new spokesperson? ;-)

Seriously though... My way of thinking is far from outdated really. The laws of supply, demand and the supply chain in general have not changed that much over the years. The fact that PS3 sales are driving the software sales lead now does not mean it will drive it in the future. The HD DVD dedicated player sales have hardly had a chance to yield any software sales. Most of those sales will come *next year* as software sales lag hardware sales as a general rule. Make no mistake, the software sales *will* come. The sales you are seeing right now are not indicative of those new HD DVD player sales (nor the increased PS3 sales after the price drop for that matter). It will be *next year* where those end sales will occur for the most part for both camps. *That* is where the real battle lies on the software front. This year it is to sell the hardware to drive those future software sales...

---Dave

[Woochifer]

That said, the Sony PS2 can play DVDs... How many people count them as standalone DVD players? Anyone who buys one *can* play DVDs on them, but how many actually do? This is not a standalone player in the same way a dedicated BR only player like my BDP-S1 is. That does not mean the PS3 is an "inferior" player (it isn't by any means), but most won't view it as a movie player for their living room system and as such, it won't drive software sales in the long-run.

Let's be honest here... Attach rates are much lower with game machines like the PS3, and you know this Sir T. If BR (or HD DVD) want to dominate, they have to sell dedicated movie *standalone* players like my Sony BDP-S1. Right now, most of the BR offerings are too expensive for most people to afford, and so they are not buying them. They will, however, once they come down in price. You dislike Toshiba's behavior because they have realized this and are doing it right now -- I on the contrary applaud them for it. BR may not like it, but they are going to have to do the same if they want to succeed long-term. The PS3 will *not* drive any format long-term. This is not a fanboy statement, it is just plain common business sense.

A point that you're missing out with trying to draw PS2 v. PS3 comparisons is timing. The PS2 came out in 2000, after the DVD format had already been on the market for 3 years with multiple generations of players already out and the price points already dropping. Yet, that did not stop the PS2 from having a major effect on solidifying the DVD format's market position.

At the time the PS2 came out, the average DVD player was selling for around $250, and the PS2 came in at about $300. For people on the fence, hundreds of thousands of them immediately jumped into the DVD market when they bought their PS2s. They'd been holding out for a lower price point on standalone players, and integrating the DVD drive into their gaming console made the PS2 a compelling purchase. Until about 2002, I'd say about half the people I knew with DVD players were using a PS2 as their primary player. And when I had my apartment in San Francisco, I was also using a PS2 as my primary DVD player (my standalone player was at my then-girlfriend's place). As the standalone player prices declined further, and DVD drives became ubiquitous, the PS2 inevitably becomes less of a market factor since many households now have multiple DVD players. But, that doesn't deny the impact the PS2 had on the DVD market during those crucial growth years between 2000 and about 2004.

The PS3 is a different situation because neither of the high-def disc formats had gained any kind of market traction when the console was introduced. The timing of the Blu-ray and PS3 rollouts did not coincide very well. That's why the PS3 came in at a price point that undercut the standalone players, and that's why the PS3 is right now the driving force behind Blu-ray's significant lead over HD-DVD. After Blu-ray has been on the market for a while, and the standalone prices decline into commodity territory, then the PS3 will become less of a factor as the Blu-ray market grows on its own. But as it is right now, the PS3 is crucial to Blu-ray's fortunes, just as to a lesser degree the PS2 was important to fueling the DVD format's growth.

Take the PS3 away, and you have a market stalemate between Blu-ray and HD-DVD. With the PS3, Blu-ray has a clearcut market advantage that HD-DVD cannot counter without resorting to subsidies (i.e., loss leader hardware, and studio payoffs). At some point, HD-DVD will have to stand or fall on its own merits, and it's very hard to do that when Blu-ray has the upper hand on both the hardware and software sides.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

The point is, you can ask your questions anywhere you want, and get an answer to support your theories. People that lurk/post on BluRay.com are by definition "movie" people. They MAY play games, but for the most part they are there for the BR MOVIES. So your source already is biased for movies.

People who go to the gaming half of the forum are just as much gamers as the people on PS3fanboy. They are probably more aware of the functions of their PS3 than most gamers are, but they are just as much gamers as PS3fanboy members are. So your claim of bias is unfounded and inaccurate. Your dodging my question is really telling.


Go to www.ps3fanboy.com and you get GAMERS who may or may not watch BR Movies. So although your PS3 is the same, for those 2 sites your audience is different. But I'm sure your aware of that. Because you are citing a source that supports your theory, while ignoring others that dont.

There is no proof that gamers do not watch movies. If you can find that proof, please post a link here for all to see. You are doing exactly the same thing as you are accusing me of doing. While I understand there are going to be some people who will not use their PS3 as a bluray player, nobody knows what that percentage is. I know this clearly, but you are attempting to box this thing up in a way that skews things unnecessarily. I am citing this source because it is clear this source understands exactly what the PS3 can do. Going to gamer sites to talk about movies is apples and oranges. I go to where they talk about games AND movies, since the PS3 does both. That is apples to apples.



Does it matter? NO. Why? Because those 2 functions are NOT necessary to be considered an "entertainment center". 7 years ago DVD upconverting wasn't even around. SACD isn't required for ANY entertainment center, unless you are trying to cloud the waters to hide your weak base. Could the PS2 do anything that the XBOX could in relation to "media center". NO.

Several years ago there was no classification called entertainment center. That is because nothing could do all that I mention internally. You obviously do not know what a entertainment center is do you? A entertainment center HAS to be able to do all of what I mentioned, or it would not be the centerpiece of your hometheater. You do not decide what is required in a entertainment center until you build one. Having a high resolution audio device is a component of a entertainment device. Without it, it would be incomplete as a entertainment center. SACD is the only high resolution music format still getting support. So there is nothing to cloud the water here. Could the XBOX do everthing the PS3 does in relation to a "media"center. NO!





No, actually I wasn't admitting anything. You somehow came to the conclusion that the PS3 is the FIRST "entertainment/media center". Clearly it wasn't, nor is it the definiative "media center" you have deluded yourself about. Did you happen to have Al "I invented the internet" Gore help you write your post?

The PS3 is the first self contained entertainment center. That is something that cannot be said about the XBOX, or the XBOX360. Even with the HD DVD add on, can the XBOX360 do lossless audio? Nope. The fact that it requires a add eliminates it as a true entertainment center. The XBOX may have been able to do all that you listed, but it was not optimized to do anything but play games well. That cannot be said for the PS3.


And your comments on the 360 are subjective. As a BR shill, and a PS3 owner, I wouldn't expect anything less. You are quite the fanboy for not liking games and all.

How does not liking games make me a fanboy. This is a stupid comment. So if I am a BR shill, can you tell me how I benefit directly from the sale of anything BR? Shills get paid for what they do right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/shill

It is plain to me that you do not know the definition of what a shill is. Perhaps you should not use words you do not know the meaning of.


BTW, you don't need a PC to do those functions, but you CAN. Same as the PS3, so I don't know why your shooting yourself in the foot for me, but keep it up.

The PS3 does not need a PC to do any of the things I listed, so it is not the same as the PS3. The XBOX360 does not upconvert DVD's, it just progressively scans them. The XBOX360 cannot do any high resolution audio internally, and it cannot playback HD movies internally either. The XBOX360 can only play CD back at redbook level, the PS3 can upconvert the audio to 176.4khz. The XBOX360 cannot even do DTHD or Dts MA lossless even with the external HD drive installed. So it is a crippled HD player at best. It sole function is a gaming machine, because that is all it is optimized internally for.


As far as the VOD, thats a great arguement to hitch your horse to. Pack your **** up and move to Australia to enjoy it. That and South Korea are the ONLY markets that have it. 360 has had it since inception. And the best part is, the PS3 can't support it in the US, and there are NO plans to bring it here. (At least announced)

So you are saying it is not possible to design a ATSC tuner to integrate with the PS3 via USB? If it can be done with the XBOX360, it can be done with the PS3. That you cannot deny. If you can design a tuner to work with the PS3 for South Korea and Australia, a simular tuner can be designed for this market as well.
?


It plays SACD, and BR movies. Well, I guess if I wanted those I could get them. The PS3doesn't play HD-DVD, or have VOD, or D/L Movies, TV programs, and other entertainment. So I guess its really not a "media center" either.

Why would the PS3 want to play HD DVD? another stupid statement that is meaningless. If VOD or D/L were available, the PS3 could handle it. It can do anything the XBOX360 does, and more. VOD is nothing. More money is made on disc based media than D/L or VOD. Not having that is not a big deal, even though the hardware could easily support it. However having that, but not being able to fully support HD DVD audio, or not having the ability to support any high resolution audio, or upconverting of video makes it not a media center as well.



I am with the topic. You are only too eager to spout off figures about how the PS3 is driving the movie market for BR. It may be, maybe not. But if its that hard to quantifiy, then perhaps the PS3 shouldn't be considered a standalone player.

Beef, do not going back to being a idiot again. It is clear that the PS3 is currently driving bluray sales, as 400k base could not be outselling a 550k base 2 to 1. I gave you three defintion of what a standalone is. The PS3 fits it to a tee, so you cannot redefine what standalone means just because you do not understand the meaning of the word.

[Groundbeef]

You obviously have the time and energy because you are here rehashing. You cannot just make up a ratio off the top of your head. It really does not matter whether YOU conceed anything here. The bottom line is by defintion you are plain wrong. Bluray players can play CD's, so their sole purpose is not just playing movies either.

I didn't make up a ratio. I was just suggesting that it would be NICE if there was a ratio to assign to the PS3. % that watch movies, vs % that dont. To more accuratly reflect the reality that not 100% of PS3 owners use the machine to watch BR movies. Don't be so defensive.



You are not making a point here. When the DVD was introduced in 1997, these same offers were apart of its release. This is not a new marketing strategy. This is entirely different from selling your players at a $200 loss, plus giving away movies for free. Have you seen the BDA do this? I think not. ?

Have you forgotten about the PS3 release? They were selling for $300 BELOW COST, and still are below cost, but not nearly as much. AND they give away 5-10 BR movies. Care to rebut that one?




You do not know what is going to happen in the future. You are just spouting speculation and opinion. It was the BDA strategy to get as many bluray players to the market as quickly as they can. They did it through the PS3, and now that traditional player prices have come down, they do not need to use the PS3 as a launching point anymore. ?

Neither do you have a crystal ball.




Well now you have several players below $500 and the PS3 is still outselling them all. How do you explain that?

Because Sony is now selling more games for the PS3? It IS a game machine you know.

[bobsticks]

Not to pile on, but I think I have to go with the boys on this one. I think Wooch's point about timing is, well, timely.

Another thing to consider is the economy of scale deal. Gaming is where the money is at right now and, of course, manufacturers realize this. I suspect their concept is to prove to the masses including the techno-litterati that there is a one-unit solution. The kids are gonna buy a gaming system anyway and if you can convince home theater/audio enthusiasts that the thing is for real you've got a winner.

To extrapolate on this, have you ever considered sending an XBOX or a PS3 to the Middle East or even Cuba? Think again, the powers-that-be won't allow it cause at the heart of things is a microprocessor so advanced that it replicates many aspects of a missile guidance system. I don't think we've ever before seen this level of technology put into what is rightfully reported to be an affordable "media center".

Show me a box capable of playing one of the HiDef formats, upscaling standard video, playing all the new audio codecs and passing along a multi-channel SACD stream and I'll show you a $1200.00 standalone that doesn't play games and has very little appeal for JoeSixPack. Boutique house are going to have a hard time replicating something with all these features and many of the advantages of "better playback" are disappearing.

I myself own a 360 and only have two games (with a grand total of maybe three hours of playing time logged). Am I an exception to the rule? Probably but that does not discount the possibility that a lot of younger enthusiasts may chose the same road. I'd rather have a system that did the deal, costs less and own a bazillion units of software than have a showpiece and have seven discs. And I may not be alone...

Scary, eh.

Just IMHO, but I think you have to consider these new techno-wunder machinations as "standalones' if only because they can and do perform the functions of one.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Maybe they should hire me as their new spokesperson? ;-)

LOL, you would be a great asset to their team.


Seriously though... My way of thinking is far from outdated really. The laws of supply, demand and the supply chain in general have not changed that much over the years. The fact that PS3 sales are driving the software sales lead now does not mean it will drive it in the future. The HD DVD dedicated player sales have hardly had a chance to yield any software sales. Most of those sales will come *next year* as software sales lag hardware sales as a general rule. Make no mistake, the software sales *will* come. The sales you are seeing right now are not indicative of those new HD DVD player sales (nor the increased PS3 sales after the price drop for that matter). It will be *next year* where those end sales will occur for the most part for both camps. *That* is where the real battle lies on the software front. This year it is to sell the hardware to drive those future software sales---Dave


It was never the plan of Sony's that the PS3 drive sales of BR disc forever. The plan was to get as many BR players released as they can in a short period of time. I do not think that anyone could foresee that alot of non gamers bought them, and plan on keeping it as the center piece of their hometheaters. Once again, time is not on HD DVD side. Warner has stated mulitple times that they are looking at 4th quarter sales very carefully. So far it is not looking very good for HD DVD as the last three weeks of sales puts bluray at more than 2:1 over HD DVD.

Toshiba has had 18 months worth of hardware sales to drive software sales. In spite of the fact they have A) lower player prices B) selling more traditional players C) and about 7 months lead on bluray they have not been able to capitalize on any of these facts. The other fly in the ointment is the products the studio are offering to the format. Universal has only one major titles in the 4th quarter, and Paramount only 2. Neither can release some really big money makers exclusively to the format. Neither have had major theatrical success in the last couple of years. Their catalog titles are selling very poorly, and neither have alot they can release next year aside from day and date new stuff, so they are going to have to produce some real hits to keep HD DVD propped up. Hardware sales do not mean alot if you cannot support it with quality software releases, and that has been a major achillies heel for the HD DVD format. Bluray by sheer numbers has made if so difficult for Toshiba to catch up, that nobody in this industry thinks its possible. According to the last sales figures I have seen, bluray has 2.7 million players sold in the US(thats counting the PS3) and HD DVD has 750k. Toshiba has had little presence everywhere else in the world. This battle is worldwide, and at this point, there is no way that Toshiba can catch up unless the PS3(and every other player) suddenly stops selling. I have seen no evidence of that.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I didn't make up a ratio. I was just suggesting that it would be NICE if there was a ratio to assign to the PS3. % that watch movies, vs % that dont. To more accuratly reflect the reality that not 100% of PS3 owners use the machine to watch BR movies. Don't be so defensive.

I do not think you know if I am being defensive or just plain factual. I am sure to you it would be nice if there is a ratio, that way you could just box up and package your arguement without critical thinking. Sorry, it does not work that way. We do not know what the percentage of PS3 being used as dedicated bluray players, and this type of argument is irrelevant at best. The bottom line is the drive is internal, and usage becomes what the end user wants it, whether they use it for games only, or do not play a single game on it.


Have you forgotten about the PS3 release? They were selling for $300 BELOW COST, and still are below cost, but not nearly as much. AND they give away 5-10 BR movies. Care to rebut that one?

Sure, it is no difference in selling the HD DVD A1 for two hundred dollars below cost and giving away five movies at inception. Its the same thing as selling a A2 for $99 dollars with two free movies effectively making the player almost free. Its the same thing as selling a A2 for $299 and giving away 10 free movies. Sony can sell the PS3 at a loss, and make up the money on games and movies. Toshiba does not own a studio, nor do can their player play games. There is a difference here.



Neither do you have a crystal ball.

Do not need one, the company I work for is part of the BDA, and they know what the BDA mission is.





Because Sony is now selling more games for the PS3? It IS a game machine you know.

Your lack surity in answering this question shows that you do not really know. You are free to call it whatever suits you, but its official nomenclature is a Digital Entertainment center. That is what it is called in the instructional manual, and that is how it is marketed by Sony. Do you see them including a free game with it? Nope, it includes free movies.

[Groundbeef]

I do not think you know if I am being defensive or just plain factual. I am sure to you it would be nice if there is a ratio, that way you could just box up and package your arguement without critical thinking. Sorry, it does not work that way. We do not know what the percentage of PS3 being used as dedicated bluray players, and this type of argument is irrelevant at best. The bottom line is the drive is internal, and usage becomes what the end user wants it, whether they use it for games only, or do not play a single game on it. .


Thats the point. It would be nice to know the ratio. Then you couldn't continually flog that every PS3 owner is a BR movie lover. And that every PS3 translates directly into BR sales.




Sure, it is no difference in selling the HD DVD A1 for two hundred dollars below cost and giving away five movies at inception. Its the same thing as selling a A2 for $99 dollars with two free movies effectively making the player almost free. Its the same thing as selling a A2 for $299 and giving away 10 free movies. Sony can sell the PS3 at a loss, and make up the money on games and movies. Toshiba does not own a studio, nor do can their player play games. There is a difference here.
.


