-
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeruvianSkies
Please enlighten me on the English language.
At my age there simply isn't enough time:(
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
At my age there simply isn't enough time:(
What a shame.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
I do not think the bluray camp is convinced that VC-1 is all that. Sony, and I know Disney for sure really like AVC. Also keep in mind that Microsoft get's royalties for VC-1 which why you probably will never see a Sony bluray product using VC-1.
That is a Sony issue only. From talking with Paidgeek from Bluray.com Sony is selling the PS3 to retailers so they make a small(very small) profit from the PS3. Sony appears to be taking the loss themselves. It seems lately that sales of standalones seems to be going bluray way as well. I think that its largely because of the visible floor space devoted to bluray as opposed to HD DVD.
I think anyone who has bought a cheap DVD player knows that the quality just isn't there. Keep in mind, HD DVD has always been cheaper than bluray, however a cheap price hasn't landed more players in the field versus bluray. Studio commitment is really VERY important when you use price as a talking point. At this point cheap chinese players are vaporware since there has been no official announcement of there release. The Venturers will NOT be sold in Walmart or Target, and unsure whether Best Buy will carry them. This makes it difficult to guage whether they will sell in sufficiently large numbers to make a difference this holiday season.
I think your word on the streets is not accurate at all. Warner is making a profit doing both formats, but they are not going to commit to doing this long term. Warner is going to look at software sales to see where the most sales are made. Titles they have released to both formats already has shown to favor bluray at a 2:1 clip, 300 had a wider ratio and still selling well on bluray. Facts do not support your contention that HD DVD has the upper hand in studio support. When you look world wide, you will find more studio's support bluray than HD DVD, especially within the european market where there has been several studios that went neutral as a result of bluray's larger player base. Don't think the studio are not looking at world wide player penitration of players.
I would also like to add that it doesn't make much sense to pay Paramount $150 million dollars to quit supporting bluray if Warner intended on going HD DVD exclusive in 2008. They could have kept the money and gained a studio. This action tells me that someone in the HD DVD camp could be going neutral at the beginning of the year, not someone going exclusive to them. The fact that the HD DVD PG courted Warner with a rather large offer, and was rebuffed points to the fact that Warner doesn't want to leave a single dollar on the table.
Point taken on Microsoft and VC-1.... I disagree about its inferiority to any of the other encodes (and I personally prefer it to MPEG-2 unless a very high bitrate is used on a dual-layer BR disc). That said, I am sure HD DVD chose that for the same reason Sony chose MPEG-2 for BR... royalties. I doubt picture quality had much to do with it for either camp... although MPEG-2 would not work well for HD-DVD at all due to the lower disc layer space.
As for the PS3, I never claimed it was a loss leader for retailers. Rather I said it was no margin king, and I maintain that. The retailers make their money on the games (and so does Sony, for that matter).
As for the Venturer HD DVD player, I have heard differently about Walmart carrying it. I have heard they will indeed, and BB may (but it is not confirmed to the best of my knowledge). Target I am sure you are right when you say they are out, but I dont believe they have made any formal statement either.
In the case of Warner going to HD DVD exclusive, next year will let us know who is right, but I am highly confident I am on this one. They have always been a strong HD DVD supporter, and their jettisoning of a key person in charge of the dual format strategy only strengthens my belief here. Even many BR supporters on the boards are preparing for this. Of course it is all speculation until an announcement is made either way next year. Warner has gone on record saying that they have received offers from both sides... now they just need to decide what is in their best interest after the holiday season.
As for 300, it is a bad example sales comparison-wise IMO because the HD DVD was a combo disc that cost $5 more than the BR. I, like most others who loathe combo discs (at a higher price point) always will buy the BR version of a title when they offer the HD DVD that way. I personally believe the combo disc is not long for this world... terrible idea, IMO unless the pricing is the same. Warner and others have to know this by now.
As for Worldwide... China is the big fish, and with CH DVD, they have in essence decided to support HD DVD as the players are compatible with the format (and the reverse appears true as well for US sales). It is true they are vaporware right *now*, but come later this year in China, and next year in the US they will not be. Again, I maintain Joe6pack will indeed buy these cheap players -- especially at a sub $100 street price point. They may complain about the cheap quality in time, but in the short-run it will equate to market penetration for HD DVD (or so I believe) as it will be an inexpensive way to not only play their DVDs, but HD DVDs as well for the studios that offer them.
The BR player lead on standalone players is for a month, and I am quite confident it will be short-lived if not already gone by now... that said, I could be wrong. Again, only time will tell if this is a short-lived anomaly as I believe, or a trend as you do... We shall see.
Lots of fun ahead for both formats... I am still angry that the two sides could not come to an agreement in the first place like most (I too remember VHS vs. Beta and was on the Beta side), but as things stand now I don't think either side is in a position to even consider declaring victory in the forseeable future.
---Dave
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
That is a Sony issue only. From talking with Paidgeek from Bluray.com Sony is selling the PS3 to retailers so they make a small(very small) profit from the PS3. Sony appears to be taking the loss themselves. This is the reason retailers do not mind devoting a good size space for the PS3. If they didn't make a profit from it, then you would only see it offered on the retailers website, much like HD DVD players are on Walmarts and Targets but not in their stores.
Can't really argue the rest of your points because I really don't know enough to argue either way.
However, this particular point needs some clarification. I am friends with both a manager at BB, and a friend who is a manager of a GameStop store. Hardware sales account for very little profit. We are talking maybe $5-10 per console. Thats for the console. Retailers don't make much if anything on them. Thats why they try to load you up on games, accessories, and the extended warrenty. This is for both the PS3 and the XBOX 360.