Right, so when Toshiba sells at a loss, and gives away movies its a mortal retail sin, but when Sony does the same thing, its ok. Sure, I understand. Sort of a kind of "Don't do what I do" kinda mentality for BR. Thanks for clearing that up for all of us.




Do not need one, the company I work for is part of the BDA, and they know what the BDA mission is. .

Right, the whole "industry insider" scoop. And TOTALLY unbiased.




Your lack surity in answering this question shows that you do not really know. You are free to call it whatever suits you, but its official nomenclature is a Digital Entertainment center. That is what it is called in the instructional manual, and that is how it is marketed by Sony. Do you see them including a free game with it? Nope, it includes free movies.

Oh I love it when your wrong. Again. Here's two links for your viewing pleasure. Actually my viewing pleasure and everyone else that wants to see you eat crow.

Tell me is it yummy? I've schooled you before on GAME machines, and once again you troll in waters you are clearly out of step with.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/826/826128p1.html

http://www.amazon.com/PlayStation-3-80GB-Motorstorm-Pack/dp/B000TVT8PI

I thought I'd throw in the first link for our Japanese pals. Since you seem so stuck on what other countries offer, but not for US consumption on the PS3, enjoy it.

The second one is available right here in the good old USA.

[Mr Peabody]

Who's on first?

[musicman1999]

Ha, well said.


bill

[pixelthis]

The point is, you can ask your questions anywhere you want, and get an answer to support your theories. People that lurk/post on BluRay.com are by definition "movie" people. They MAY play games, but for the most part they are there for the BR MOVIES. So your source already is biased for movies.

Go to www.ps3fanboy.com and you get GAMERS who may or may not watch BR Movies. So although your PS3 is the same, for those 2 sites your audience is different. But I'm sure your aware of that. Because you are citing a source that supports your theory, while ignoring others that dont.




Does it matter? NO. Why? Because those 2 functions are NOT necessary to be considered an "entertainment center". 7 years ago DVD upconverting wasn't even around. SACD isn't required for ANY entertainment center, unless you are trying to cloud the waters to hide your weak base. Could the PS2 do anything that the XBOX could in relation to "media center". NO.




No, actually I wasn't admitting anything. You somehow came to the conclusion that the PS3 is the FIRST "entertainment/media center". Clearly it wasn't, nor is it the definiative "media center" you have deluded yourself about. Did you happen to have Al "I invented the internet" Gore help you write your post?

And your comments on the 360 are subjective. As a BR shill, and a PS3 owner, I wouldn't expect anything less. You are quite the fanboy for not liking games and all.

BTW, you don't need a PC to do those functions, but you CAN. Same as the PS3, so I don't know why your shooting yourself in the foot for me, but keep it up.

As far as the VOD, thats a great arguement to hitch your horse to. Pack your **** up and move to Australia to enjoy it. That and South Korea are the ONLY markets that have it. 360 has had it since inception. And the best part is, the PS3 can't support it in the US, and there are NO plans to bring it here. (At least announced)




?

It plays SACD, and BR movies. Well, I guess if I wanted those I could get them. The PS3doesn't play HD-DVD, or have VOD, or D/L Movies, TV programs, and other entertainment. So I guess its really not a "media center" either.






I am with the topic. You are only too eager to spout off figures about how the PS3 is driving the movie market for BR. It may be, maybe not. But if its that hard to quantifiy, then perhaps the PS3 shouldn't be considered a standalone player.


America is in Australia?
Because I live in AMERICA, and have VOD on my comcast service, with digital sound,
FF,RR,pause, ETC.
Just about every cable company over a certain pop density offers some sort of VOD.
In fact that has been an argument of mine from the git go, if these two "camps" in the format war dont watch it the rental market will be gone , disapeared while they squable.
I have free movies, some HD, payperview, some HD.
And the whole "standalone " crap falls squarely into the who gives a rats a*** categeory.
Do people who buy ps3 buy movies to watch on it?
Of COURSE THEY DO.
All of this folderal is simply a smokescreen to hide the obvious, mainly that BLU is kicking HD's butt, outselling 2 to 1, mostly.
My question is, do you in the HD camp really understand what you're advocating?
Another decade of living with an inferiour format, and why?
The price diff isnt really that much anymore, the Blu machine beats HD in every categeory ,
mostly, are you getting paid by tosh to shill their inferiour crap?
If Beta had won the last big "war" we wouldnt have been saddled with a P.O.S videotape system backed by the darth vader of the video world, RCA, whose motto has always been,
"save a penny a set? DO IT".
Now there are those who want to stick us with a HD disc with HALF the capacity
of the competing format, and thats just one of its deficencies.
I wonder why, are you just addle brained?:1:

[Groundbeef]

America is in Australia?
Because I live in AMERICA, and have VOD on my comcast service, with digital sound,
FF,RR,pause, ETC.
Just about every cable company over a certain pop density offers some sort of VOD.
:

It appears you read my posts as carefully as I read yours.

The discussion was between the 360 offering VOD, and the PS3 NOT offering VOD. And whether or not the PS3 was the "first entertainment/media center" offered.

It isn't no matter how much Sir T tries to polish that turd.

[Groundbeef]

People who go to the gaming half of the forum are just as much gamers as the people on PS3fanboy. They are probably more aware of the functions of their PS3 than most gamers are, but they are just as much gamers as PS3fanboy members are. So your claim of bias is unfounded and inaccurate. Your dodging my question is really telling. .

Can you quantify that or is that speculation? I have a feeling its speculation. I'm not dodging anything, but you seem to relish using sources that support your position, without regard to counter point. By definition BluRay.com is geared towards the BluRay function, not the gaming portion. So, if I'm perusing the BluRay board, the odds are I am interested in movies. Not exclusive to games, but movies are in play. On other more game oriented sites, more gamers are going to be interested in GAMES. So to surmise you would get the same reception on both sites asking the same question is rediculous. At best I am shocked at your niave view, at worst suspect that you are again shading the arguement to fit your narrow view/debate.



There is no proof that gamers do not watch movies. If you can find that proof, please post a link here for all to see. You are doing exactly the same thing as you are accusing me of doing. While I understand there are going to be some people who will not use their PS3 as a bluray player, nobody knows what that percentage is. I know this clearly, but you are attempting to box this thing up in a way that skews things unnecessarily. I am citing this source because it is clear this source understands exactly what the PS3 can do. Going to gamer sites to talk about movies is apples and oranges. I go to where they talk about games AND movies, since the PS3 does both. That is apples to apples. .

Never said they DON'T watch movies, just said that if you ask different pools of users, you will get different responses. Its telling you are unable to belive it.




Several years ago there was no classification called entertainment center. That is because nothing could do all that I mention internally. You obviously do not know what a entertainment center is do you? A entertainment center HAS to be able to do all of what I mentioned, or it would not be the centerpiece of your hometheater. You do not decide what is required in a entertainment center until you build one. Having a high resolution audio device is a component of a entertainment device. Without it, it would be incomplete as a entertainment center. SACD is the only high resolution music format still getting support. So there is nothing to cloud the water here. Could the XBOX do everthing the PS3 does in relation to a "media"center. NO!.

Shocking as it may be, I don't think everyone in the world supports your narrow view. I don't have SACD, but I'll be damned if I don't have an "entertainment center". As far as "several years ago there was no classification called entertainment center" is patently false. I would even suggest you are now lying.

Check out this link:

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/support/systemuse/xbox/console/mediacenterextender.htm

This is for a product that is 7 years old, and yet MS introduced the concept of "entertaiment center" YEARS AGO. Granted it didn't play HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, but for the day it was the ONLY product that did all work of an entertainment center. All in 1080i too boot. You could stream data from a PC (the PS3 does this as well BTW), show pictures, movies, music, and others. Oh yeah, worked as a PVR. Thats something that even the mighty PS3 CANT DO TODAY!!!!

And the 360 did these functions as well, 13 MONTHS AGO. The PS3 you own doesn't do these functions so I guess according to your definition, its NOT an entertainment center either.

So you can stick your "PS3 is the 1st entertainment center" comment and blow it..




The PS3 is the first self contained entertainment center. That is something that cannot be said about the XBOX, or the XBOX360. Even with the HD DVD add on, can the XBOX360 do lossless audio? Nope. The fact that it requires a add eliminates it as a true entertainment center. The XBOX may have been able to do all that you listed, but it was not optimized to do anything but play games well. That cannot be said for the PS3. .

Your PS3 can't play HD-DVD so its not an "entertainment center" either. It can't do VOD, so I guess its not an "entertainment center" either. ohhhhh it has lossless audio? Whoopeee.

BTW the 360 does upconvert to both 1080i, and 1080p. So I don't know where you get your info, but you really ought to do better research.




How does not liking games make me a fanboy. This is a stupid comment. So if I am a BR shill, can you tell me how I benefit directly from the sale of anything BR? Shills get paid for what they do right?.

You work for a BR studio. I assume they pay you. So if BR does well, so do you. Hence-SHILL




The PS3 does not need a PC to do any of the things I listed, so it is not the same as the PS3. The XBOX360 does not upconvert DVD's, it just progressively scans them. The XBOX360 cannot do any high resolution audio internally, and it cannot playback HD movies internally either. The XBOX360 can only play CD back at redbook level, the PS3 can upconvert the audio to 176.4khz. The XBOX360 cannot even do DTHD or Dts MA lossless even with the external HD drive installed. So it is a crippled HD player at best. It sole function is a gaming machine, because that is all it is optimized internally for. .

The 360 DOES upconvert provided you use the correct cable. 1080p with the VGA cable, 1080i with component. Now that the HDMI is standard, it can do both through it.

http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/09/21/xbox-360-hd-dvd-playback-maximum-1080i-via-component-1080p-vga/

For you to suggest the "sole function" of the 360 is a gaming machine, you again are lying. No more than the PS3 "sole function" is a gaming machine.



So you are saying it is not possible to design a ATSC tuner to integrate with the PS3 via USB? If it can be done with the XBOX360, it can be done with the PS3. That you cannot deny. If you can design a tuner to work with the PS3 for South Korea and Australia, a simular tuner can be designed for this market as well. .

Well, seeing as the tuner is external for the South Korea, and Autralia, that would kill your definition of the PS3 being a "entertainment center" as its not self contained. Thanks for the reminder. I love it when you make yourself look silly.




Why would the PS3 want to play HD DVD? another stupid statement that is meaningless. If VOD or D/L were available, the PS3 could handle it. It can do anything the XBOX360 does, and more. VOD is nothing. More money is made on disc based media than D/L or VOD. Not having that is not a big deal, even though the hardware could easily support it. However having that, but not being able to fully support HD DVD audio, or not having the ability to support any high resolution audio, or upconverting of video makes it not a media center as well. .

Well, if the PS3 can't play ALL current HD formats then its really NOT an "entertainment center" as you have suggested. Remeber your narrow definition as it ALL needs to be contained? Or that doesn't factor in when it doesn't support your point?

Again with the FUD about upconversion. With HDMI, or VGA you get 1080i or 1080p.




Beef, do not going back to being a idiot again. It is clear that the PS3 is currently driving bluray sales, as 400k base could not be outselling a 550k base 2 to 1. I gave you three defintion of what a standalone is. The PS3 fits it to a tee, so you cannot redefine what standalone means just because you do not understand the meaning of the word.

I've never disputed its a standalone player. Again, trying to square your argument with FUD. What I have said over and over, is that YOUR suggestion that its a 1-1 net gain for BR is false. If 100% of PS3 owners were BR Movie buyers/renters I would agree with you without any problem. But they are not, so its not really right to try and account for them in that fashion.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Can you quantify that or is that speculation? I have a feeling its speculation. I'm not dodging anything, but you seem to relish using sources that support your position, without regard to counter point. By definition BluRay.com is geared towards the BluRay function, not the gaming portion. So, if I'm perusing the BluRay board, the odds are I am interested in movies. Not exclusive to games, but movies are in play. On other more game oriented sites, more gamers are going to be interested in GAMES. So to surmise you would get the same reception on both sites asking the same question is rediculous. At best I am shocked at your niave view, at worst suspect that you are again shading the arguement to fit your narrow view/debate.

In case you didn't know, future games released to the PS3 will be on bluray disc. Alot of the gamers on Bluray.com are members of PS3fanboy as well. Just because you are interested in games does not mean you are not interested in movies as well. To advance the theory that gamers and not interested in movies, and will react negatively to the mention of movies is rediculous. PS2 owners help drive the DVD format. And now PS3 owners are helping to drive the bluray format. Not everyone is as single minded and one dimensional as you are.




Never said they DON'T watch movies, just said that if you ask different pools of users, you will get different responses. Its telling you are unable to belive it.

I went to a pool that is more balanced between movies and games. What good is it to go to a place were there is no interest in movies. The people I went to fully use their PS3, not just use it for one thing.





Shocking as it may be, I don't think everyone in the world supports your narrow view. I don't have SACD, but I'll be damned if I don't have an "entertainment center". As far as "several years ago there was no classification called entertainment center" is patently false. I would even suggest you are now lying.

If you XBOX360 does not have the internal parts to fully support all functions(it does not) then it is not a entertainment center. There is no support for high resolution music. There is no internal HD disc drive. You have to connect these items to the XBOX360 to get these features, and no matter what you do it cannot support not one high resolution audio format, not even those related to HD DVD. Its a entertainment system, not a entertainment center. There is a difference.


Check out this link:

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/support/systemuse/xbox/console/mediacenterextender.htm

This is for a product that is 7 years old, and yet MS introduced the concept of "entertaiment center" YEARS AGO. Granted it didn't play HD-DVD or Blu-Ray, but for the day it was the ONLY product that did all work of an entertainment center. All in 1080i too boot. You could stream data from a PC (the PS3 does this as well BTW), show pictures, movies, music, and others. Oh yeah, worked as a PVR. Thats something that even the mighty PS3 CANT DO TODAY!!!!

And the 360 did these functions as well, 13 MONTHS AGO. The PS3 you own doesn't do these functions so I guess according to your definition, its NOT an entertainment center either.


It does not say entertainment center, it say media center. Entertainment center came with the PS3, not with the original XBOX. Entertainment centers are optimized internally for all forms of entertainment, not just DVD and CD. The XBOX required external sources to do what it does, so it is just a media center. The only functions that the PS3 does not have(but it can do) is the downloading of TV programs and movies. The rest of it, it can do better than the XBOX and the XBOX360 for that matter. The PS3 has USB ports, so it is easy to add a tuner to it. It already allows you to save video clips to its hard drive, so it is a DVR as well. There is a big difference on whether the hardware can perform the task, or if the task is even offered to the hardware. The PS3 can do everything the XBOX360 can do hardware wise, but the services that the XBOX360 has, the PS3 does not.

As far as the original XBOX doing 1080i, that is not a truthful statement at all. the XBOX360 was the first to do 1080i




So you can stick your "PS3 is the 1st entertainment center" comment and blow it..

I will leave the blowing to you thanks.


Your PS3 can't play HD-DVD so its not an "entertainment center" either. It can't do VOD, so I guess its not an "entertainment center" either. ohhhhh it has lossless audio? Whoopeee.

Your XBOX360 cannot play bluray, so its not an entertainment center. If VOD was offered to the PS3 it could do it. So you do not appear stupid, you might want to distinguish what the hardware can do, and what service is not allowed to the hardware.


BTW the 360 does upconvert to both 1080i, and 1080p. So I don't know where you get your info, but you really ought to do better research.

Sorry, but it does not deinterlace the video correctly, so there are artifacts according to Secret of Hometheater testing. It did not pass the 3:2 pull down cedence test for either video or film. It also fail the stands and flag testing on the video essentials disc. It does not upconvert DVD's to 1080i, it upconverts games. It does not do below black , its white levels are too low. The PS3 passed all of these test, does below black, and properly display white levels.



You work for a BR studio. I assume they pay you. So if BR does well, so do you. Hence-SHILL

This is very stupid and illogical since my work is not directly related to BR specifically. I mix movies for theatrical release, not specifically for bluray release. I did the same thing before bluray. If bluray didn't exist, I would still be mixing movies for theatrical release. My studio still payed me before BR existed, and if bluray loses(which i highly doubt) my studio would still pay me. You are nightliar really show just how ignorant you are of the movie studio business. So I suppose a secretary that works for a bluray exclusive studio is also a shill. Idiotic!





The 360 DOES upconvert provided you use the correct cable. 1080p with the VGA cable, 1080i with component. Now that the HDMI is standard, it can do both through it.

http://www.engadgethd.com/2006/09/21/xbox-360-hd-dvd-playback-maximum-1080i-via-component-1080p-vga/

Even after the software upgrade this fall, via component cables, the Xbox 360 will still only upconvert DVDs to 480p, and will play HD DVD movies at a maximum resolution of 1080i. To get 1080p output for movies, you must use a VGA cable, which is not subject to the same copyright restrictions

It does not upconvert DVD's, and only outputs HD DVD at 1080i. VGA is not copy protected, and the DVD forum does not allow copy written material to be played through insecure hook ups. VGA to HDMI connections are frought with issues, because of aacs copy protections.