So, its not really true that small profit dictates shelf space entirely. Retailers are probably making at least the $5-10 per console on a dedicated HD-DVD player.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by drseid
Point taken on Microsoft and VC-1.... I disagree about its inferiority to any of the other encodes (and I personally prefer it to MPEG-2 unless a very high bitrate is used on a dual-layer BR disc). That said, I am sure HD DVD chose that for the same reason Sony chose MPEG-2 for BR... royalties. I doubt picture quality had much to do with it for either camp... although MPEG-2 would not work well for HD-DVD at all due to the lower disc layer space.
Let's get the internet spread FUD out of the way first. This is no direct connection to inferior picture quality with the combination of BD-25 and MPEG-2. This is misinformation at the highest order(not saying you started it). Here is a bluray title review with both MPEG-2, BD-25, and a comparison of the same movie on HD DVD with VC-1
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/failuretolaunch.html
Notice these key words in this paragraph
Oddly, they continue to use different codecs for the different formats, with the Blu-ray getting the MPEG-2 treatment, and HD DVD getting VC-1. Despite this difference, both transfers come from the same master, are presented in 2.35:1 widescreen and 1080p video, and look identical.
Here is another two:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/chronos.html
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/tony...anclassic.html
So it's not the combination of MPEG-2 and BD-25 that leads to picture quality problems, its poor print condition.
MPEG-2 and HD DVD don't mix. You do have to have to use a higher bitrate with MPEG-2, and HD DVD maximum video bitrate is only 29.4mbps which with the combination of this codec, and alot of action, would exceed the bit budget of the system. VC-1 is perfect for HD DVD.
Quote:
As for the PS3, I never claimed it was a loss leader for retailers. Rather I said it was no margin king, and I maintain that. The retailers make their money on the games (and so does Sony, for that matter).
I think this is a minor point not worth debating over.
Quote:
As for the Venturer HD DVD player, I have heard differently about Walmart carrying it. I have heard they will indeed, and BB may (but it is not confirmed to the best of my knowledge). Target I am sure you are right when you say they are out, but I dont believe they have made any formal statement either.
“We have no plans to have Venturer in our stores this holiday,” Wal-Mart merchandise spokeswoman Melissa O’Brien said. “We will continue to offer the best values on popular HD DVD and Blu-ray products from leading consumer brands like Sony, Samsung, Philips, Toshiba and RCA.”
http://www.videobusiness.com/index.a...leid=CA6473655
Target has made their position known as well:
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/07/26/ta...ay-as-the-way/
Quote:
In the case of Warner going to HD DVD exclusive, next year will let us know who is right, but I am highly confident I am on this one. They have always been a strong HD DVD supporter, and their jettisoning of a key person in charge of the dual format strategy only strengthens my belief here. Even many BR supporters on the boards are preparing for this. Of course it is all speculation until an announcement is made either way next year. Warner has gone on record saying that they have received offers from both sides... now they just need to decide what is in their best interest after the holiday season.
I think you have some of your facts twisted. Steve Nickerson is a former employee of Toshiba, and a major proponent of HD DVD. His public face says he was a proponent of neutrality for Warner, however those within the industry know he is very pro HD DVD. His departure does not represent Warner's impending exclusivity. Warner is a major member of the BDA, and probably the only studio making a profit from neutrality. They also have been paying big attention to the sales figures of their titles released on both formats. WE both know where that stands. Warner is going to remain neutral because it makes good business sense for them. Bluray movies are outselling HD DVD currently YTD at a 61:39 percent here in the states. In Europe its 70:30 YTD. In Japan its 94:6 YTD. I do not think Warner will ignore this.
Quote:
As for 300, it is a bad example sales comparison-wise IMO because the HD DVD was a combo disc that cost $5 more than the BR. I, like most others who loathe combo discs (at a higher price point) always will buy the BR version of a title when they offer the HD DVD that way. I personally believe the combo disc is not long for this world... terrible idea, IMO unless the pricing is the same. Warner and others have to know this by now.
Unfortunately you cannot dismiss what you don't like. I like to deal with the facts. Both formats got the release, bluray outsold HD DVD by more than 2:1, and 300 is still the top selling bluray disc, outselling even the newest HD DVD releases after more than a month on the market. Cost aside, the facts are there.
Quote:
As for Worldwide... China is the big fish, and with CH DVD, they have in essence decided to support HD DVD as the players are compatible with the format (and the reverse appears true as well for US sales). It is true they are vaporware right *now*, but come later this year in China, and next year in the US they will not be. Again, I maintain Joe6pack will indeed buy these cheap players -- especially at a sub $100 street price point. They may complain about the cheap quality in time, but in the short-run it will equate to market penetration for HD DVD (or so I believe) as it will be an inexpensive way to not only play their DVDs, but HD DVDs as well for the studios that offer them.
You and I know that CH-DVD and HD DVD are not compatible. They are based on simular designs, but they are not compatible formats. That's a fact, an undisputable fact. The fact that they are based on simular designs doesn't necessarily mean that HD DVD will benefit from its manufacture. As of now, cheap chinese players are vaporware, and cannot be debated within the contexted of current events. Cheap players will only move joe6pack to buy when ALL studio support a single format. Nobody wants to buy a brick, not even a cheap brick. Considering all the bad press that the Chinese manufacturing sector has received recently, the American consumer may just pass these players up, cheap price and all. We'll see though.
We both agree that China is a big fish, and at IFA 2007 China Hualu, the only consumer electronics company owned by a branch of the Chinese government joined the BDA.
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/...28&newsLang=en
This is not vaporware, it has already happened.
Quote:
The BR player lead on standalone players is for a month, and I am quite confident it will be short-lived if not already gone by now... that said, I could be wrong. Again, only time will tell if this is a short-lived anomaly as I believe, or a trend as you do... We shall see.
Geeze, this is a powerful statement to make considering no one knows how long a sales lead is going to continue unless they can predict the future. The HD DVD PG should hire you right away!!!
Quote:
Lots of fun ahead for both formats... I am still angry that the two sides could not come to an agreement in the first place like most (I too remember VHS vs. Beta and was on the Beta side), but as things stand now I don't think either side is in a position to even consider declaring victory in the forseeable future.
---Dave
I am angry as well. However my anger is more strongly directed at Toshiba, because when Sony approached Toshiba and Warner with the idea to begin working on HDM on disc, Toshiba rebuffed them saying, and I quote" There are not enough HDTV in the field to even begin working on this". When Toshiba saw that Sony began organizing a pre-BDA group of manufacturers and studios that went ahead with developement on which is now called bluray, they rushed THEIR idea before the DVD forum for adoption. Quite a few companies(including the one I work for) obstained from voting on HD DVD. The most common reason stated was this forum was designed for the promotion of the DVD format, not a high definition format. Also many of those same companies were already envolved in the developement of the Bluray format. Sony had already given in and withdrew their specs for the developement of the DVD format, and Toshiba could have done the same this time around if it weren't for their desire to continue getting the same kind of royalties it is currently getting from the DVD format. In the end, both sides greed made it impossible to unify.
We disagree without even calling each other names. This has to be a presidence of some sort in the history of this war online.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
Can't really argue the rest of your points because I really don't know enough to argue either way.
However, this particular point needs some clarification. I am friends with both a manager at BB, and a friend who is a manager of a GameStop store. Hardware sales account for very little profit. We are talking maybe $5-10 per console. Thats for the console. Retailers don't make much if anything on them. Thats why they try to load you up on games, accessories, and the extended warrenty. This is for both the PS3 and the XBOX 360.
So, its not really true that small profit dictates shelf space entirely. Retailers are probably making at least the $5-10 per console on a dedicated HD-DVD player.
I did say they are making a small profit, though I do not know what that amount is. So a standalone HD DVD player gives them the same profit as a PS3. Interesting....
One of my close friends is a manager at a best buy near me. He says that the profit they can make DOES determine the amount of shelf space they will give. Maybe it doesn't for gaming machines, but that is certainly true of televisions, DVD players, appliances and various other goods.
-
Ahem, with all due respect, Sir Terrence,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
First, it is stupid to market two formats that essentially do the same thing. There is no history of any disc based media that do indentical things coexisting.
Well I'd mention Intel & AMD, but those aren't exactly disks. But if we have to limit it to disk wars, isn't wat you describe exactly how the SACD & DVD-A feud unfolded? And some brick-owning die-hards would argue, it still rages on. If I remember right (thanks bobsticks for reminding us), DVD-A came late to the party, eventually had the larger catalog, including more hit/modern titles, more shelf-space in the stores, more support with disk-player manufacturers, and well, they just about fizzled out, now. All the while, SACD, like the proverbial turtle racing the hare, slowly but surely won the race (if you can call it a win). This recent scenario should be reason enough to remind us that format wars, like tribal conflicts, don't always end quickly or completely.
By the way, there are currently 3453 laserdisks for sale on eBay, including over 300 new ones.
Sir T., I certainly respect your insight into this industry and I can't argue against the numbers. But I've also learned that sudden changes, shifts, and product announcements can make a huge difference in volatile markets. What if there was an embarrassing corporate scandal at Sony or Disney? What if Microsoft software all of a sudden stopped working with BR disks because of some "bug"? Or how about if Venturer or another Chinese manufacturer made a cheap BR player instead, and it was a real hit, sent BR player sales tumbling and Panasonic and Samsung were to throw in the towel instead?
I know it's a stretch but it could happen. Or how about this one, and I'm really just shooting in the dark here - wild speculation at best - a new war were to suddenly start somewhere in the world and it affected transportation, production, or the financial markets? I mean, I'm really reaching for straws here, but let's just presume for the sake of argument, that such a wild, distant possibility would just happen to affect, oh, I dunno, electronic sales over the holiday season?
Anyhow, what I'm trying to say is that:
1. Format wars don't always end suddenly,
2. A lead in one format, however large or apparent, can always change,
3. Seemingly unrelated events, especially sudden ones, can dramatically change markets.
Hence the reason that most of the buying public is just going to wait this one out. And the real danger for both formats and the companies that support them, is that a third option emerges and makes the former two obsolete. That third option, IMO, is HD downloads.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightflier
Well I'd mention Intel & AMD, but those aren't exactly disks. But if we have to limit it to disk wars, isn't wat you describe exactly how the SACD & DVD-A feud unfolded? And some brick-owning die-hards would argue, it still rages on. If I remember right (thanks bobsticks for reminding us), DVD-A came late to the party, eventually had the larger catalog, including more hit/modern titles, more shelf-space in the stores, more support with disk-player manufacturers, and well, they just about fizzled out, now. All the while, SACD, like the proverbial turtle racing the hare, slowly but surely won the race (if you can call it a win). This recent scenario should be reason enough to remind us that format wars, like tribal conflicts, don't always end quickly or completely.