For you to suggest the "sole function" of the 360 is a gaming machine, you again are lying. No more than the PS3 "sole function" is a gaming machine.

Does the XBOX 360 have a internal HD DVD drive? no!. Does it have the necessary audio codecs to fully support HD DVD? Nope. Does it have the ability to pass high resolution audio? Nope. Then the machine is optimized for games only. The PS3 does support all of the audio codecs for bluray, has a internal bluray drive, and support high resolution audio internally. It is a fully internally optimized digital device for audio and video, something the XBOX360 is not.




Well, seeing as the tuner is external for the South Korea, and Autralia, that would kill your definition of the PS3 being a "entertainment center" as its not self contained. Thanks for the reminder. I love it when you make yourself look silly.

The XBOX360 does not have a internal tuner either, so whats you point?





Well, if the PS3 can't play ALL current HD formats then its really NOT an "entertainment center" as you have suggested. Remeber your narrow definition as it ALL needs to be contained? Or that doesn't factor in when it doesn't support your point?

Doesn't this apply to the XBOX360 as well, it does not play bluray disc, and it does not have a internal HD DVD drive. The PS3 was designed to play bluray disc with its internal drive, that is all that is needed for it to be considered a entertainment center. Not be able to play HD DVD is not necessary, its not apart of the bluray standards. The XBOX360 was never designed to play HD DVD disc, that was an after thought.


Again with the FUD about upconversion. With HDMI, or VGA you get 1080i or 1080p.

Only the premium XBOX 360 has HDMI. The standard XBOX360 does offer 1080p over VGA, but how many televisions have VGA hookups? Next to none. It does do 1080i over component for HD DVD, but it does not upcovert DVD's because of copy protection.





I've never disputed its a standalone player. Again, trying to square your argument with FUD. What I have said over and over, is that YOUR suggestion that its a 1-1 net gain for BR is false. If 100% of PS3 owners were BR Movie buyers/renters I would agree with you without any problem. But they are not, so its not really right to try and account for them in that fashion.

You are lying. You did say it was not a standalone, you said it cannot be counted as a standalone because it plays games. Unfortunately that does not square with the definition of standalone. Be a man boy. If you made a mistake, admit it. It does not matter how many people use it as a BR player, it has a built in drive just like a traditional standalone, with makes it as much as standalone as the traditional ones.

I never stated it was a 1-1 gain, that has never been apart of my arguement. I have stated that it has a internal drive, and that what makes it a standalone. You cannot lie you way out of this bro.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Thats the point. It would be nice to know the ratio. Then you couldn't continually flog that every PS3 owner is a BR movie lover. And that every PS3 translates directly into BR sales.

I never said any of this. Your reading skills suck dog nuts. I said it has an internal bluray drive, and that makes it as much as standalone as a BDP-S1.


Right, so when Toshiba sells at a loss, and gives away movies its a mortal retail sin, but when Sony does the same thing, its ok. Sure, I understand. Sort of a kind of "Don't do what I do" kinda mentality for BR. Thanks for clearing that up for all of us.

Sony is not selling its traditional bluray players at a loss. The PS consoles have always been sold at a loss. The PS3 is being sold at a loss because just like the XBOX360 games are much more profitable to both Sony and Microsoft. The model for the PS3 is not the same as the model for Sony traditional bluray players. The traditional players do not have games it can rely on to create profit later.





Right, the whole "industry insider" scoop. And TOTALLY unbiased.

A game plan has no biases smartness. It is a game plan.





Oh I love it when your wrong. Again. Here's two links for your viewing pleasure. Actually my viewing pleasure and everyone else that wants to see you eat crow.

Tell me is it yummy? I've schooled you before on GAME machines, and once again you troll in waters you are clearly out of step with.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/826/826128p1.html

http://www.amazon.com/PlayStation-3-80GB-Motorstorm-Pack/dp/B000TVT8PI

I thought I'd throw in the first link for our Japanese pals. Since you seem so stuck on what other countries offer, but not for US consumption on the PS3, enjoy it.

The second one is available right here in the good old USA.

You forgot this little gem in small print on your amazon link

Purchase a PlayStation 3 between October 1, 2007 and January 31, 2008 and receive 5 free Blu-Ray movies via mail-in offer. While supplies last

Now why would they offer five free movies for a game machine??

Why would walmart offer 15 free movies for just a GAME MACHINE?

http://digg.com/playstation/Wal_mart_s_Secret_Sale_on_PS3_15_free_Blu_Ray_Movi es?offset=51

Maybe you need to get schooled a little here

http://www.kickstartnews.com/reviews/hardware/sony_playstation_3.html

Notice the words Entertainment Console at the top of the page. And these words in the body of the text;

First things first. The PlayStation 3 is not just a game console. It's designed to be the center of a home entertainment system which includes gaming, music, video, movie and the internet

or this

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003966193_brier22.html

This post was a waste of your time, and did nothing to further your point.

[Mr Peabody]

VOD is so insignificant it isn't funny. Cable barely has the room for what they do, they sure don't have the capacity to offer enough rental variety to effect anything. Besides that everything they do is inferior. I was talking to a guy who is in the cable/satelite business and he told me that cable even had to quit calling their service "digital" because the way they were doing it was technically not digital. Comcast don't service my area, they may some how be an exception but I doubt it. Charter seems to have no one in charge and is about as anti-customer service as a company can get. VOD is not competitively priced either. $4.99 a pop for an inferior picture and stereo sound at best, I don't think so. Charter don't even have any HD PPV. Cable won't ever be able to have any effect on rental or people owning their own movies.

Now if some how you had access to every movie in the rental store or movie studio catalog from your couch, that would be significant. DL may some day supply that but that would be many years down the road. People are complaining about HD discs taking a few seconds to load how do you expect them to wait for one to download? There is a segment that are geeks and technical savvy but another large hurdle is how to make this DL easy enough for Joe 6-pak to want to be able to do it, and affordable enough. For get Joe, I don't even want to do it.

[pixelthis]

VOD is so insignificant it isn't funny. Cable barely has the room for what they do, they sure don't have the capacity to offer enough rental variety to effect anything. Besides that everything they do is inferior. I was talking to a guy who is in the cable/satelite business and he told me that cable even had to quit calling their service "digital" because the way they were doing it was technically not digital. Comcast don't service my area, they may some how be an exception but I doubt it. Charter seems to have no one in charge and is about as anti-customer service as a company can get. VOD is not competitively priced either. $4.99 a pop for an inferior picture and stereo sound at best, I don't think so. Charter don't even have any HD PPV. Cable won't ever be able to have any effect on rental or people owning their own movies.

Now if some how you had access to every movie in the rental store or movie studio catalog from your couch, that would be significant. DL may some day supply that but that would be many years down the road. People are complaining about HD discs taking a few seconds to load how do you expect them to wait for one to download? There is a segment that are geeks and technical savvy but another large hurdle is how to make this DL easy enough for Joe 6-pak to want to be able to do it, and affordable enough. For get Joe, I don't even want to do it.


Where to start?
First , the viewing is INSTANTANEOUS.
There is no "download", buy the movie and its pretty much on, and you can watch it as often as you want in 24 hours. Its saved to the DVR like everything else you get.
And its not just movies, its also tv shows, music videos and concerts, etc.
The greatest thing is if you have a premium channel you get to watch their vod
offerings FOR FREE.
When the fourty year old virgin was on I went to on demand, and there it was, in high def,
hit a button and thats it.
Something you really want it will be in the video store a few weeks earlier, but I CAN USUALLY WAIT.
As for " tech savy" how much knowledge do you need to hit a ondemand button and navigate a few menus?
The free movies are a bit limited right now, but how many gems do you find in blockbuster?
Basically the system is server based, the movies are on harddrive, basically it all boils
down to server capacity.
Dont think this is a threat to rental stores?
Do you think Texas instruments thought LCD was a "threat" five years ago with a fifteen inch screen selling for 2 grand?
Most dont want to "collect" movies, one watch would do, with VOD you dont have to get in the car, etc.
This tech has amazing possibilities and is only in the infant stages.
Trust me, its going to be a real problem for the rental market.
As for quality we have comcast and charter in my area, Comcast DOES call their service digital, they also have an analog service.
A lot of people do think charter sucks.
People love the comcast service but hate the price.
But when you watch everything through a digital cable box, everything, even standard def looks great. Tin man looked amazing.
I think sci-fi is next in the HD upgrade dept:1:

[pixelthis]

AND I like and respect you mr p, but websurfing drunk is something best left to the
professionals:hand:

[drseid]

VOD is so insignificant it isn't funny. Cable barely has the room for what they do, they sure don't have the capacity to offer enough rental variety to effect anything. Besides that everything they do is inferior. I was talking to a guy who is in the cable/satelite business and he told me that cable even had to quit calling their service "digital" because the way they were doing it was technically not digital. Comcast don't service my area, they may some how be an exception but I doubt it. Charter seems to have no one in charge and is about as anti-customer service as a company can get. VOD is not competitively priced either. $4.99 a pop for an inferior picture and stereo sound at best, I don't think so. Charter don't even have any HD PPV. Cable won't ever be able to have any effect on rental or people owning their own movies.

Now if some how you had access to every movie in the rental store or movie studio catalog from your couch, that would be significant. DL may some day supply that but that would be many years down the road. People are complaining about HD discs taking a few seconds to load how do you expect them to wait for one to download? There is a segment that are geeks and technical savvy but another large hurdle is how to make this DL easy enough for Joe 6-pak to want to be able to do it, and affordable enough. For get Joe, I don't even want to do it.

I agree 100% here. I have a couple gripes with VOD. One is I like something tactile for my money (like a disc). The other main gripe is what you mention above about waiting for the downloads. I can deal with the relatively long load times my BDP-S1 and HD-A1 have, but those are only a couple minutes... With even a high speed connection, it would take me what would seem as long as the movie to download it. If I am going to wait that long and have to pay for it, I would rather go to the theater and see it there.

---Dave

[drseid]

Where to start?
First , the viewing is INSTANTANEOUS.
There is no "download", buy the movie and its pretty much on, and you can watch it as often as you want in 24 hours. Its saved to the DVR like everything else you get.
And its not just movies, its also tv shows, music videos and concerts, etc.
The greatest thing is if you have a premium channel you get to watch their vod
offerings FOR FREE.
When the fourty year old virgin was on I went to on demand, and there it was, in high def,
hit a button and thats it.
Something you really want it will be in the video store a few weeks earlier, but I CAN USUALLY WAIT.
As for " tech savy" how much knowledge do you need to hit a ondemand button and navigate a few menus?
The free movies are a bit limited right now, but how many gems do you find in blockbuster?
Basically the system is server based, the movies are on harddrive, basically it all boils
down to server capacity.
Dont think this is a threat to rental stores?
Do you think Texas instruments thought LCD was a "threat" five years ago with a fifteen inch screen selling for 2 grand?
Most dont want to "collect" movies, one watch would do, with VOD you dont have to get in the car, etc.
This tech has amazing possibilities and is only in the infant stages.
Trust me, its going to be a real problem for the rental market.
As for quality we have comcast and charter in my area, Comcast DOES call their service digital, they also have an analog service.
A lot of people do think charter sucks.
People love the comcast service but hate the price.
But when you watch everything through a digital cable box, everything, even standard def looks great. Tin man looked amazing.
I think sci-fi is next in the HD upgrade dept:1:

Those "instantaneous" HD VODs on at least my cable system (Cox) are not particularly good quality, overpriced, and *extremely* limited in supply only about 10 relatively stale releases at a time. All this, driven by a horrible interface that is slow as molassas, ugly and user unfriendly. If this is the future of HD, I want none of it. I think BR and HD offer much better options for my dollars.

---Dave

[kexodusc]

I dunno about back home in the USA, but here in Canada my digital VOD service has improved dramatically in the last 2 years.
I can click an HD title, and watch it in about 20 seconds through the menu system. No downloading first, it's seems to be a more dynamic connection to whatever title I select.

The picture quality, well, it's somewhere between the best DVD and HD-DVD/BluRay, though in my experience is better than a lot of HD content from CBS, Fox, etc.
The audio is of course limited to Dolby Digital, sometimes at 384 k, sometimes at 448. That's for now. Not great, but still very enjoyable.

If I had to choose between going to Blockbuster to rent a movie vs VOD, I'd choose VOD. Why? Simple - less time and travel, no return obligation, and overall a superior experience. And in my area, new releases are tiny bit cheaper with VOD. I may be losing some audio quality in the lower bit-rate Dolby Digital compared to DVD (and especially DTS), but it's definitely not a huge loss most of the time. DTS is so rare now that it's dismissable. Comes down to better pic quality vs possibly slightly inferior sound quality that's noticeable sometimes. Now, for something like LOTR or Star Wars or whatever, I'd probably sacrifice the pic quality for the better sound, but then, I'd probably buy the movie if it was any good so renting vs VOD is moot.

For all but the most heavily special-effects laden films, it's an easy choice. And keep in mind, I'm someone who appreciates the audio quality more than video quality when watching movies. Most people are video-first.

Now, if VOD evolves and continues to improve as bandwidth goes up over time, then I'm afraid I'll have to side with Pix on this one. Start sending DTS or better than DVD quality sound and things are going to get ugly for the rental industry very fast.

You pay for convenience.
I'm a person who travels an aweful lot in his job, is away from home often, and values his free time at a rate higher than his salary would pay him per hour. That convenience element can't be ignored. On that front Blockbuster just can't compete at all.

[GMichael]

I still like the idea of being able to throw in a disk when company asks, "Do you have such-n-such on DVD?" On demand still has too few choices right now. Maybe in the future there will be more to pick from. Till then, I hate being restricted to what they are offering.

[Groundbeef]

In case you didn't know, future games released to the PS3 will be on bluray disc. Alot of the gamers on Bluray.com are members of PS3fanboy as well. Just because you are interested in games does not mean you are not interested in movies as well. To advance the theory that gamers and not interested in movies, and will react negatively to the mention of movies is rediculous. PS2 owners help drive the DVD format. And now PS3 owners are helping to drive the bluray format. Not everyone is as single minded and one dimensional as you are. .

No, only in your world are two different audiences the "same" when it fits your needs. I never said that gamers don't watch movies, or Movie watchers don't play games. If your going to state as fact that you got 10 pages of responses to your query on a MOVIE board, I suggested you would get a different response on a GAMING board. Really, is it that hard for you to understand?




I went to a pool that is more balanced between movies and games. What good is it to go to a place were there is no interest in movies. The people I went to fully use their PS3, not just use it for one thing. .

No, you went to a board frequented by MOVIE buffs, who also MAY play games. Not a GAMING board with viewers who MAY watch movies. Big difference.




If you XBOX360 does not have the internal parts to fully support all functions(it does not) then it is not a entertainment center. There is no support for high resolution music. There is no internal HD disc drive. You have to connect these items to the XBOX360 to get these features, and no matter what you do it cannot support not one high resolution audio format, not even those related to HD DVD. Its a entertainment system, not a entertainment center. There is a difference. .

While I appreciate your arguement, its self fufilling for YOU. However, I can't find any definition of an "Entertainment Center" that stipulates 1. Must have internal BR player. 2. Support SACD. Its just in your little world.





It does not say entertainment center, it say media center. Entertainment center came with the PS3, not with the original XBOX. Entertainment centers are optimized internally for all forms of entertainment, not just DVD and CD. The XBOX required external sources to do what it does, so it is just a media center. The only functions that the PS3 does not have(but it can do) is the downloading of TV programs and movies. The rest of it, it can do better than the XBOX and the XBOX360 for that matter. The PS3 has USB ports, so it is easy to add a tuner to it. It already allows you to save video clips to its hard drive, so it is a DVR as well. There is a big difference on whether the hardware can perform the task, or if the task is even offered to the hardware. The PS3 can do everything the XBOX360 can do hardware wise, but the services that the XBOX360 has, the PS3 does not.

As far as the original XBOX doing 1080i, that is not a truthful statement at all. the XBOX360 was the first to do 1080i .

No, actually the PS3 can't play HD-DVD either. So according to your definition its not an "entertainment center" because it doens't support ALL formats of HD movie playback. If you use the USB then its an EXTERNAL device. If you can count that for the PS3 (Tuner) then what the hell is the difference between that and the HD-DVD for the 360? NOTHING.

And heres a link for the XBOX Component Cables. Mind you, this was for a machine 7 YEARS ago. Games were optimized for 1080i output. (Not every game, but plenty of them). So, you can take your "not a truthful statment" and blow it out your ass. Again, you are clueless about gaming machines and what they are capable of. The 360 was NOT the first to do 1080i. The original XBOX WAS.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/h/hdavpack/



Your XBOX360 cannot play bluray, so its not an entertainment center. If VOD was offered to the PS3 it could do it. So you do not appear stupid, you might want to distinguish what the hardware can do, and what service is not allowed to the hardware. .

The PS3 cannot play HD-DVD, so its not an entertaiment center.



Sorry, but it does not deinterlace the video correctly, so there are artifacts according to Secret of Hometheater testing. It did not pass the 3:2 pull down cedence test for either video or film. It also fail the stands and flag testing on the video essentials disc. It does not upconvert DVD's to 1080i, it upconverts games. It does not do below black , its white levels are too low. The PS3 passed all of these test, does below black, and properly display white levels. .

It can upconvert DVD's using either VGA or HDMI. As far as the testing goes, its irrelevant to the arguement. Perhaps its not as "good" as the PS3, but it DOES upconvert. Your arguement about the PS3 is just as invalid. Unless a consumer is using an HDMI cable, they will not have upconverson either.



This is very stupid and illogical since my work is not directly related to BR specifically. I mix movies for theatrical release, not specifically for bluray release. I did the same thing before bluray. If bluray didn't exist, I would still be mixing movies for theatrical release. My studio still payed me before BR existed, and if bluray loses(which i highly doubt) my studio would still pay me. You are nightliar really show just how ignorant you are of the movie studio business. So I suppose a secretary that works for a bluray exclusive studio is also a shill. Idiotic! .

I'm neither ignorant, nor stupid. If you worked for a HD-DVD exclusive studio, I very much doubt you would argue with the same voracity for BR as you do now. I'm not suggesting you don't truly belive in what you say, but lets be honest. You do have a financial stake in the sucess of the BR format. No more idiotic than being shocked at a checker at Lowes doesn't praise the benefits of shopping at Home Depot!



Even after the software upgrade this fall, via component cables, the Xbox 360 will still only upconvert DVDs to 480p, and will play HD DVD movies at a maximum resolution of 1080i. To get 1080p output for movies, you must use a VGA cable, which is not subject to the same copyright restrictions

It does not upconvert DVD's, and only outputs HD DVD at 1080i. VGA is not copy protected, and the DVD forum does not allow copy written material to be played through insecure hook ups. VGA to HDMI connections are frought with issues, because of aacs copy protections. .

HD-DVD is output at 1080p with HDMI cable. Just like the PS3. Stop spreading FUD. If you use componet cables with the PS3 you are subject to the same restrictions.

[



Doesn't this apply to the XBOX360 as well, it does not play bluray disc, and it does not have a internal HD DVD drive. The PS3 was designed to play bluray disc with its internal drive, that is all that is needed for it to be considered a entertainment center. Not be able to play HD DVD is not necessary, its not apart of the bluray standards. The XBOX360 was never designed to play HD DVD disc, that was an after thought. .

No, it wasn't an "after thought" it was a design. MS decided not to cram an unecessary accessory into an already expensive machine. Sony went another route, and made the machine quite expenisive. I suppose only you will praise Sony for its rather bloated, overpriced GAME machine, and its lackluster sales for the 1st year. Only recently after its price was cut from the stratosphere is it beginning to see sales.




Only the premium XBOX 360 has HDMI. The standard XBOX360 does offer 1080p over VGA, but how many televisions have VGA hookups? Next to none. It does do 1080i over component for HD DVD, but it does not upcovert DVD's because of copy protection.
.

Once again, out of water. ALL XBOX brands carry the HDMI output. Only the "Elite" comes WITH the HDMI cable. Not even the PS3 comes with that! If you are still unsure check here:

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/compare101.htm?WT.svl=nav

Notice where HDMI is "sold separately" on ALL Console's. Again, with the misinformation and spin. Shame on you T, I thought better of you.

And how many TV's in homes have HDMI? Its getting larger, but not even close to a majority of households. So for every 360 that has to use component, or composite, so does a PS3 owner. BTW nice of Sony to include COMPOSITE cables in with even their 80 GB premium line. What resolutions does that handle again?



You are lying. You did say it was not a standalone, you said it cannot be counted as a standalone because it plays games. Unfortunately that does not square with the definition of standalone. Be a man boy. If you made a mistake, admit it. It does not matter how many people use it as a BR player, it has a built in drive just like a traditional standalone, with makes it as much as standalone as the traditional ones.

I never stated it was a 1-1 gain, that has never been apart of my arguement. I have stated that it has a internal drive, and that what makes it a standalone. You cannot lie you way out of this bro.

No, I said it shouldn't be counted as a standalone if you were going to dis-allow the HD-DVD addon for the 360 not to be counted. Go back and check. Thats always been the arguement. You don't want the 360 HD-DVD drive counted, but want to include EVERY PS3 sale as a "BR Unit". Thats asinine.

[Groundbeef]

Sony is not selling its traditional bluray players at a loss. The PS consoles have always been sold at a loss. The PS3 is being sold at a loss because just like the XBOX360 games are much more profitable to both Sony and Microsoft. The model for the PS3 is not the same as the model for Sony traditional bluray players. The traditional players do not have games it can rely on to create profit later.

Your right, Sony can rely on the PS3 games (whenever they actually come out) to supplant their huge loss on each unit. However, just like Toshiba they run the risk of hurting their partners by lowering the expectation of price by undercutting the market. Granted, at this time prices HAVE fallen, but initially the PS3 was hundereds of $$ cheaper than the the other BR player offerings.

Similar to Toshiba offering HD-DVD players at unrealistic, low prices.

You cannot with a straight face or honest arguement suggest that the PS3 didn't exhibit a downward price pressure on other BR player makers. So to suggest that somehow Sony is differnent than Toshiba in lowering margins on other suppliers is false.



Your lack surity in answering this question shows that you do not really know. You are free to call it whatever suits you, but its official nomenclature is a Digital Entertainment center. That is what it is called in the instructional manual, and that is how it is marketed by Sony. Do you see them including a free game with it? Nope, it includes free movies.

You forgot this little gem in small print on your amazon link

Purchase a PlayStation 3 between October 1, 2007 and January 31, 2008 and receive 5 free Blu-Ray movies via mail-in offer. While supplies last

Now why would they offer five free movies for a game machine??

Why would walmart offer 15 free movies for just a GAME MACHINE?

http://digg.com/playstation/Wal_mart_s_Secret_Sale_on_PS3_15_free_Blu_Ray_Movi es?offset=51

Maybe you need to get schooled a little here



No, you just embarassed yourself further. I made sure to include your initial quote "Do you see them including a free game with it? Nope. You seem to have forgotten that part. I wouldn't want people to read your response and think somehow you were right.

Because you were not. I never suggested that Sony WASN'T giving away movies. I just wanted to prove you wrong that they don't give away games. Clearly they do, and I am looking forward to you saying: "GB, I was wrong. (again) Clearly Sony has been giving away games, to entice customers to buy our GAMING machine".

I'll be waiting for your admission.

[GMichael]

Dead horse, meet whip.
Whip, meet dead horse.
Glad you two are getting together.

[Groundbeef]

Dead horse, meet whip.
Whip, meet dead horse.
Glad you two are getting together.

That was pretty funny.

[Mr Peabody]

Pix. did you notice the break between paragraphs in my post? VOD is from cable, in my 2nd paragraph I was referring to DL, from internet.

Charter had NOTHING on demand in HD and I don't think anything was even in DD. HBO-HD sounded good, near DVD quality but the HD picture is not as good as Dish's HD picture. If I could get HD-VOD you may sway me. Dish has HD PPV channels but I haven't checked them out yet. One of the other companies needs to buy Charter and put them out of their misery. They won't though because of the cost to upgrade. Have any of your cable companies had a BBB warning over their bundling like Charter? I do have a bit of a mystery though, my sound from Dish is inferior to what I was getting from Charter on HD premium channels like HBO. I'm sure the receiver settings are correct. I'm going to try another digital cable if that don't do it I may see if I can swap boxes to see if any difference. If no difference I will have to except the fact that Dish don't sound as good as the suckiest cable company in the world. I would think though if my cable went bad I wouldn't get sound or the sound would be worse than it is, either with drop out or distortion.

[pixelthis]

Pix. did you notice the break between paragraphs in my post? VOD is from cable, in my 2nd paragraph I was referring to DL, from internet.

Charter had NOTHING on demand in HD and I don't think anything was even in DD. HBO-HD sounded good, near DVD quality but the HD picture is not as good as Dish's HD picture. If I could get HD-VOD you may sway me. Dish has HD PPV channels but I haven't checked them out yet. One of the other companies needs to buy Charter and put them out of their misery. They won't though because of the cost to upgrade. Have any of your cable companies had a BBB warning over their bundling like Charter? I do have a bit of a mystery though, my sound from Dish is inferior to what I was getting from Charter on HD premium channels like HBO. I'm sure the receiver settings are correct. I'm going to try another digital cable if that don't do it I may see if I can swap boxes to see if any difference. If no difference I will have to except the fact that Dish don't sound as good as the suckiest cable company in the world. I would think though if my cable went bad I wouldn't get sound or the sound would be worse than it is, either with drop out or distortion.

I just want to put to rest this "downloading " pap.
My digital vod is as good as a dvd, the hd is better sometimes than broadcast,
and theres a pretty good selection.
I mean, really, go into the video store and how many titles are there that yolu really want.
And the comment about having something "tangible" is quite rediculous.
My movie is on the hard drive in my DVR, I can play it as much as I like in a 24hr period,
and the price is 3.99 for most payperview, and a lot you dont have to pay for at all.
Last time I rented an older title it cost money, same as the new ones.
On vod the free movies are just that...free.
And again, if you buy a premium service they offer free downloads, both hi-def and sd.
Cant beat free.
If you say that every movie is worth buying well, I can see your nose grow.
Some are quite good but dont have that special something that makes you want to own it.
Not that I care, the future of movie rental is VOD. Get used to it.
when you "rent a disc are you paying for the right to have a piece of plastic in your house for a day or two?
Of course not, you're paying for the movie on it.
In the future no one will use precious oil to make a plastic disc so that someone else can use even more precious oil to go rent it.
what HDDVD and BLU-RAY both are "fighting" for is the right to be the archive medium of movie lovers who want a copy of certain movies in their home.
And after the video store goes the way of the dinosaur that will be the SOLE market for a
movie on disc medium, and that market will be a lot smaller than puting out zillions of
discs to sell to rental outlets.
Dont think the video store will disapear?
I used to walk into stores and see shelves full of turntables, and there werent any video stores.
Did you ever think that you'd see record stores fade out like they are now?
Video stores are next:1:

[GMichael]

And the comment about having something "tangible" is quite rediculous.
My movie is on the hard drive in my DVR, I can play it as much as I like in a 24hr period,



And when your friends visit with their 4 year olds who want to see Finding Nemo, will that still be saved on your DVR? What if they want to see the Loin King, or Cars? Do you have all of the possibilities saved? Can you save them ALL to be viewed anytime you like?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

No, only in your world are two different audiences the "same" when it fits your needs. I never said that gamers don't watch movies, or Movie watchers don't play games. If your going to state as fact that you got 10 pages of responses to your query on a MOVIE board, I suggested you would get a different response on a GAMING board. Really, is it that hard for you to understand?

I posted my inquiry in the gaming section beef brain. That is where the gamers hang out. In case you have not been there, there is one section devoted to nothing but gaming and the PS3. Gamers watch movies(as evidenced by the PS2 contribution to the DVD format) as well as play games, and that was demonstrated by the 10 pages of response.




No, you went to a board frequented by MOVIE buffs, who also MAY play games. Not a GAMING board with viewers who MAY watch movies. Big difference.

I am sorry, but the movie buffs have their own section, and the gamers have theirs. I went to the gamers section. Please do not tell me what I did, you can't even remember what you say.



While I appreciate your arguement, its self fufilling for YOU. However, I can't find any definition of an "Entertainment Center" that stipulates 1. Must have internal BR player. 2. Support SACD. Its just in your little world.

I didn't say it must have SACD or bluray. I said it must support high defintion audio and video. The PS3 supports both, and the XBOX360 does not. It is that simple.




No, actually the PS3 can't play HD-DVD either. So according to your definition its not an "entertainment center" because it doens't support ALL formats of HD movie playback. If you use the USB then its an EXTERNAL device. If you can count that for the PS3 (Tuner) then what the hell is the difference between that and the HD-DVD for the 360? NOTHING.

I did not say all of nothing. I simply said it must support high definition video and audio. I said nothing about all of the video formats, I said all of the advance audio formats, you know, like DTHD and Dts MA lossless, DD+, Dts HD, and some sort of high definition audio only format. . Big difference for those who can actually read. Since all but the gaming portion of the XBOX360 function are external, it cannot be considered a true media hub. And when all of the devices are hooked up, the XBOX360 cannot even support the audio codecs that support HD DVD. DD and Dts lossy are yesterdays codecs.


And heres a link for the XBOX Component Cables. Mind you, this was for a machine 7 YEARS ago. Games were optimized for 1080i output. (Not every game, but plenty of them). So, you can take your "not a truthful statment" and blow it out your ass. Again, you are clueless about gaming machines and what they are capable of. The 360 was NOT the first to do 1080i. The original XBOX WAS.

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/h/hdavpack/

I will leave the blowing to you. I do not care about gaming machines. I care about entertainment centers, which means I do not care about the XBOX360




The PS3 cannot play HD-DVD, so its not an entertaiment center.

The XBOX360 cannot play HD DVD without the drive, and even with the drive it only does a half ass job with supporting it. Whether the PS3 can do HD DVD or not is irrelevant, it can do high definition video INTERNALLY, something the XBOX360 cannot do. So it is a Entertainment center. HD DVD is not the only game in town, as long as the box can play high definition video from its INTERNAL drive, it is a Entertainment Center.




It can upconvert DVD's using either VGA or HDMI. As far as the testing goes, its irrelevant to the arguement. Perhaps its not as "good" as the PS3, but it DOES upconvert. Your arguement about the PS3 is just as invalid. Unless a consumer is using an HDMI cable, they will not have upconverson either.

The testing confirms whether the player is opitimized for the format, or not. The PS3 passed all of the test that show it is optimized for both Bluray and DVD. The XBOX360 could not, and that shows that the high definition support for its video side is an afterthought, and not integral to its design. Bad upconversion is like having no upconversion at all.




I'm neither ignorant, nor stupid. If you worked for a HD-DVD exclusive studio, I very much doubt you would argue with the same voracity for BR as you do now. I'm not suggesting you don't truly belive in what you say, but lets be honest. You do have a financial stake in the sucess of the BR format. No more idiotic than being shocked at a checker at Lowes doesn't praise the benefits of shopping at Home Depot!

You do not know what I would do under any circumstances. You are both ignorant and stupid to make this statement. I was working at a bluray exclusive studio and owned a HD DVD player first, bought a bunch of titles, and watch them. That proves that what I do for a living does not effect my personal choices.

You do not know a damn thing about how studio operate, because if you did, you would not make stupid ignorant statements such as this. I have said this over and over, but I will repeat it again for the thick headed. I mix for theatrical release, and yes, the soundtracks I mix do appear on Bluray disc. But they also appeared on VHS, Laserdisc, and DVD. I have remixed soundtracks for bluray disc, but I also remixed for Laserdisc and DVD. If bluray goes away, I still make money. If HD DVD and DVD goes away, I still make money. If film goes away, my job is gone. Now if you cannot understand this, then you are stupid and ignorant, even more so since I have already explain this over and over again.




HD-DVD is output at 1080p with HDMI cable. Just like the PS3. Stop spreading FUD. If you use componet cables with the PS3 you are subject to the same restrictions.

DVD is not upconverted to 1080p, it is only upconverted to 480p. The PS3 can upconvert to 1080p. There is not FUD there, just fact.




No, it wasn't an "after thought" it was a design. MS decided not to cram an unecessary accessory into an already expensive machine. Sony went another route, and made the machine quite expenisive. I suppose only you will praise Sony for its rather bloated, overpriced GAME machine, and its lackluster sales for the 1st year. Only recently after its price was cut from the stratosphere is it beginning to see sales.

If the drive is not internal, then it was an afterthought. The drive became available well after the 360 was released. It does not pass the necessary video testing that supports the notion that HD DVD was on the mind of the designers of the XBOX360. That is supported by the lack of lossless audio as well. No lossless audio, failed video testing is a sure sign that HD DVD was an afterthought. When you add up the cost of the XBOX360, the HD DVD drive, and the necessary support services like live etc, that makes the cost of the XBOX360 more than PS3. You can say GAME machine all you like, it just makes you look stupid. GAME machines do not do what the PS3 does. Games are just ONE thing the PS3 does.