No comparison to SACD and DVD-A. Both formats were stillborn at birth. SACD was because there were no post processing tools for either the studio, on in the players. Secondly it didn't have the support of the major record companies, and that goes for DVD-A as well. DVD-A didn't do well because they couldn't deliver 24/96khz multichannel on a consistant basis, and often what was sold didn't sound any better than CD, but just added surround. Neither was easy to hookup to anyone's receiver because of copy protection. Thirdly, the consumer wants and wanted mobile audio, audio they could put on a pocket player and run. Neither audio format could do this.
HD DVD and Bluray do have industry support and can be hooked up to all current receivers. Apples and oranges comparison.
I think you are under the impression that one camp has to fold up and blow away for the other to win. Nope, that is not the case. One will be the dominate format and will continue to grow. The other will not disappear overnight, but it will not get the best titles, and from a studio perspective will not be well supported. Players may continue to sell to play disc already purchased, but it will not grow. That could play out for years even with the war officially over. The studios want this war over, the manufacturers want this war over, and to spir consumer interest in HDM on disc, this war has to be over quickly before the public is totally turned off.
Quote:
By the way, there are currently 3453 laserdisks for sale on eBay, including over 300 new ones.
And not a single player manufactured in 10 years, which is why there are 3453 laserdisc for sale.
Quote:
Sir T., I certainly respect your insight into this industry and I can't argue against the numbers. But I've also learned that sudden changes, shifts, and product announcements can make a huge difference in volatile markets. What if there was an embarrassing corporate scandal at Sony or Disney? What if Microsoft software all of a sudden stopped working with BR disks because of some "bug"? Or how about if Venturer or another Chinese manufacturer made a cheap BR player instead, and it was a real hit, sent BR player sales tumbling and Panasonic and Samsung were to throw in the towel instead?
A corporate scandal at Sony or Disney is not going to change their market strategy, or their support of Bluray. It would take the collaspe of the entire bluray superstructure to do that(you can throw Fox in as well). Microsoft does not have a single finger in the bluray camp, so the real question is What if HDi suddenly stopped working in HD DVD players because of bugs in the software? There are several chinese manufacturers that will be making bluray players in the future. They were welcomed into the BDA already. Have cheap chinese DVD players stop Panasonic and Samsung from making DVD players?
Quote:
I know it's a stretch but it could happen. Or how about this one, and I'm really just shooting in the dark here - wild speculation at best - a new war were to suddenly start somewhere in the world and it affected transportation, production, or the financial markets? I mean, I'm really reaching for straws here, but let's just presume for the sake of argument, that such a wild, distant possibility would just happen to affect, oh, I dunno, electronic sales over the holiday season?
The all sales of electronics would suffer, but it wouldn't stop either camp at this point from pushing their format
Quote:
Anyhow, what I'm trying to say is that:
1. Format wars don't always end suddenly,
2. A lead in one format, however large or apparent, can always change,
3. Seemingly unrelated events, especially sudden ones, can dramatically change markets.
Hence the reason that most of the buying public is just going to wait this one out. And the real danger for both formats and the companies that support them, is that a third option emerges and makes the former two obsolete. That third option, IMO, is HD downloads.
1. I understand, and have never stated that this war would end suddenly. However the war does not have to suddenly end for a victor to emerge.
2. When a industry(the studios) decide who they want to support, there is no change. See DIVX vs regular DVD on that one. Once the studios choose regular DVD, DIVX died never to return.
3. These same events would harm EVERYONE, not just bluray or HD DVD.
The infrastructure for downloads is a looooong way off. Industry survey's already indicated movie downloads already are losing steam. For HD movies the internet would have to be faster with no bottlenecks, consumer would have to have several terabytes of storage, and a way to get it there. Downloads would have to be able to offer 1080p, seemless branching, PIP, and be able to handle VERY large file sizes. It will be quite a few years before that happens. Whatever format is left standing has plenty of years to mature.
I think most of the public is waiting this out because there is no full studio support for either format, and software prices are still too high. I do not think player prices play too much into this because DVD prices were still quite high at this point in their history, and people were buying them left and right.
I am not dismissing your points. However these points have already been argued ad naseum over the last six or so months.
-
Hd downloads as a viable option are at least 10 years away for the general public.In the U.S. the average download speed is less than 2 MBPS ,here in Canada we are about 5MBPS
but in Japan it is about 60 MBPS.So we here in North America have a long way to before this is a viable alternative in large scale numbers.
bill
-
I'm gonna take a walk on the wild side and state the obvious.....In the infamous words of my father, "It's not about the money,...but it's about the money!" The "bottom line" is the virtue here guys. Regardless of which camp is selling more software and/or hardware, it's about profitability. Believe me when I tell you, if another format hits the market that has very similar video quality and cost the studios less money to produce it and it cost the manufacturer's less money to build the hardware to play the new format, then both HD DVD and BD will go the way of the Dodo! An example....VMD (Versatile Multi-Layer Disc) is on the horizon, and is being considered by both studios and manufacturer's. I'm not saying that VMD is going to take the world by storm, but Paramount understood the overall cost of producing BD, and opted to go exclusively HD DVD. Even with the $150 million payout, they saw it would cost them less going HD DVD than staying with BD. One more thing, marketing is everything. Hey, when I think of a hamburger, Mikey D's comes to mind. Doesn't make the Big Mac the best burger out there, but the damage has been done. McDonald's is burned into memory. Maybe not to that extent, but sony understands this notion better than anyone. Market the product to the 10th power, and you have a good chance of taking the market no matter how mediorce your product is! Not saying that Blu ray is mediorce, but the process/cost can easily put it in that category. I'm talking "Cost justification!" The difference between DVD vs. VHS and HD DVD vs. BD is, there was no comparison between DVD and VHS. A moron could see the benefits of DVD over VHS. Kind of like the what happened when the CD came to the market. When BD and HD DVD hit the market, DVD is still in it's heyday! DVD's are still outselling the HD formats by an obscene margin! Consumers, although curious about the new formats are for the most part content with standard DVDs and the with the onslaught of upconverting/upscaling dvd players, which offer hi-def-like quality, allows the consumer to hold off and wait for the dust to settle. Which allows for the infiltration of less costly upstart format developers. Imagine a disc that uses a red laser instead of a blue one, has 50 GB storage capacity, and the manufacturing cost was no more than that of the average dvd! It's coming! Everything that was said in the previous posts are valid points and articulated well, but the bottom line again....is the MONEY!