Once again, out of water. ALL XBOX brands carry the HDMI output. Only the "Elite" comes WITH the HDMI cable. Not even the PS3 comes with that! If you are still unsure check here:

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/compare101.htm?WT.svl=nav

So you add a HDMI cable and connection, raise the price $80 over the premium and you have a elite. Someone is getting ripped off here since a HDMI connection adds about $20 in parts to the player, and the cable can be had for less than $10 at monoprice. The 360 elite costs $20 less than the PS3, and the PS3 has the built in bluray drive. Somebody got screwed!




Notice where HDMI is "sold separately" on ALL Console's. Again, with the misinformation and spin. Shame on you T, I thought better of you.

How do you sell HDMI seperately? Either it is on the player, or it is not. It cannot be installed after the player is sold can it? LOL


And how many TV's in homes have HDMI? Its getting larger, but not even close to a majority of households. So for every 360 that has to use component, or composite, so does a PS3 owner. BTW nice of Sony to include COMPOSITE cables in with even their 80 GB premium line. What resolutions does that handle again?

Far more homes have HDMI than VGA, that is for sure. You cannot make a statement that for every360 that has to use component of composite, so does a PS3 owner. You do not know that, and either you enjoy doing what nightliar does and just tell lies, or you are making something up just to make a unsupportable point. Which is it.

It does 1080p to answer your question, that is its native resolution.




No, I said it shouldn't be counted as a standalone if you were going to dis-allow the HD-DVD addon for the 360 not to be counted. Go back and check. Thats always been the arguement. You don't want the 360 HD-DVD drive counted, but want to include EVERY PS3 sale as a "BR Unit". Thats asinine.

The HD DVD is a ADD ON. The bluray drive is INTERNAL. The difference is obvious. Traditional standalones have enternal bluray drives just like the PS3, and unlike the XBOX360. The ADD ON cannot function without the XBOX360 or a computer. The PS3 needs neither, its function are all INTERNAL. As long as the drive is in every PS3 just like it is in a traditional standalone, every PS3 is a bluray player.

I have given you the definition at least 10 times of what the word standalone means. To continue to believe that a ADD ON should be counted like a INTERNAL drive is asinine. You may not like it, but the definition is what it is.

[Groundbeef]

I posted my inquiry in the gaming section beef brain. That is where the gamers hang out. In case you have not been there, there is one section devoted to nothing but gaming and the PS3. Gamers watch movies(as evidenced by the PS2 contribution to the DVD format) as well as play games, and that was demonstrated by the 10 pages of response.

I am sorry, but the movie buffs have their own section, and the gamers have theirs. I went to the gamers section. Please do not tell me what I did, you can't even remember what you say. .

Just as usual, you are blowing smoke. There is no denying Bluray.com is a movie centric board. It may have a "gaming" section, but it's movie centric. By definition, viewers to that site are generally MOVIE buffs, who may play games. Ask a "movie" related question will give you answers by "movie" people.

Go to a game centric site, and you will get "gamers" who may or may not watch movies. Your incessant and loud rebuttles only reinforce the notion that you will never conceed even when faced with insurmountable, and indisputable facts. You will get different answers on different sites.




I will leave the blowing to you. I do not care about gaming machines. I care about entertainment centers, which means I do not care about the XBOX360.

Well, you own a PS3. A GAMING machine, so I guess you do care about them:cornut:




The XBOX360 cannot play HD DVD without the drive, and even with the drive it only does a half ass job with supporting it. Whether the PS3 can do HD DVD or not is irrelevant, it can do high definition video INTERNALLY, something the XBOX360 cannot do. So it is a Entertainment center. HD DVD is not the only game in town, as long as the box can play high definition video from its INTERNAL drive, it is a Entertainment Center. .

Pull up one of those fancy dictionary sites you always cite. Show me where it defines an "entertainment center" as you profess. If you do, I'll eat my hat.



You do not know what I would do under any circumstances. You are both ignorant and stupid to make this statement. I was working at a bluray exclusive studio and owned a HD DVD player first, bought a bunch of titles, and watch them. That proves that what I do for a living does not effect my personal choices. .

That you own HD-DVD movies in your home is irrelevant to the arguement. You work for a BR studio, and you profess it freely. To suggest that your employment in NO WAY shades your arguements is silly. And makes you look silly.



DVD is not upconverted to 1080p, it is only upconverted to 480p. The PS3 can upconvert to 1080p. There is not FUD there, just fact. .

Wrong again, Mr. T. With HDMI or VGA it upconverts. Your the one with the FUD problem.



So you add a HDMI cable and connection, raise the price $80 over the premium and you have a elite. Someone is getting ripped off here since a HDMI connection adds about $20 in parts to the player, and the cable can be had for less than $10 at monoprice. The 360 elite costs $20 less than the PS3, and the PS3 has the built in bluray drive. Somebody got screwed!.

No, you also get 100GB more storage on the HD. 40GB more than the PS3. Looks like the sap that bought the PS3 with less storage got screwed.




How do you sell HDMI seperately? Either it is on the player, or it is not. It cannot be installed after the player is sold can it? LOL.

Now your really being ignorant. You need to buy the CABLE seperately. Just like the PS3. Or do you really need that pointed out?




Far more homes have HDMI than VGA, that is for sure. You cannot make a statement that for every360 that has to use component of composite, so does a PS3 owner. You do not know that, and either you enjoy doing what nightliar does and just tell lies, or you are making something up just to make a unsupportable point. Which is it.

It does 1080p to answer your question, that is its native resolution. .

I see, so with the included "component" YELLOW cable, your telling me the PS3 pushes 1080p? Thats pretty funny. Even for your FUD tactics that's over the top.

I think this here arguement has run its course. I would like to take this moment to point out that you have been really out of line on your responses. I PM'd you before, and actually had a nice chat with you. I really don't understand the need for the personal insults you insist on throwing around. I've restrained, and not sure why you feel the need to go to the gutter. It takes away from your expertise, and only makes you look like a desperate whiner.

Have a nice evening.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Your right, Sony can rely on the PS3 games (whenever they actually come out) to supplant their huge loss on each unit. However, just like Toshiba they run the risk of hurting their partners by lowering the expectation of price by undercutting the market. Granted, at this time prices HAVE fallen, but initially the PS3 was hundereds of $$ cheaper than the the other BR player offerings.

You analysis is completely flawed. No other BR manufacturer is offering a device like the PS3. And now that you can find a traditional standalone for cheaper than the PS3, you point is moot. The PS3 because of its uniqueness can be sold at a loss because it does support gaming. Traditional standalones are not afforded this kind of break. They must make money on the player because there is no way to make a profit elsewhere. Initially it was the goal of the BDA to get as many players out there as they can. It was not until the prices of the traditional standalones dropped that the PS3 prices have dropped. We cannot talk about initially, initially is gone, never to be lived again.


Similar to Toshiba offering HD-DVD players at unrealistic, low prices.

No it is not simular. The Toshiba players only play movies. You lose money on those players, you cannot make it up. Toshiba does not own a movie studio, therefore it cost them to subsidize with free movies. Players being sold at a loss, and free movies given away is not how the BDA operates, or wants to operate. Now they may give away free movies, but there is a profit made on every player the BDA manufacturers sell.


You cannot with a straight face or honest arguement suggest that the PS3 didn't exhibit a downward price pressure on other BR player makers. So to suggest that somehow Sony is differnent than Toshiba in lowering margins on other suppliers is false.

No it did not. The other BR players that have had there prices lowered were earlier generation model moved to make room for other new generational models. It is normal in the CE industry to do this. The Samsung player just recently dropped in price is making room for another player to be introduce early next year. Panasonic player came in cheaper than the last because Panasonic is producing enough players to become more efficient at making them, and with the benefit of cheaper part prices. This would have happened even if the PS3 was not reduced in price. The Samsung BDP-1000 price was reduced long before the PS3 price was. So BOOM, there goes you arguement.

Toshiba has already admitted that their HD DVD format is losing alot of money. I already provided a link that shows this. BR manufacturers are not losing money. That is the difference.


No, you just embarassed yourself further. I made sure to include your initial quote "Do you see them including a free game with it? Nope. You seem to have forgotten that part. I wouldn't want people to read your response and think somehow you were right.

Because you were not. I never suggested that Sony WASN'T giving away movies. I just wanted to prove you wrong that they don't give away games. Clearly they do, and I am looking forward to you saying: "GB, I was wrong. (again) Clearly Sony has been giving away games, to entice customers to buy our GAMING machine".

I'll be waiting for your admission.

You will get no admission here. Amazon is allowed to put together PS3 packages that include free games. Sony does not have to authorize this, and the Amazon package is a Amazon package, not a Sony package. Paidgeek, a Sony executive confirmed that for me. So I am right, Sony does not give away games. Amazon may as a promotion to move PS3's, but not Sony. Sony does give away free movies, and so do BR exclusive studios. Gaming retailers are allowed to bundle free software with players without Sony permission to do so. Sony knows this practice moves players, and therefore leads to software sales in the future. It is not the practice of Sony to give away games as a Sony sanctioned promotion. Paidgeek has also confirmed this. So if you are waiting for an admission, please hold your breath, I would love to see the outcome.

[PeruvianSkies]

And when your friends visit with their 4 year olds who want to see Finding Nemo, will that still be saved on your DVR? What if they want to see the Loin King, or Cars? Do you have all of the possibilities saved? Can you save them ALL to be viewed anytime you like?

This has to be hypothetical, I mean I see your point, but come on....Pix...friends....that's a good one!

[Groundbeef]

You will get no admission here. Amazon is allowed to put together PS3 packages that include free games. Sony does not have to authorize this, and the Amazon package is a Amazon package, not a Sony package. Paidgeek, a Sony executive confirmed that for me. So I am right, Sony does not give away games. Amazon may as a promotion to move PS3's, but not Sony. Sony does give away free movies, and so do BR exclusive studios. Gaming retailers are allowed to bundle free software with players without Sony permission to do so. Sony knows this practice moves players, and therefore leads to software sales in the future. It is not the practice of Sony to give away games as a Sony sanctioned promotion. Paidgeek has also confirmed this. So if you are waiting for an admission, please hold your breath, I would love to see the outcome.

Paidgeek is wrong and so are you. Unless your contention is that Amazon actually OPENS each box, inserts a "free" game (Motorstorm), then, in a feat of real action, reworks the box art to include the "Free Game Inclosed" graphic, then repackages the box to include the "free" game.

Your off your rocker.

And as if this isnt enough for you. Heres a link from SONY corp itself showcasing the unit, and a 5 GAME giveaway!

http://www.us.playstation.com/EP/Promotions/296

Heres the picture, now you explain how Amazon bundles this all up without any input from Sony?

Now you can apologize twice. Once for being wrong initally, and now a second time for using a source that clearly doesn't know what he is talking about!

[Mr Peabody]

Pix, did the cable company give you some rosie red glasses and told you to keep them on for better viewing? Either they did or you have the best cable service in the states. Until the cable industry modernizes and standardizes your dream will never come true. I have no doubt that Charter is the worst service in the states. Charter did offer the free VOD the kids loved that for finding their favorite shows at night but I never used it for anything, it was only stereo and SD. My package gave me HBO, Cinemax & Starz but I only watched the 3 HD movie channels. If I am sitting through a movie I want at least DVD quality. As I stated in an earlier post cable is as expensive as satelite and most instances more and Charter was lucky to have a dozen HD channels not including local, that may have brought them close to 20.

[pixelthis]

This has to be hypothetical, I mean I see your point, but come on....Pix...friends....that's a good one!


Kinda like the idea of you ever having sex.

Mr p I cant beleive you doubt me.
My cable system is fiber optic, digital, and works very well, whats so hard to beleive?
And they are adding a few more HD channels, Sci-fi and a few others.
You need to quit talking about CHARTER, I have heard plenty of horror stories from out in the county where charter runs, although i HAVE NEVER HAD IT FOR MYSELF.
Everything I describe is true about the cable service I get, I DONT KNOW WHY ITS SO HARD TO BELEIVE.
A few years ago Comcast upgraded to fiber optic, first to various neighborhoods, then eventually the idea was to get to the pole, dont know if they got that far yet.
DIRECT TV is tempting, with all of the HD, but then what do I do for a cable modem?
It is not perfect by any streach, rate increases were announced recently, and the west coast feeds of premium channels were dropped, "they were redundant" is what a company shill said.
But knowing a little about this stuff I know that the service is quite good.
We have a wide demograpic in my town, and we have always been a test market, getting thing first, this may be what Comcast is thinking of for the future.
At least now they realize they have competition, they are adding HD all of the time, probably nervous about Direct tv's new HD channels.
And their vod service is quite good, which is why I say, (like a lot of other people) that
the rental future is VOD.
Sure you'll want a hard copy of some movies, that is the function whatever hd disc
surrives will serve, but that market is gonna be a LOT smaller than the huge sales to rental
stores is all I am saying.
AND in spite of ground beefs fanboy denial of reality, that format will probably be BLU RAY.
If you go by what the industry is already talking about and considering, Its Bluray
ALREADY:1:
"

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Paidgeek is wrong and so are you. Unless your contention is that Amazon actually OPENS each box, inserts a "free" game (Motorstorm), then, in a feat of real action, reworks the box art to include the "Free Game Inclosed" graphic, then repackages the box to include the "free" game.

Your off your rocker.

You may think you know everything about gaming, but you don't know $hit about the business. The packaging of the games are handled by third party sources. While Sony is not in the business of giving games away, the retailer may cut a deal with Sony to allow the company that makes the packaging to create unique packaging for a promotion for a specific retailer. That is how the business works.


And as if this isnt enough for you. Heres a link from SONY corp itself showcasing the unit, and a 5 GAME giveaway!

http://www.us.playstation.com/EP/Promotions/296

Heres the picture, now you explain how Amazon bundles this all up without any input from Sony?

If you read my first post without your overly emotional filters, you would have understand clearly that Sony has knowledge that a retailer is working with the packaging company to create unique packaging for a promotion, but they do not need permission from Sony to do it. Sony may use that promotion for advertising purposes, but they DO NOT GIVE AWAY GAMES. Bundling is strictly a retailers thing, not Sony thing. Sony does bundle movies sometimes in the box, and sometimes via fullfilment. This is a Sony contest, not a promotion. Contest are quite a bit different than retail sales. They may have giveaways during Sony sponsored contests, but they do not give away games during retail promotions. Stick to PLAYING games, instead of pretending you know the business aspects of gaming.


Now you can apologize twice. Once for being wrong initally, and now a second time for using a source that clearly doesn't know what he is talking about!

Read what I stated above. It is obvious you do not know what the hell you are talking about, but you sure do like to bellow alot. You can hold your breath twice as long waiting for an apology. I wonder what it looks like to see a cow turning blue. Paidgeek works for Sony gaming division, he knows a hell of alot more about that business than you do.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Kinda like the idea of you ever having sex.

Mr p I cant beleive you doubt me.
My cable system is fiber optic, digital, and works very well, whats so hard to beleive?
And they are adding a few more HD channels, Sci-fi and a few others.
You need to quit talking about CHARTER, I have heard plenty of horror stories from out in the county where charter runs, although i HAVE NEVER HAD IT FOR MYSELF.
Everything I describe is true about the cable service I get, I DONT KNOW WHY ITS SO HARD TO BELEIVE.
A few years ago Comcast upgraded to fiber optic, first to various neighborhoods, then eventually the idea was to get to the pole, dont know if they got that far yet.
DIRECT TV is tempting, with all of the HD, but then what do I do for a cable modem?
It is not perfect by any streach, rate increases were announced recently, and the west coast feeds of premium channels were dropped, "they were redundant" is what a company shill said.
But knowing a little about this stuff I know that the service is quite good.
We have a wide demograpic in my town, and we have always been a test market, getting thing first, this may be what Comcast is thinking of for the future.
At least now they realize they have competition, they are adding HD all of the time, probably nervous about Direct tv's new HD channels.
And their vod service is quite good, which is why I say, (like a lot of other people) that
the rental future is VOD.
Sure you'll want a hard copy of some movies, that is the function whatever hd disc
surrives will serve, but that market is gonna be a LOT smaller than the huge sales to rental
stores is all I am saying.
AND in spite of ground beefs fanboy denial of reality, that format will probably be BLU RAY.
If you go by what the industry is already talking about and considering, Its Bluray
ALREADY:1:
"

Pix,
The sale through market overtook the rental market along time ago. So the rental market is already off the table in that respect.

Unfortunately there is a huge group of movie collectors that feel VOD is not at high enough quality. Most are delivered as 720p, but the signals are highly compressed which sucks the resolution out of the signal. While some are delivered with DD at 448kbps, that is yesterday audio codec, and the equivalent of DVD. Until VOD can equal the HD DVD or bluray experience, I cannot see the movie collector going this direction.

It would have been easier for cable to sell VOD if people had not seen 1080p video. However it will be very difficult for the cable industry to sell 720p when most televisions going out of the retailers showrooms are 1080p. People are going to gravitate towards 1080p sources to match their 1080p televisions.

While VOD has its advantages, it also has quite a few drawbacks as well. VOD will have to take a huge technical leap if it is going to appeal to quite a few people. Nobody in the movie industry thinks that VOD is going to replace disc anytime soon.

[Groundbeef]

You may think you know everything about gaming, but you don't know $hit about the business. The packaging of the games are handled by third party sources. While Sony is not in the business of giving games away, the retailer may cut a deal with Sony to allow the company that makes the packaging to create unique packaging for a promotion for a specific retailer. That is how the business works. .

You are now in the realm of "inventing your own reality". Sony Corp is SELLING the "bundle" I am talking about RIGHT NOW. So let me get this straight. Sony, doesn't give away games. It allows 3rd parties to decide what goes into the "box", then design their own packaging? Then, Sony, takes these retailer re-packs (as you contend), and then sells them on THEIR OWN website, but has NO hand in it? You are much less "in the know" as you profess.

Heres the weblink to the SONY store, (BTW thats actually RUN by Sony, not a 3rd party retailer).

I'll continue to wait for your admission of your own foolishness.

Here's the link if you'd like to pick up a PS3 with the FREE GAME included in the box. Sold by SONY, packaged BY SONY.

http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/Hardware

[Groundbeef]

AND in spite of ground beefs fanboy denial of reality, that format will probably be BLU RAY.
If you go by what the industry is already talking about and considering, Its Bluray
ALREADY:1:
"

I've never said that BR will probably not win. Chances are, its going to. I just said that so far, its not a done deal.

And in the meantime, VOD, and other digital delivery services will continue to make inroads on the HD formats. (either one)

If the format war is too protracted, VOD and other digital demand sources could become a real player in the market.

Although Sir T has raised some vaild points on bandwidth restrictions, and compression, for the most part, people are "accepting" some of the shortcomings due to convience. Perhaps not to build a library of movies, but for a 1 time viewing on short notice, it sure is nice to stay inside (as its sleeting outside).

[Mr Peabody]

Pix, I don't doubt you, just understand your service is the exception, not the norm. Why quit talking about Charter? Maybe the truth will keep some one from making the mistake of subscribing with them. Imagine your worst customer service nightmare and Charter is some where beyond that. I could write a page here on just my last encounter and no one would believe it. It's true sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction.

[pixelthis]

Pix,
The sale through market overtook the rental market along time ago. So the rental market is already off the table in that respect.

Unfortunately there is a huge group of movie collectors that feel VOD is not at high enough quality. Most are delivered as 720p, but the signals are highly compressed which sucks the resolution out of the signal. While some are delivered with DD at 448kbps, that is yesterday audio codec, and the equivalent of DVD. Until VOD can equal the HD DVD or bluray experience, I cannot see the movie collector going this direction.

It would have been easier for cable to sell VOD if people had not seen 1080p video. However it will be very difficult for the cable industry to sell 720p when most televisions going out of the retailers showrooms are 1080p. People are going to gravitate towards 1080p sources to match their 1080p televisions.

While VOD has its advantages, it also has quite a few drawbacks as well. VOD will have to take a huge technical leap if it is going to appeal to quite a few people. Nobody in the movie industry thinks that VOD is going to replace disc anytime soon.

Thats what you get for thinking like a fanboy instead of a man on the street.
Why did people use a crappy system like VHS when there was a much better system available, LASERDISC?
The truth is that most people dont care THAT much for quality, they just want to watch a movie.
And I have stood and watched the results of demos in stores, a lot of everyday people
just dont think the "improvement" is worth the trouble, if they see one at all.
Its like I said, these formats are evolutionary, not revolutionary.
Most movies arent bought by people. they are rented, simply as that.
By people who still mostly have standard def sets with ghosting, "green" people,
etc. You wouldnt beleive some of the things I have seen.
The standards are different for movies you keep as opposed to movies you just want to watch once or twice.
The limitations of VOD are temporary, as bandwidth increases the service will improve.
And it is the future, no more rented out signs, no more not being able to find your movie,
and no more late fees, and cheaper costs.
Some movies I can get IN HD, Those I cant are still very good in the PQ dept.
And nobody thinks that VOD will replace the disc anytime soon?
Are these the same rocket scientists who thought that gaming would'nt exceed movies
ticket sales?
Or that the movie theater business wouldnt ever be in trouble from video and gaming
and the internet? (the number of theaters is shrinking)
Maybe they oughta talk to some of their buddies in the record biz, who are suffereing mightly as the industry is disapearing from under their feet.
Their industry was almost destroyed by kids downloading lossy MP3S.
Most arent bothered by the crappy quality, they'll say its "just as good as a CD".
And the record stores, they are a closin.
AND YOU THINK SELLING "QUALITY" to the masses is gonna fly?
When all of those cheap DVD players on grocery store shelves disapear in a week,
who do you think is buying them?
The biggest problem that first, audiophiles and now videophiles have ever had is getting
enough people to buy quality gear so that THEY could afford it..
Back when audio got started audiophiles had to build their own gear mostly.
IF YOU GET THE PRICE LOW ENOUGH you might make a go at it, but I saw SVHS
vcrs gather dust because they were a few bucks more than vhs. One of the most fun things about my SVHS vcr was when people thought I was watching "live " tv, When I paused or scanned on it they were amazed at the quality of my recorded tapes, but not enough to pay more than a hundred bucks for a "vcr".
I was posting on various forums, talking about how a format war with the new lossless
highq audio discs was a drastic mistake because it would be hard enough to sell "quality"
to enough people when most just want to dl cheap (or free) MP3'S off the web.
And now the same thing is happening in video.
Maybe not with the same results as the last format fiasco, but it wont help.
My main contention is that its a different world, for the first time since the record player
media is no longer tied to physical objects. This is a hugh change, and if media companies dont grasp this major change then they'll be like the dinosaurs looking at the
"pretty" lights from the meteor crater:1:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You are now in the realm of "inventing your own reality". Sony Corp is SELLING the "bundle" I am talking about RIGHT NOW. So let me get this straight. Sony, doesn't give away games. It allows 3rd parties to decide what goes into the "box", then design their own packaging? Then, Sony, takes these retailer re-packs (as you contend), and then sells them on THEIR OWN website, but has NO hand in it? You are much less "in the know" as you profess.

Heres the weblink to the SONY store, (BTW thats actually RUN by Sony, not a 3rd party retailer).

I'll continue to wait for your admission of your own foolishness.

Here's the link if you'd like to pick up a PS3 with the FREE GAME included in the box. Sold by SONY, packaged BY SONY.

http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/Hardware

I can see that you are too stupid to understand the difference between a promotional bundle and a giveaway. Sony does not do giveaways of either games or movies, they do promotional bundles, and the retailers do giveaways.

Promotional bundle= A PS3 and a game or movie within the packaging OR, a coupon for free movies sent in for fullfillment. Sony or the retailer can do these as the game is not scanned by the register, and not listed as a sale.

A giveaway=A PS3 and a free game or movie that is picked out by the consumer, scanned as a sell through at the register, and listed as a sale.

When I say Sony does not do giveaways, that is different from promotional bundles whether it is done by Sony, or by a large retailer.

I hope your little pee brain understands the difference now, so you can give this insignificant point a break.

[PeruvianSkies]

I can see that you are too stupid to understand the difference between a promotional bundle and a giveaway. Sony does not do giveaways of either games or movies, they do promotional bundles, and the retailers do giveaways.

Promotional bundle= A PS3 and a game or movie within the packaging OR, a coupon for free movies sent in for fullfillment. Sony or the retailer can do these as the game is not scanned by the register, and not listed as a sale.

A giveaway=A PS3 and a free game or movie that is picked out by the consumer, scanned as a sell through at the register, and listed as a sale.

When I say Sony does not do giveaways, that is different from promotional bundles whether it is done by Sony, or by a large retailer.

I hope your little pee brain understands the difference now, so you can give this insignificant point a break.

Wow, Sir T you are right, I always wondered why I sat there and looked at the package for so long trying to determine whether or not to buy it, I kept going back and forth, "is this a promotional item or a giveaway?"

The consumer doesn't really care in the matter and your point doesn't hold water, although it does perhaps from the manufacturers standpoint, but the consumer isn't looking at that detail, just the end result, which is "What can I get for free?"

[Groundbeef]

I can see that you are too stupid to understand the difference between a promotional bundle and a giveaway. Sony does not do giveaways of either games or movies, they do promotional bundles, and the retailers do giveaways.

Promotional bundle= A PS3 and a game or movie within the packaging OR, a coupon for free movies sent in for fullfillment. Sony or the retailer can do these as the game is not scanned by the register, and not listed as a sale.

A giveaway=A PS3 and a free game or movie that is picked out by the consumer, scanned as a sell through at the register, and listed as a sale.

When I say Sony does not do giveaways, that is different from promotional bundles whether it is done by Sony, or by a large retailer.

I hope your little pee brain understands the difference now, so you can give this insignificant point a break.

Oh you and Bill Clinton musta gone to Law School I see. It all depends on what "is" means now? So you agree that Sony is GIVING away a game, if they call it a "promotional bundle"? And yet you quibble if I call it a "giveaway". Clearly you will go to any length to NOT admit you are wrong.

Furthermore, I do understand the difference. Perhaps you don't. These are movies/games packaged IN the box. With corresponding box art to reflect the FREE game/movie included IN THE BOX. It requires no additional steps by the consumer. Open the box, ITS THERE. Provided by SONY. This is not a "rebate", or a retailer give away. Go to ToysRUs, BB, Amazon, or the SONY store. Guess, what? Its all the same. Same box, same game/movie. This is not a "pull" from Sony, this is a "Push". They designed the box, packaged it, included the FREE game/movie, and pushed it to the retailer. Perhaps you ought to actually look at the links I provided, and stop relying on your friend who clearly has been left out of the loop.

Several times you have argued (strenously I might add) that Sony NEVER gives away games. Now all of the sudden you realize that you are CLEARLY wrong, and try to split hairs between "Promotional Bundle" and Giveaway. You are a real piece of work.

This entire arguement (this portion of it) is based on your initial claim that :



Do you see them including a free game with it? Nope, it includes free movies..

And you have been proven wrong. You can buy a PS3 from the SONY STORE, with a "Free" game included. Not a movie, a GAME. Its not SpiderMan3, its a GAME. And your wrong counsler, again I might add.

Please, feel free to try and split more hairs. It only makes you look worse than you already do. Also, feel free to let loose with more personal insults. They really have added to the discourse, and your expertise is only glorified.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Thats what you get for thinking like a fanboy instead of a man on the street.

This was totally uncalled for, can you discuss something without the name calling, or is that just a little too mature for you?


Why did people use a crappy system like VHS when there was a much better system available, LASERDISC?

It is called cheaper players, cheaper software. However there was 2 million videophiles that didn't go for VHS. Quality trumps price and convience to this group of people. These people will not be satisfied by VOD at 720p with yesterday audio codec.


The truth is that most people dont care THAT much for quality, they just want to watch a movie.

They may want to watch a movie more than once, especially with children. Do you think the average "street" person wants to pay $4.99 three of four times so the kids can watch Polar Express? I do not think so, they would rather have the DVD, bluray, or HD DVD. Can you travel with VOD? Nope, that is why you have the physical disc. Can you burn a VOD onto a DVD, nope.


And I have stood and watched the results of demos in stores, a lot of everyday people
just dont think the "improvement" is worth the trouble, if they see one at all.
Its like I said, these formats are evolutionary, not revolutionary.

Watching a demo in a store is not going to tell you anything, but it will give you an idea. If someone tells me the difference between 480i and 1080p is just an "improvement" I would say they have never seen true 1080p properly displayed. HD DVD is evolutionary, Bluray is evolutionary, and as the new year kicks in, and we see the additional things bluray can do, it will be very apparent that it is evolutionary.




Most movies arent bought by people. they are rented, simply as that.

Not true at all. The sell through market over took the rental market along time ago. Rentals still account for millions, the sell through market is in the billions.


By people who still mostly have standard def sets with ghosting, "green" people,
etc. You wouldnt beleive some of the things I have seen.
The standards are different for movies you keep as opposed to movies you just want to watch once or twice.

40% of American housholds have a HDTV. The ghosting and "green" displays are not the predominate television out there. What you have seen is represented within your space and time. That is not representive of what is out there in totality.


The limitations of VOD are temporary, as bandwidth increases the service will improve.

Increasing bandwidth is expensive, and let's face it, no work is being directed that way. We are still a long way from widespread VOD usage, and I think everyone in the film industry understands that which is why they still promote disc based media.



And it is the future, no more rented out signs, no more not being able to find your movie,
and no more late fees, and cheaper costs.

Online rentals apparently are doing better than VOD revenue wise. Online rentals wiped out the mom and pop rental stores that often had the problems you listed above. Netflicks has completely reshaped the rental market, and as far as I have seen rented out has not been a problem, being able to find a movie is not a problem, and there is no late fees. At VOD current price level of $4.99 per movie, it will have to drop in price a little more to compete with netflicks.


Some movies I can get IN HD, Those I cant are still very good in the PQ dept.

I cannot argue with anyone personal taste, but VOD does not look all that good to me just yet. And certainly not as good as a HD DVD or Bluray at this point.


And nobody thinks that VOD will replace the disc anytime soon?
Are these the same rocket scientists who thought that gaming would'nt exceed movies
ticket sales?

VOD will replace disc, but only after the quality of VOD exceeds the disc. If you think I am going to give up 1080p and lossless audio for highly compressed 720p and dynamically compressed lossy audio, you are crazy. It will have to improve in quality as most of us are not going backwards, we are looking forward.

When an studio exec looks at the studio revenue from VOD, they only see a flat line since 2004. With 75% of households with broadband(and therefore digital cable) and revenue not growing, that means that VOD is not a growing market at this point. In order for VOD to grow, disc would have to be deemed obsolete. That is not going to happen anytime soon since the sales of HD media on disc(even this early) is way beyond the revenue of VOD which is at least 5 years more mature a market.




Or that the movie theater business wouldnt ever be in trouble from video and gaming
and the internet? (the number of theaters is shrinking)

The movie business is in trouble because of DVD, the high cost of going to the movies, and not enough decent movies coming out of hollywood to support the amount of theaters. Another issue killing off theaters is the overbuilding during the late nineties and early 2000's. Gaming has played no role in the decline of movie theaters. Aside from picture size, the movie theater offers no advantage over the custom built theaters, or a majority of enthusiast hometheaters.


Maybe they oughta talk to some of their buddies in the record biz, who are suffereing mightly as the industry is disapearing from under their feet.
Their industry was almost destroyed by kids downloading lossy MP3S.
Most arent bothered by the crappy quality, they'll say its "just as good as a CD".

The industry is suffering mightly because of quality issues. When the loudness wars began in the late nineties, CD sales began to decline. Excessive compression, constant and persistant clipping of digital signals basically killed sound quality. Amoung audiophiles this is unacceptable, and many went back to vinyl, DVD-A or SACD. The sound quality of heavily compressed CD is no better than MP3


And the record stores, they are a closin.

This is not due to your argument your are presenting, this is due to online sales of CD and records. Convience rules in this case, as does price(online is cheaper), and that is what is killing the local record stores.


AND YOU THINK SELLING "QUALITY" to the masses is gonna fly?

It sold DVD to the public.


When all of those cheap DVD players on grocery store shelves disapear in a week,
who do you think is buying them?

People who bought those same cheap players 6 months before. DVD players used to be components built to last. Then they became throw away items lacking in quality parts, and cost more to fix than they are worth. You ever heard of plan obsolesence? That is what a cheap DVD player are.


The biggest problem that first, audiophiles and now videophiles have ever had is getting
enough people to buy quality gear so that THEY could afford it..
Back when audio got started audiophiles had to build their own gear mostly.
IF YOU GET THE PRICE LOW ENOUGH you might make a go at it, but I saw SVHS
vcrs gather dust because they were a few bucks more than vhs. One of the most fun things about my SVHS vcr was when people thought I was watching "live " tv, When I paused or scanned on it they were amazed at the quality of my recorded tapes, but not enough to pay more than a hundred bucks for a "vcr".

I do not know Pix, there were an awful lot of SVHS players sold when they were available. I had four of them myself. Most of my friends had at least one. What killed SVHS more than anything was the fact the studios refused to support it with high quality movies. If they had, it would have delayed the release of DVD.


I was posting on various forums, talking about how a format war with the new lossless
highq audio discs was a drastic mistake because it would be hard enough to sell "quality"
to enough people when most just want to dl cheap (or free) MP3'S off the web.