There were a lot of "What if's" in there, but that's where it starts. The idea!
One more example of how the consumer mentality can shift.....remember when the DVD Recorder hit the market? Pioneer introduces it to the consumer market for $4 large! 4 thousand dollars!:mad2: It took at least 4 years before the dvd recorders could be had for less than $300. By then it was too late. Tivo hit the market. It was hot until the cable and satellite companies developed the DVR. Panasonic, Philips and Pioneer had a brainstorm and put hard drives into the dvd recorders, but again, too late. I know I'm missing other developments during that time, like Hi def and DVD-/+RW blank media and the like...but hopefully you see where I'm going. Change is inevitable in this industry. And anything can happen. One man's brain dead theory could be another man's epiphany into greatness!
Regards!
-
A word on Laserdisc....
I own roughly 100 LD's still, I only got rid of titles once a DVD edition was released that was superior to the LD, so why do I still have 100 or so LD's? Because they still retain value to me and have yet to be beaten by a superior format in some way, shape, or form. I know that I have recited this information before, but I'll say it again... These are some prime examples of LD's that are still highly sought after, and for good reason.
BLADE DTS edition - the last DTS Laser produced and there still is no DTS on any edition of the film on DVD released inside the US, I do however have the Japanese DTS edition, but it cost me severely to get. The DTS on the LD is thicker though than the Japanese DVD import.
RONIN DTS edition - another great DTS offering on LD that again has not been issued inside the US on DVD with DTS, although there is a nice DTS edition in the UK of the film. Currently going for $85 on eBay btw.
SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (Criterion Ed.) - superb 2.0 stereo soundtrack that is thicker and more pronounced than the 5.1 mix on the Sp. Ed. DVD.
BRAM STOKERS DRACULA (Criterion Ed.) the only version of the film with color accuracy that was approved by Coppola.
TAXI DRIVER (Criterion Ed.) only version of this film that includes an incredibly commentary track by Scorsese to date.
THE ABYSS (THX Laserdisc set) still has superior surround sound mix over the 5.1 on the DVD.
These are just some examples and there are still hundreds of titles on LD that still have yet to be issued on DVD.
So why is this 'obsolete' format still desirable to some on eBay and other outlets? Well, because you can A. buy them cheap and B. there are still dozens and dozens of titles that are superior to anything to date on another format and are worth tracking down.
-
Sir T, I should comment on your last statement first before addressing your individual points...
I too understand your anger at Toshiba -- this whole thing could have been avoided with some people thinking more sanely... I actually was a BR supporter before I switched to neutral with an HD DVD bias. BR had all the better specs on paper, and as you have rightly pointed out previously, more studio support and more manufacturer support. It appeared to be a relatively easy choice...
The reason for my switch and subsequent anger at BR and particularly Sony, is due to their lack of support for quality early on in their release schedule. HD DVD beat them to market with a lot of glitches in the players (and a few software ones as well), but I thought Sony et al were taking their time and getting it right... Then came their early BR release of "The Fifth Element" a film that was used by many for DVD as a reference standard... and they obviously used either a poor master or just did a sloppy overall job as the disc was called a disaster by many (including me as I got it for free with my player). This, after all the delays and wait and high prices was a big letdown for me and many others... Then there was "The House of Flying Daggers"... etc. One poorly done BR release after another. In the meantime, the player costs were $1000+ versus half that for HD DVD. The HD DVDs by comparison were relatively well-mastered (although they have had some clunkers too, of course). I think BR lost a lot of the early adopters right then and I personally have still not forgiven the format even though at this point I view the picture quality to be just as good as HD DVD (although no better). Bottom line is Toshiba went out of their way to improve their glitchy players early on, and the HD DVD group released primarily quality releases (from a video and audio perspective). In any case that is my take on why I am where I am today with respect to format support.
Now to discuss your other points...
In the case of MPEG-2 Vs. VC-1 or AVC etc. I am not saying VC-1 is superior, but rather it is better suited for lower volume space applications. Some of the early BR releases were hampered by single layer MPEG-2 transfers on a long movie that needed more space to breathe in order to maximize performance for the MPEG-2 format... Either that or they were just poorly mastered, of course. You used an example of one film. Longer films may have fared differently... It is irrelevant anyways, because now if you have a long film, BR can just use a dual layer 50GB disc. So the point really is moot. Bottom line is both formats can look just as good as the other when they are properly mastered on the right amount of disc layers.
As for the Venturer release information I stand corrected. Please accept my apologies.
In the case of 300, I stand by my comments on it being a poor example, IMO. It is not a matter of like or dislike... it is a matter of comparing apples to apples. Take the "Planet Earth" box set... That is a better comparison. Check the results on that and you get a different answer. It all comes down to what you look at.
That said, it is unquestioned that your facts are correct in overall sales, and that is a more accurate indicator. Of course all of these numers are from *before* the Paramount switch, so we will have to see if HD DVD makes a strong comeback in time as that plays out.
As for CH DVD and HD DVD being compatible... I never said that. What I *did* say was I believed China's taking on CH DVD was good for HD DVD. I believe this because I have read the CH DVD players can play HD DVDs too (*backward* compatibility). If this proves to be true, then I would say it is indeed good news for HD DVD. I guess we will see.
As for predicting the future... I am working on it, but unfortunately I keep on making errors. ;-) Still trying...
Seriously though, while I cannot see the future any better than anyone else, I do have a very good "gut feeling" instinct, and get it right *most* of the time. That is not to say this will be one of them of course... My gut tells me that the Paramount switch will turn the tide in standalone player sales back to HD DVD when coupled with HD DVD's relatively low pricing. Again, I can't predict the future, but the facts do seem to indicate I have a good chance of being right here. Again, it wouldn't be the first time I predict something wrong based on current trends, but I trust my business instincts.
Finally, with respect to Warner... That one we will just have to agree to disagree. I may have to eat a bit of humble pie in February of next year (maybe more than a bit), but I truly believe I am right on this one... Time will tell, and I certainly respect your beliefs to the contrary, and your reasoning for those beliefs.
Regards,
---Dave
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeruvianSkies
I own roughly 100 LD's still, I only got rid of titles once a DVD edition was released that was superior to the LD, so why do I still have 100 or so LD's? Because they still retain value to me and have yet to be beaten by a superior format in some way, shape, or form. I know that I have recited this information before, but I'll say it again... These are some prime examples of LD's that are still highly sought after, and for good reason.
So why is this 'obsolete' format still desirable to some on eBay and other outlets? Well, because you can A. buy them cheap and B. there are still dozens and dozens of titles that are superior to anything to date on another format and are worth tracking down.
I confess I have kept my entire LD collection too. In my case, discs like Le Grand Chemin (The Grand Highway) are classics I too can't find elsewhere.
LD unfortunately never really caught on, but I still have a large place in my heart for it...
---Dave
-
I will also have to "agree to disagree" with you on this one...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
No comparison to SACD and DVD-A. Both formats were stillborn at birth. SACD was because there were no post processing tools for either the studio, on in the players. Secondly it didn't have the support of the major record companies, and that goes for DVD-A as well. DVD-A didn't do well because they couldn't deliver 24/96khz multichannel on a consistant basis, and often what was sold didn't sound any better than CD, but just added surround. Neither was easy to hookup to anyone's receiver because of copy protection. Thirdly, the consumer wants and wanted mobile audio, audio they could put on a pocket player and run. Neither audio format could do this.
HD DVD and Bluray do have industry support and can be hooked up to all current receivers. Apples and oranges comparison.
This I have to disagree with - our money-grubbing society seems way to eager to dismiss the lessons of just yesteryear, perhaps better said by Santayana: "those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it." The fact is that SACD and DVD-A provide perhaps the most accurate comparison to what could very well unfold with this format war.
First of all, they where not at all stillborn at birth, whatever that means. I remember the lively discussions online about each format's supposed superiority, the sizable catalog for DVD-A that made me drool because I chose SACD, and the almost weekly growth, albeit very short lived, in shelf space at places like Tower, Fry's, GG, and others. There was a time, not too long ago when every record company was considering the formats and DVD-A was the clear leader, much like BR is now. SACD was first out of the gate, but they just didn't have the catalog or the rock and new releases that DVD-A could boast about. This sounds a whole lot like what I'm reading here about BR. By the way, much of the fear-mongering about SACD processing and DVD-A's 24/96Hz inconsistencies had been laid to rest, if not technically, at least in the marketplace, when both formats really seemed to take off.
I also remember reading articles about these formats being the perfect storm, just as we were reaching a market saturation of surround sound systems in people's homes. The argument went that these formats were riding the wave of HT buying witnessed across the industry. And let's not forget that while Laserdisk players are no longer made, more and more quality players are being introduced supporting SACD and to a lesser extent DVD-A.
So what happened? you nailed it on the head: you could not copy them. Yes, we can argue ad-infinitum about whether that was truly their undoing, but the more interesting comparison here is that no one really has hacked HD-DVD or BR in a way that can be widely exploited. And for all the evils that bootlegging might conjure up, from starving artists to links to terrorism and drugs to the possibility that it will grow hair on the palms of your hands, we cannot ignore the possibility that this may be any format's greatest impediment to market saturation. After all, it was the very reason DOS & Windows spread like wildfire throughout the world, that blank cassette sales outnumbered original recording sales in some years, and that, regardless of what the MPAA/RIAA may want you to believe, it made American pop culture the world standard from the deepest jungles of Indonesia to the plateaus of the Andes.
This is where the greatest threat to these formats is, IMO: downloaded content. Downloads' greatest advantage over the greedy copy protection schemes (remember the Sony root-kit scandal?) of HD-DVD and BR, is convenience. I will even go so far as saying that below-DVD quality content such as what is growing like wildfire with the iMovie and the X-box, is eating into the profits of the hi-def formats. Ask any average Joe at BB or CC, what they would like more: unlimited and free access to 24 episodes via download at standard TV quality or the complete collection on HD-DVD / BR at outrageous cost to his pocketbook? It wouldn't even be about the money either. If he even knows what these formats are, he'll prefer the convenience of just clicking a few buttons on the remote and watch 6 episodes, commercial-free in a row than having to get up to switch disks. Heck, he'll probably prefer having it on his iPhone! This doesn't even get into the discussion of which format average Joe would choose.