The demographic that chooses to DL for free off the web is a different market segment than the HD on disc crowd. MP3 sound on disc would not even equal Dolby digital at 384kbps. One of the most talked about things aside from image quality on HD on disc is lossless PCM audio. I think you will have a hard time telling them that MP3 quality sound for video is worth chasing after(which is what you get from VOD) after they have heard lossless PCM(which all bluray owners have heard)


And now the same thing is happening in video.
Maybe not with the same results as the last format fiasco, but it wont help.
My main contention is that its a different world, for the first time since the record player
media is no longer tied to physical objects. This is a hugh change, and if media companies dont grasp this major change then they'll be like the dinosaurs looking at the
"pretty" lights from the meteor crater:1:

I think you are making this point way too prematurely. Since HD DVD and bluray disc sales combined generates more revenue than VOD, this arguement is impossible to make with any credibility. If what you state is true, then the studios would have jumped all over downloads, and skipped both HD formats altogether. We have not reached the point where discs have become obsolete. When the quality of downloads matches the performace of disc based media, then you may have a point. But people still like own what they pay for. This is especially true since people still do not trust hard drives to store their movies.

VOD and video downloading is going to be the wave of the future, unfortunately that future still is not here.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Oh you and Bill Clinton musta gone to Law School I see. It all depends on what "is" means now? So you agree that Sony is GIVING away a game, if they call it a "promotional bundle"? And yet you quibble if I call it a "giveaway". Clearly you will go to any length to NOT admit you are wrong.

Clearly I know the distinction between the two, and you don't.


Furthermore, I do understand the difference. Perhaps you don't. These are movies/games packaged IN the box. With corresponding box art to reflect the FREE game/movie included IN THE BOX. It requires no additional steps by the consumer. Open the box, ITS THERE. Provided by SONY. This is not a "rebate", or a retailer give away. Go to ToysRUs, BB, Amazon, or the SONY store. Guess, what? Its all the same. Same box, same game/movie. This is not a "pull" from Sony, this is a "Push". They designed the box, packaged it, included the FREE game/movie, and pushed it to the retailer. Perhaps you ought to actually look at the links I provided, and stop relying on your friend who clearly has been left out of the loop.

You are attempting to fuse this in a way that does not reflect the reality of the business. Sorry, you can't do that. There is a distinction between the two for business reasons, whether the process is transparent to the consumer or not.

Since my friend is in the upper levels of management within Sony, I would rather trust what he says, than some game playing hamburger flipper with a cursory knowledge of the gaming business. Posting links does not make your point if you do not understand what you are linking. Your first link was to a contest, the second to a bundling. You posted none that exibitied a "giveaway" situation. In box are bundles, out of box chosen from the store is a giveaway. Offers for free disc to be mailed in are giveaways.


Several times you have argued (strenously I might add) that Sony NEVER gives away games. Now all of the sudden you realize that you are CLEARLY wrong, and try to split hairs between "Promotional Bundle" and Giveaway. You are a real piece of work.

This is not splitting hairs at all. This is understanding and differentating one from another. If all of us glossed over details like you do just for convience, we would be just as ignorant and stupid as you are about the process. The devil is in the details, you skip the details, and you don't know crap.






And you have been proven wrong. You can buy a PS3 from the SONY STORE, with a "Free" game included. Not a movie, a GAME. Its not SpiderMan3, its a GAME. And your wrong counsler, again I might add.

You can chose to call it free, I choose to call it what the industry calls it. Bundled. Now, if it will make you feel better to call me wrong, do it. I imagine calling me wrong is probably a high point of your life.


Please, feel free to try and split more hairs. It only makes you look worse than you already do. Also, feel free to let loose with more personal insults. They really have added to the discourse, and your expertise is only glorified.

And you can continue to gloss over and fuse things together just so you can personally comprehend the issues. When you only have one brain cell, I guess this ability is an advantage for you. And by the way, I am unconcerned about how I look to you for obvious reasons.

[Groundbeef]

Since my friend is in the upper levels of management within Sony, I would rather trust what he says, than some game playing hamburger flipper with a cursory knowledge of the gaming business. Posting links does not make your point if you do not understand what you are linking. Your first link was to a contest, the second to a bundling. You posted none that exibitied a "giveaway" situation. In box are bundles, out of box chosen from the store is a giveaway. Offers for free disc to be mailed in are giveaways.

This is not splitting hairs at all. This is understanding and differentating one from another. If all of us glossed over details like you do just for convience, we would be just as ignorant and stupid as you are about the process. The devil is in the details, you skip the details, and you don't know crap. .

No, your trying to hide in the details. Again, I take you back to your original quote of:




Do you see them including a free game with it? Nope, it includes free movies.

You are aware that the game "Motorstorm" is published by Sony Computer Entertainment no? And you are aware in the "Motorstorm" bundle, that they are not CHARGING for the game no? So it is a "giveaway". They are NOT charging for it. They are giving it away. A Sony Product "bundled" in with the PS3. Again, you are wrong, but would rather look like a fool than admit it.

You orginally contend that Sony didn't "include" a free game with the PS3. When proven wrong you attempt to quote your "friend" who says Sony doesn't give away games. Again, wrong.

Now you are trying to pretend that somehow by "bundling" the game with a PS3, that Sony is really "giving" it away. Quite amusing really.

And I didn't forget about the 40GB. It was never an issue that Sony was giving away a movie with the PS3. But you are correct. Sony is both "giving" away either a movie or a game. Again, you are wrong about Sony never "including" a game with the PS3.





And you can continue to gloss over and fuse things together just so you can personally comprehend the issues. When you only have one brain cell, I guess this ability is an advantage for you. And by the way, I am unconcerned about how I look to you for obvious reasons.

Again with the personal attack. Well, I guess when you have no argument, the best you can do is insult. Thats ok, I know when I have beaten you when you have nothing other than lame beef jokes, or cracks about brain power. You have overplayed your hand once again.

You need to kick back, relax, and pop a BR into you Gaming Machine, and veg out. It might do your blood pressure some good.

[PeruvianSkies]

No, your trying to hide in the details. Again, I take you back to your original quote of:



You are aware that the game "Motorstorm" is published by Sony Computer Entertainment no? And you are aware in the "Motorstorm" bundle, that they are not CHARGING for the game no? So it is a "giveaway". They are NOT charging for it. They are giving it away. A Sony Product "bundled" in with the PS3. Again, you are wrong, but would rather look like a fool than admit it.

You orginally contend that Sony didn't "include" a free game with the PS3. When proven wrong you attempt to quote your "friend" who says Sony doesn't give away games. Again, wrong.

Now you are trying to pretend that somehow by "bundling" the game with a PS3, that Sony is really "giving" it away. Quite amusing really.

And I didn't forget about the 40GB. It was never an issue that Sony was giving away a movie with the PS3. But you are correct. Sony is both "giving" away either a movie or a game. Again, you are wrong about Sony never "including" a game with the PS3.





Again with the personal attack. Well, I guess when you have no argument, the best you can do is insult. Thats ok, I know when I have beaten you when you have nothing other than lame beef jokes, or cracks about brain power. You have overplayed your hand once again.

You need to kick back, relax, and pop a BR into you Gaming Machine, and veg out. It might do your blood pressure some good.


I think he is getting a bit overloaded because now several of us are not in agreement with him and he can't seem to keep up with all of it, so instead of retreating in defeat he lets his ego do all the talking.

The thing is that all of us are knowledgeable people on various levels and sometimes there are not absolute truths when it comes to certain things, just highly opinionated viewpoints, which is why heated debates like this exist in the first place and of course like that scene from Reservoir Dogs, everyone wants to be MR. BLACK and no one wants to backdown, so we all just rant and rave back and forth and nothing gets settled.

[Groundbeef]

I think he is getting a bit overloaded because now several of us are not in agreement with him and he can't seem to keep up with all of it, so instead of retreating in defeat he lets his ego do all the talking.

The thing is that all of us are knowledgeable people on various levels and sometimes there are not absolute truths when it comes to certain things, just highly opinionated viewpoints, which is why heated debates like this exist in the first place and of course like that scene from Reservoir Dogs, everyone wants to be MR. BLACK and no one wants to backdown, so we all just rant and rave back and forth and nothing gets settled.

Not much of a viewpoint here. He says Sony doesn't include games with the PS3. They do, and now he's in a box. And instead of being the better man, and graciously admitting he is wrong he would rather attempt to assisinate the messenger that pointed out his error.

[PeruvianSkies]

Not much of a viewpoint here. He says Sony doesn't include games with the PS3. They do, and now he's in a box. And instead of being the better man, and graciously admitting he is wrong he would rather attempt to assisinate the messenger that pointed out his error.

Don't worry I'll be like Clint Eastwood in the movie IN THE LINE OF FIRE and jump in front of the bullet, I have a vest on!

[GMichael]

Don't worry I'll be like Clint Eastwood in the movie IN THE LINE OF FIRE and jump in front of the bullet, I have a vest on!

What good will that down vest do you in this case?

[PeruvianSkies]

What good will that down vest do you in this case?

Well, I guess keep the battle raging on.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

No, your trying to hide in the details. Again, I take you back to your original quote of:



You are aware that the game "Motorstorm" is published by Sony Computer Entertainment no? And you are aware in the "Motorstorm" bundle, that they are not CHARGING for the game no? So it is a "giveaway". They are NOT charging for it. They are giving it away. A Sony Product "bundled" in with the PS3. Again, you are wrong, but would rather look like a fool than admit it.

You orginally contend that Sony didn't "include" a free game with the PS3. When proven wrong you attempt to quote your "friend" who says Sony doesn't give away games. Again, wrong.

Now you are trying to pretend that somehow by "bundling" the game with a PS3, that Sony is really "giving" it away. Quite amusing really.

And I didn't forget about the 40GB. It was never an issue that Sony was giving away a movie with the PS3. But you are correct. Sony is both "giving" away either a movie or a game. Again, you are wrong about Sony never "including" a game with the PS3.





Again with the personal attack. Well, I guess when you have no argument, the best you can do is insult. Thats ok, I know when I have beaten you when you have nothing other than lame beef jokes, or cracks about brain power. You have overplayed your hand once again.

You need to kick back, relax, and pop a BR into you Gaming Machine, and veg out. It might do your blood pressure some good.

If what you think is so true, then why is there completely different terminology for bundling and for giveaways.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_%28marketing%29

Giveaways are what is done with ALL bluray players. You get 5 free movies with every bluray player purchased. These are usually chosen by the consumer. A bundle is a combination of products chosen by the retailer or manufacturers that comes with no choice for the consumer. These are two completely different concepts to most folks. A bundle is in package, a giveaway is out of the package. This should not be hard for even the most stupid to understand.

I hope all of the immature bravado is making you feel better about yourself.

Game machines don't play blurays, and obviously you don't think.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Not much of a viewpoint here. He says Sony doesn't include games with the PS3. They do, and now he's in a box. And instead of being the better man, and graciously admitting he is wrong he would rather attempt to assisinate the messenger that pointed out his error.

I would not waste my time with the messenger. I said Sony does not GIVEAWAY games, I did not say Sony does not BUNDLE games. Big difference to the those who understand detail, no difference to the ones that can't think they're way out of a paper bag.

I never used the word include ever.

[bobsticks]

Is the cost from the manufacturer to the retailer different between the bundle and the standard package?

[PeruvianSkies]

Is the cost from the manufacturer to the retailer different between the bundle and the standard package?

I am not sure, but again I must emphasize this point...

What difference does it make to those buying it whether it was a GIVEAWAY or BUNDLE ...they are only thinking about the free stuff, that's the selling point.

[Groundbeef]

Is the cost from the manufacturer to the retailer different between the bundle and the standard package?

NO.

This is a semantics game, and Sir T knows it. The game is MotorStorm. Its published by Sony Computer Entertainment, and included with a PS3. He can claim that its a "bundle" (and it is-no disagreement on that). However, what he wants to pretend is that Sony isn't "giving" the game away. (And they are).

Again, the entire portion of the debate started when Sir T made the false claim that :



Do you see them including a free game with it? Nope, it includes free movies.

He has since been proven wrong, but continues to whine about how a "bundle" is different than a "giveaway". Regardless of what Wiki has to say on the matter, Sony DOES include a free game with some PS3's (thats why it's a GAME MACHINE that happens to play BR movies).

Rather than simply say "Hey, I was wrong about that", he has attempted to belittle, insult, and smoke the arena to hide his error. It takes quite an "expert" to go down that path.

I would actually have agreed with him if retailers were taking a PS3, scanning it, then getting a game from the shelf, scanning it, and voiding the price. Then he would be correct, and there would be no discussion. But thats not the issue, and he is wrong to continue to argue. It only makes him look less of an expert.

[bobsticks]

I am not sure, but again I must emphasize this point...

What difference does it make to those buying it whether it was a GIVEAWAY or BUNDLE ...they are only thinking about the free stuff, that's the selling point.

While I have not had the stamina to read the preceeding tomes in their entirety, it seems as if the issue of contention is whether "Sony is giving away free games". It seems to me that if the retailer is baring the burden of an increased cost for the goods at a lesser margin or same retail price then it's actually the retailer that is giving away games. The picking of nits and a matter of semantics to be sure, but technically correct.

I would agree, however, that the motivation of the consumer is strictly based on the greatest utility at the lowest cost.

[Groundbeef]

While I have not had the stamina to read the preceeding tomes in their entirety, it seems as if the issue of contention is whether "Sony is giving away free games". It seems to me that if the retailer is baring the burden of an increased cost for the goods at a lesser margin or same retail price then it's actually the retailer that is giving away games. The picking of nits and a matter of semantics to be sure, but technically correct.

I would agree, however, that the motivation of the consumer is strictly based on the greatest utility at the lowest cost.

In the "bundle" format there is NO increased cost to the retailer. Margins are already razor thin on consoles (according to a manager I know at a couple game shops) they typically only make a few $$ on the actual console. Thats why they pimp the extended warrenty, extra controllers, and the games.

This is different than say BB selling the PS3, and then "giving" the consumer a free game off the shelf. In that instance the retailer WOULD be giving away the games. However, this isn't the case. This is a PS3 with a FREE Sony made game included.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Wow, Sir T you are right, I always wondered why I sat there and looked at the package for so long trying to determine whether or not to buy it, I kept going back and forth, "is this a promotional item or a giveaway?"

The consumer doesn't really care in the matter and your point doesn't hold water, although it does perhaps from the manufacturers standpoint, but the consumer isn't looking at that detail, just the end result, which is "What can I get for free?"

Well Mr racist, I wasn't aware that you could think actually. Since Sony is a manufacturer, I was speaking from their point of view. And I did say that to the consumers all of this is the same from their perspective. Maybe thinking and reading is beyond you, as it is beyond most racists.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

In the "bundle" format there is NO increased cost to the retailer. Margins are already razor thin on consoles (according to a manager I know at a couple game shops) they typically only make a few $$ on the actual console. Thats why they pimp the extended warrenty, extra controllers, and the games.

This is different than say BB selling the PS3, and then "giving" the consumer a free game off the shelf. In that instance the retailer WOULD be giving away the games.

Hence giveaway right?



However, this isn't the case. This is a PS3 with a FREE Sony made game included.

Bundle, and that is fundementally different from a giveaway. You understand the concept completely, which is why I think you are arguing just for the sake of an arguement. If that is the case, I am through wasting my time with you. This is the second time I have wasted my time with your stupidity, and it will be the last I assure you.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I think he is getting a bit overloaded because now several of us are not in agreement with him and he can't seem to keep up with all of it, so instead of retreating in defeat he lets his ego do all the talking.

Racist, I debated your stupid azz, GB stupid azz, and nightliar stupid azz all at the same time. None of you agreed with me. Nightliar is on hiatus for now, you haven't offered a damn thing to debate, and GB can be handled when he is not just being a retard. It would take far more than your three can deliver to overload me, so let's not get this thing twisted.

Now you just muddle along back with your racist idealogies, and cut the online pyscho analysis unless you want to do it on yourself. Maybe you can figure out that everyone within a single race is not cut out of the same cloth.

[PeruvianSkies]

In the "bundle" format there is NO increased cost to the retailer. Margins are already razor thin on consoles (according to a manager I know at a couple game shops) they typically only make a few $$ on the actual console. Thats why they pimp the extended warrenty, extra controllers, and the games.

This is different than say BB selling the PS3, and then "giving" the consumer a free game off the shelf. In that instance the retailer WOULD be giving away the games. However, this isn't the case. This is a PS3 with a FREE Sony made game included.

Yes indeed, I used to work in similar situations and there were often times where the store would eat the profit here and there to generate sales upfront.

[PeruvianSkies]

Well Mr racist, I wasn't aware that you could think actually. Since Sony is a manufacturer, I was speaking from their point of view. And I did say that to the consumers all of this is the same from their perspective. Maybe thinking and reading is beyond you, as it is beyond most racists.

I am far from racist, you are just overly sensitive to the truth, which is why what I said offended you and I was only pointing out what my hispanic said as a generalization of her culture, which you seemed to fit well, it's not my fault that you fit the stereotype.

[PeruvianSkies]

Racist, I debated your stupid azz, GB stupid azz, and nightliar stupid azz all at the same time. None of you agreed with me. Nightliar is on hiatus for now, you haven't offered a damn thing to debate, and GB can be handled when he is not just being a retard. It would take far more than your three can deliver to overload me, so let's not get this thing twisted.

Now you just muddle along back with your racist idealogies, and cut the online pyscho analysis unless you want to do it on yourself. Maybe you can figure out that everyone within a single race is not cut out of the same cloth.

So now you are insulting mentally retarded people? That's real nice. Talk about a new low.

[JSE]

Good freaking God. I read this whole thread. :out:

BR, HDDVD....... whatever. They will both be obsolete within 5 years when everything will be able to be obtained online through itune-like providers or cable/sat providers. Within 5 or so years, you will just click on which movie you want and download it, store it on hard drive and be done with it. The film vs. digital revolution in the photography world is a perfect example of this. CD vs. mp3? Same thing. How are CD sales doing lately?

JSE

[musicman1999]

There will always be people that refuse to accept mediocre quality when high quality is available.Ever compare a cd to an mp3, mp3 suck quality wise.Downloads may at somepoint many years from now replace rentals.


bill

[pixelthis]

Good freaking God. I read this whole thread. :out:

BR, HDDVD....... whatever. They will both be obsolete within 5 years when everything will be able to had online through itune-like providers or cable/sat providers. Within 5 or so years, you will just click on which movie you want and download it, store it on hard drive and be done with it. The film vs. digital revolution in the photography world is a perfect example of this. CD vs. mp3? Same thing. How are CD sales doing lately.

JSE


Kinda simplistic, but basically what I have been saying for awhile.
As for MP3 there are a lot of codecs that dont sacrifice quality, Mp3 really came about in a 56k world. There are non-lossy types like FLAC and APE.
Thinking that you have to sacrifice "quality" is the mantra of those opposing this view,
while there are the wrecks of dozen of companies that have gone broke trying to sell "quality" to the masses.
Those who populate boards like this one tend to be an exception, which is why I have been saying that we need Blu Ray TO "WIN" THIS FORMAT WAR.
Last time a crappy video system won over a better one and we were stuck with it for a few decades. DOESNT matter if the audio or video-phile faces reality or not, this hobby rides on a sea of mediocrity, mass production gives us the economies of scale to build decent gear from the parts of more mediocre machines.
If HDDVD or a similar inferiour format wins this we will be stuck with it, and any "high end"
product will be limited by the tech it came from.
the business model of the future will be VOD and downloading, for rental, and maybe ONE format of high q for archiving "collections" that people for some reason dont want on hard drive, but something more permanent. Theres only gonna be room for one format,
indeed there doesnt need to be any more than one.
The only question is, which one?:1:

[JSE]

There will always be people that refuse to accept mediocre quality when high quality is available.Ever compare a cd to an mp3, mp3 suck quality wise.Downloads may at somepoint many years from now replace rentals.


bill


I don't think it will be many years. It's already starting. I know a lot of people who download movies and store them on hardrives, ipods, DVDs, etc. These are the "masses" that support and drive the market. Like Pix said, people like us on boards are the exception. There are far far more people out their who will give up some quality for covenience. I agreed downloads are not the same quality as Blueray or HDDVD but they probably will be at some point or they will at least be good enough that even more people will switch. SACD and DVD Audio and even CD have been killed by mp3. People have choosen convenience and "decent" quality over superior formats. Why would video be any different? If I were BR or HDDVD, I would drop the price of players like a rock while the "getting is still good" and video download is still in the "infant" stages. The longer people hold off on buying these players due to price is the longer they will have to discover video download. I really think BR and HDDVD have a fairly small window of opportunity here and they are blowing it.

And for the record, I would prefer BR or HDDVD became and stayed the standard for a long time. I, like most people here, want quality.

And, to whoever gave me a red chicklet for going off topic in this thread and did not have the balls to ID themselves, screw you. If your gonna give a red chicklet, be man or women enough to sign it. I don't mind getting red chicklets, I just can't stand cowards.

[johnny p]

[QUOTE=JSE
And for the record, I would prefer BR or HDDVD became and stayed the standard for a long time. I, like most people here, want quality.

.[/QUOTE]


AMEN! I can't commit to buying the BR b/c I feel less confident about it...... and I don't want to buy a cheaper HD b/c I want to hold the hope that BR will win out!

[pixelthis]

AMEN! I can't commit to buying the BR b/c I feel less confident about it...... and I don't want to buy a cheaper HD b/c I want to hold the hope that BR will win out!

I love this JSE guy.

But while I am a blu fanboy I would be willing to accept HDDVD if it were the only format tommorrow. I think this "format" war is that destructive.
We need ONE format NOW.
And while blu is superiour I will accept anything that gets us to the next step:1:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I am far from racist, you are just overly sensitive to the truth, which is why what I said offended you and I was only pointing out what my hispanic said as a generalization of her culture, which you seemed to fit well, it's not my fault that you fit the stereotype.

You are a racist. How do we know that you have a hispanic wife? We don't. So you are too stupid to realize that you cannot make generalization on a whole race when the generalization is a human character issue, not a race issue.

Like I said to before, George W. Bush is arrogant, does not admit he is wrong. He is a white male, are all white males like that? No. So you cannot assume that all puerto ricans males are like that as well. Are you really this stupid?

What you have essentially said is that because I am a white male, I am perfect and that is why my wife married me. If she believes this, she is stupid. If you believe this, you are more stupid.

Actually I am glad you said it, now I know amoug other things you are a racist idiot.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Good freaking God. I read this whole thread. :out:

BR, HDDVD....... whatever. They will both be obsolete within 5 years when everything will be able to be obtained online through itune-like providers or cable/sat providers. Within 5 or so years, you will just click on which movie you want and download it, store it on hard drive and be done with it. The film vs. digital revolution in the photography world is a perfect example of this. CD vs. mp3? Same thing. How are CD sales doing lately?

JSE

JSE, P2P traffic is already overloading comcast's system to the point they are slowing down traffic, or cutting P2P entirely through their network. If all of comcast customers suddenly switch to downloading, the internet would be clogged beyond belief.

What if you hard drive crashed? Generally download sites do not allow you to re-load or replace you movies you lost. So you have to pay for it again. Do you really think consumers will go for that? I don't.

I do not think the film vs digital revolution is a good comparison. I didn't require any additional capacity to switch from film to disc. It didn't require a consumer to choose convience over quality.

Disney, Sony, Paramount, Warner and Sony just completed a study on the feasibility of downloading movies over the internet. According to this report(I just got my copy via email yesterday) the internet as we currently know it would not be able to support mass downloading of movies. Our speeds are too slow, surveys show that people do not watch movies on their computers, and there is no easy way to get a movie from your computer to your television. We are currently stuck at 720p and the studios would like to see that raised to 1080p. Bob Chapek has said that when downloading can look and sound better than disc, and have the same protections as disc, then Disney would give up disc for downloading. We are not even close to that possiblity right now, and they say it would be about a decade before we get there.

[Groundbeef]

Disney, Sony, Paramount, Warner and Sony just completed a study on the feasibility of downloading movies over the internet. According to this report(I just got my copy via email yesterday) the internet as we currently know it would not be able to support mass downloading of movies. Our speeds are too slow, surveys show that people do not watch movies on their computers, and there is no easy way to get a movie from your computer to your television. We are currently stuck at 720p and the studios would like to see that raised to 1080p. Bob Chapek has said that when downloading can look and sound better than disc, and have the same protections as disc, then Disney would give up disc for downloading. We are not even close to that possiblity right now, and they say it would be about a decade before we get there.

Although Disney won't give up disc for downloading, they are toying with downloading. You are able to get some Disney Films on the XBOX Live network.

And, you are correct most people don't watch movies on their computer. Apple TV is somewhat convient, the XBOX 360 is way more convienent (already attached to the TV).

Interestingly enough, just today Sony announced that its going to be launching a service in 2008 to 'rival' Itunes, and Live. We shall see how that works, but it appears Sony is going to try and leverage its many divisions into one unified "network".

[johnny p]

I'm stuck with 720p and compared to my old tube T.V. and bunny ears, it's a big improvment, so as far as the Downloading, Blu Ray vs. HD DVD etc. etc. etc. I have the luxury of an empty wallet preventing me from being a trailblazer in any one new format or technology currentlyon, or in the near future, on the market......

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Although Disney won't give up disc for downloading, they are toying with downloading. You are able to get some Disney Films on the XBOX Live network.

You are correct on this. From what I understand, it isn't doing so well revenue wise for them either.


And, you are correct most people don't watch movies on their computer. Apple TV is somewhat convient, the XBOX 360 is way more convienent (already attached to the TV).

I just read in TV predictions that only about 30% of XBOX360 owners are hooked up to HDTV's. They also stated that only 15% are hooked up to a 5.1 sound system. Those figures are going to have to rise considerable if XBOX live is going to grow in the future, and get the studio to release more content to it.


Interestingly enough, just today Sony announced that its going to be launching a service in 2008 to 'rival' Itunes, and Live. We shall see how that works, but it appears Sony is going to try and leverage its many divisions into one unified "network".

I think it is smart. They have a movie studio, Universal Music is a BR exclusive supporter as is Disney and Fox, I am sure Warner would want to have access to the 3 million PS3 out there. We'll see how that works out.

[JSE]

JSE, P2P traffic is already overloading comcast's system to the point they are slowing down traffic, or cutting P2P entirely through their network. If all of comcast customers suddenly switch to downloading, the internet would be clogged beyond belief.

Exactly!

That's why Comcast and other providers such as AT&T which I use are looking at ways to expand their networks. They see the problem and are going to address it. They have to expand to keep up with technology. It will happen, it's just a issue of how long and how.



What if you hard drive crashed? Generally download sites do not allow you to re-load or replace you movies you lost. So you have to pay for it again. Do you really think consumers will go for that? I don't.

Absolutely they will. The digital imaging revolution IS a perfect example of this. Consumers faced the same thing with digital imaging and that issue barely even registered in cosumer's minds. If you loose the image file, it's gone. People still adopted digital at a record pace. Film has been all but reduce to a niche format now. There are many ways to backup your images today and the same can and is being down with digital music and video files. I have my main hard drive and a 5 other hard drives to backup my work. I also use online storage sites as well as DVDs. None of these are full proof but redundancy provides security. However, the average digital camera user never thinks about file safety and really does not care or does not know enough to care. It's a shame but it's reality. Those of us that do care or earn money from photography take the necessary steps to protect our work.


I do not think the film vs digital revolution is a good comparison. I didn't require any additional capacity to switch from film to disc. It didn't require a consumer to choose convience over quality.

I will assume you are speaking from the providers point of view. That's the only way that statement makes some sense. However, the digital imaging revolution is still a perfect example. When digital cameras first came out, consumers chose convenience over qaulity for several years. It was not until the 5/6MP cameras came out that a digital file could hold up against a film negative in a 4x6 print. That took what? Maybe 4 to 5 years to get to that point? So yes, they absolutely did choose convenience over quality for some time.


Disney, Sony, Paramount, Warner and Sony just completed a study on the feasibility of downloading movies over the internet. According to this report(I just got my copy via email yesterday) the internet as we currently know it would not be able to support mass downloading of movies. Our speeds are too slow, surveys show that people do not watch movies on their computers, and there is no easy way to get a movie from your computer to your television. We are currently stuck at 720p and the studios would like to see that raised to 1080p. Bob Chapek has said that when downloading can look and sound better than disc, and have the same protections as disc, then Disney would give up disc for downloading. We are not even close to that possiblity right now, and they say it would be about a decade before we get there.


I agree with everything except how long it will take to get there. I think it will be much sooner. In the end, it's really not up to the studios. It's really up to the consumer. The studios can take whatever stance they want but it won't slow down progress. Technology will advance and again people will sacrafice some quality for convenience and keep downloading movies. Cable/Sat/Hardware/Software companies will and are seeing this and they will find a way to make it happen. The music companies got their butts handed to them by mp3 and there was not a darn thing they could do about it.

[Woochifer]

Good freaking God. I read this whole thread. :out:

BR, HDDVD....... whatever. They will both be obsolete within 5 years when everything will be able to be obtained online through itune-like providers or cable/sat providers. Within 5 or so years, you will just click on which movie you want and download it, store it on hard drive and be done with it. The film vs. digital revolution in the photography world is a perfect example of this. CD vs. mp3? Same thing. How are CD sales doing lately?

JSE

JSE, you ignorant fool! (tryin' to wriggle a red pill outta 'ya! :cornut: )

Actually, I used to agree with your point on downloads. But, now I'm a lot more skeptical because all of the movie downloading schemes out there are tied to some form of DRM and/or have an expiration date attached. Because of these limitations, to me downloads are more of a substitute for PPV and rentals. Cable providers already offer PPV and on-demand services, so this is merely an extension of an existing market.

If anything, the DVD transformed the home video market from a rental model to a sell-through model, and this dynamic won't change if the studios continue to saddle down movie downloads by attaching self-destruct dates and not allowing the files to freely transfer between devices.

The music market is different because music has always created a great demand for portability, and it's that demand for having music on the go is what IMO sparked the MP3 revolution. On the audio side, the trend is more towards smaller and more portable. On the video side though, the trend is towards bigger screens and higher resolution. The decline in CD demand has many many factors behind it (the rise of the DVD format being one of them), and not all of them apply to the home video market.

[Woochifer]

Hey! My cheap ploy worked! Ask and ye shall receive! I just noticed that my reputation has moved below the 3-greenie mark! Terrence, that downward race to the 1-greenie reputation is ON! :cornut:

P.S. I just noticed that the new red pill (geez, received within a minute of my post!) is unsigned. JSE, I thought our intervention had cured you of that anonymous chiclet dealing addiction! :5:

[Groundbeef]

You are correct on this. From what I understand, it isn't doing so well revenue wise for them either. .

Frankly, I'm not really all that suprised. The Disney offerings are "sparce" at best, mostly years old, and certainly not top shelf. Lots of "Aladin 2" and other crap. If they would release some more current Disney films, I think they would be doing better. I think MS wants to capture some of the "youth" video market, but Disney hasn't given them top shelf material.

Most of the other films on Live are current, and better offerings.



I just read in TV predictions that only about 30% of XBOX360 owners are hooked up to HDTV's. They also stated that only 15% are hooked up to a 5.1 sound system. Those figures are going to have to rise considerable if XBOX live is going to grow in the future, and get the studio to release more content to it. .

I would surmise that the numbers are simliar to that for PS3 owners. As much as we (you and I) argue about this topic, I think we could agree on that. I remember reading that approximatly 40% of PS3 owners don't even realize it plays BR movies. After all, Sony didn't include the crappy composite (yellow) video cable for nothing.

I'm not sure if it is requisite though for consumers to be attached to either a HDTV/5.1 sound to d/l movie content though. Granted, the experience (visual and audio) would be better, but not necessary. Just a high speed connection.




I think it is smart. They have a movie studio, Universal Music is a BR exclusive supporter as is Disney and Fox, I am sure Warner would want to have access to the 3 million PS3 out there. We'll see how that works out.

Yes, we shall see. If they can pull it off, it would be a wise move. However, based on some of the recent delays with other PS3 offerings in the online arena I'm not really very optimistic about it. Remeber "Home"? That was supposed to be out 3 quarters ago. They keep pushing back the Beta. That's not a good sign.

[JSE]

Hey! My cheap ploy worked! Ask and ye shall receive! I just noticed that my reputation has moved below the 3-greenie mark! Terrence, that downward race to the 1-greenie reputation is ON! :cornut:

P.S. I just noticed that the new red pill (geez, received within a minute of my post!) is unsigned. JSE, I thought our intervention had cured you of that anonymous chiclet dealing addiction! :5:


Twas not me! I think I have only given 1 red chicklet our so far and it was to Joe Bialek (sp?). If I ever do give someone a reddy, I will sign it. Plus there are certain people on this board that I would probably never give a red chicklet to becasue I respect them and their point of views (even when they are wrong :yikes: ) based on my years here. Your one of them BTW.

Anyway, in regard to your prior post,

I can agree with you to a point but I think the industry will change. When is the question. I think it will be sooner than later and that's why I think Blueray and/or HDDVD will diminish in significance within 5 years or so. I don't doubt one of them will become the standard format for a physical product (disc) , I just think the product will take the same path that CDs are now. The sales will dwindle and online downloading will take over once the technology catches up.

[GMichael]

I remember reading that approximatly 40% of PS3 owners don't even realize it plays BR movies. After all, Sony didn't include the crappy composite (yellow) video cable for nothing.
.

My HD-DVD player came the same way. Go figure.

[drseid]

My HD-DVD player came the same way. Go figure.

Yes, agreed... When I gave my parents their HD-A2 I bought them, I had to also include some component cables for their HDTV with it because I noticed it does not come with *those*. How stupid... selling an HD player with only a *composite* cable (no HDMI either).

---Dave