The bottom line is that this format war is killing hi-def - like the proverbial snake eating its own tail. Decades off? I doubt it. If Japan has 60Mb/s download speeds (I believe that's enough for a full BR download in about 5 minutes), then it's only a matter of a few short years before the iMovie/x-box subscriptions start offering usable HD content for download here in the US. Given all the other stuff that is going on in the world right now that will distract people in the coming year, this x-mas season is crucial. I'll paraphrase from Drumline: "whatever the beef is between those two, they better grill it up and eat it," because if they don't, there's an eager new drummer sitting on the sidelines who can dance circles around them.
-
Correct me if I am wrong....
I thought (and I admit I could be wrong on this) that the DTS-CD's were first to be issued as a 5.1 system for music, then DVD-Audio was issued, which required a DVD-Audio machine to play the entire disc (a la MLP tracks) and then SACD slowly crept in sometime after this. I recall having many DVD-A's before any SACD's were issued, but maybe I am wrong.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by drseid
Sir T, I should comment on your last statement first before addressing your individual points...
I too understand your anger at Toshiba -- this whole thing could have been avoided with some people thinking more sanely... I actually was a BR supporter before I switched to neutral with an HD DVD bias. BR had all the better specs on paper, and as you have rightly pointed out previously, more studio support and more manufacturer support. It appeared to be a relatively easy choice...
I jumped on the HD DVD bandwagon first. Bought the A1 and several discs. The player could not play any of them without glitches or freezes. Returned it and got a second A1. It did exactly the same thing, but in completely different places on each disc. By the time I was ready to return the second player, Toshiba came out with the second generation players. I returned the A1, paid a little extra, and got a X-A2. It had a faster load up(but still slow), but had lip sync'ing issues and glitches. Worse, Toshiba's customer service was inept and incompetent. It took three calls to get the first firmware upgrade, and 4 to get the second. By the time all of this took place, I was turned off by Toshiba, and quit buying HD DVD. The quit buying part became a wise choice because the picture quality of recent universal titles made it easy to make that decision.
Quote:
The reason for my switch and subsequent anger at BR and particularly Sony, is due to their lack of support for quality early on in their release schedule. HD DVD beat them to market with a lot of glitches in the players (and a few software ones as well), but I thought Sony et al were taking their time and getting it right... Then came their early BR release of "The Fifth Element" a film that was used by many for DVD as a reference standard... and they obviously used either a poor master or just did a sloppy overall job as the disc was called a disaster by many (including me as I got it for free with my player). This, after all the delays and wait and high prices was a big letdown for me and many others... Then there was "The House of Flying Daggers"... etc. One poorly done BR release after another. In the meantime, the player costs were $1000+ versus half that for HD DVD. The HD DVDs by comparison were relatively well-mastered (although they have had some clunkers too, of course). I think BR lost a lot of the early adopters right then and I personally have still not forgiven the format even though at this point I view the picture quality to be just as good as HD DVD (although no better). Bottom line is Toshiba went out of their way to improve their glitchy players early on, and the HD DVD group released primarily quality releases (from a video and audio perspective). In any case that is my take on why I am where I am today with respect to format support.
SPHE did start off rather poorly on the software side, but their players are a hell of alot more stable than HD DVD players. I have had the Samsung, Panasonic, Pioneer and the PS3(I ended up keeping this) in my system at any given time without a single burp or fart. And of the more than 175 bluray titles I have, I may have several with poor picture quality(from the neutral studios) but my remaster copy of The Fifth Element is beautiful, not to mention sounds off the hook.
Quote:
Now to discuss your other points...
In the case of MPEG-2 Vs. VC-1 or AVC etc. I am not saying VC-1 is superior, but rather it is better suited for lower volume space applications. Some of the early BR releases were hampered by single layer MPEG-2 transfers on a long movie that needed more space to breathe in order to maximize performance for the MPEG-2 format... Either that or they were just poorly mastered, of course. You used an example of one film. Longer films may have fared differently... It is irrelevant anyways, because now if you have a long film, BR can just use a dual layer 50GB disc. So the point really is moot. Bottom line is both formats can look just as good as the other when they are properly mastered on the right amount of disc layers.
From the reports I have received from a Sony insider, the issue has never been disc space or MPEG-2, it was the print quality. So they instituded a policy that they would rather delay a release, than to encode it with a poor print. Disney and Sony have the highest composite picture and sound scores of all studio releasing on both formats. The results were gleaned from average PQ and SQ taken from 10 review sites. Universal and Paramount sit at the bottom.
Quote:
As for the Venturer release information I stand corrected. Please accept my apologies.
Dave, apologize for what? Not knowing something? Eh, not even necessary bro.
[quoteIn the case of 300, I stand by my comments on it being a poor example, IMO. It is not a matter of like or dislike... it is a matter of comparing apples to apples. Take the "Planet Earth" box set... That is a better comparison. Check the results on that and you get a different answer. It all comes down to what you look at.[/quote]
What could be more apples to apples than a single title that was released on both formats. The cost difference is offset when you consider the HD DVD had more extra's than the bluray version. The difference is sales of the Planet earth boxset doesn't even come close to the difference in sales of 300. Now when you compare sales of titles from neutral studios other than the two we mention, bluray still outsells HD DVD by at LEAST 2:1, and sometimes a even larger ratio. Planet Earth is the only title of which HD DVD has outsold bluray. That is very telling.
Quote:
That said, it is unquestioned that your facts are correct in overall sales, and that is a more accurate indicator. Of course all of these numers are from *before* the Paramount switch, so we will have to see if HD DVD makes a strong comeback in time as that plays out.
Well, Paramount will have Transformers, and that title will do VERY well. Universals titles are doing extremely poorly. Their lack of attention to quality, and the lack of the use of Dolby trueHD is really hurting them bad. If one looks at trends, catalog titles(with the exception of Disney and Sony) overall are only average. Almost all of bluray's releases are day and date with the DVD, and sales done this way tend to do pretty well. HD DVD gained nothing from Paramounts exclusivity, Paramount was already serving them with titles. I cannot see where they will increase sales for HD DVD. With Fox stepping back in and releasing 16+ titles, that makes up exactly what Paramount had intended for bluray until the end of the year. If Paramount was a BR exclusive, then its switch would have probably had more impact on HD DVD sales. But I cannot see how a studio that was already serving you will increase your sales.
Quote:
As for CH DVD and HD DVD being compatible... I never said that. What I *did* say was I believed China's taking on CH DVD was good for HD DVD. I believe this because I have read the CH DVD players can play HD DVDs too (*backward* compatibility). If this proves to be true, then I would say it is indeed good news for HD DVD. I guess we will see.
No, CH-DVD cannot play HD DVD. That is incorrect information. The modulation scheme is different, and it doesn't support any of our codecs. The optical will read an HD DVD disc, but after the optical everything becomes incompatible. The disc's they manufacture will not play in a HD DVD. Besides based on the link I provided, it looks like both camps have major players in that market.
Quote:
As for predicting the future... I am working on it, but unfortunately I keep on making errors. ;-) Still trying...
Flunked it in high school, and gave up tryin!
Quote:
Seriously though, while I cannot see the future any better than anyone else, I do have a very good "gut feeling" instinct, and get it right *most* of the time. That is not to say this will be one of them of course... My gut tells me that the Paramount switch will turn the tide in standalone player sales back to HD DVD when coupled with HD DVD's relatively low pricing. Again, I can't predict the future, but the facts do seem to indicate I have a good chance of being right here. Again, it wouldn't be the first time I predict something wrong based on current trends, but I trust my business instincts.
I do not go by my gut feelings. They are too easily swayed by my biases. I go by my insider information contacts I have developed within the studio community. Facts always over rule my gut. If you just deal with the FACTS, and keep our biases aside, I cannot see where Toshiba has laid the ground work for HD DVD long term success. The fact that neither Toshiba nor Microsoft has access to a film library means they will have to continue to pay studio's for supporting HD DVD. Toshiba Japan will no longer fund any North American Toshiba HD DVD operations, so Toshiba America is basically on their own. Sony, Disney and Fox will not support HD DVD because of the lack of region coding, and additional layers of protection on their intellectual property. Without these guys, I cannot see where HD DVD future is secure.
Quote:
Finally, with respect to Warner... That one we will just have to agree to disagree. I may have to eat a bit of humble pie in February of next year (maybe more than a bit), but I truly believe I am right on this one... Time will tell, and I certainly respect your beliefs to the contrary, and your reasoning for those beliefs.
Regards,
---Dave
As a very influentual member of the BDA, I cannot see Warner walking away from BR. My sources tell me that Warner is really under pressure from its parent company to make more money. They cannot do that exclusively supporting a format with a much smaller player base and substantially lower sales as a result. Warner is very much aware of its image amoung consumers, and I just don't think they will jepordize this by pulling support from bluray. Paramount on the other hand has so angered so many BR supporters, that they have vowed to not purchase Paramount's DVD's. Toshiba really should leave Warner alone and really pay attention to Universal. Universal's disc sales are miserable right now, and have never been that great since HD DVD inception. They don't have a single title in the top twenty, or the top 50 for that matter in sales. The Ultimate Bourne is their only big title for Christmas, and they cannot release a single Steven Spielberg movie as an exclusive title. Even Universal has openly stated that they are under considerable pressure from THEIR parent company to improve the Studio's performance. I also have it from my sources that their technical staff has been touring bluray replication facilities for the last year. If Universal goes neutral(which I suspect they will), then this fully explains why Toshiba went after Paramount with so much money. Why would you spend $150 million bucks to get a studio NOT to support bluray if you were already going to have another larger one going exclusive in your favor?.
Such intrigue......
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeruvianSkies
I own roughly 100 LD's still, I only got rid of titles once a DVD edition was released that was superior to the LD, so why do I still have 100 or so LD's? Because they still retain value to me and have yet to be beaten by a superior format in some way, shape, or form. I know that I have recited this information before, but I'll say it again... These are some prime examples of LD's that are still highly sought after, and for good reason.
BLADE DTS edition - the last DTS Laser produced and there still is no DTS on any edition of the film on DVD released inside the US, I do however have the Japanese DTS edition, but it cost me severely to get. The DTS on the LD is thicker though than the Japanese DVD import.
RONIN DTS edition - another great DTS offering on LD that again has not been issued inside the US on DVD with DTS, although there is a nice DTS edition in the UK of the film. Currently going for $85 on eBay btw.
SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (Criterion Ed.) - superb 2.0 stereo soundtrack that is thicker and more pronounced than the 5.1 mix on the Sp. Ed. DVD.
BRAM STOKERS DRACULA (Criterion Ed.) the only version of the film with color accuracy that was approved by Coppola.
TAXI DRIVER (Criterion Ed.) only version of this film that includes an incredibly commentary track by Scorsese to date.
THE ABYSS (THX Laserdisc set) still has superior surround sound mix over the 5.1 on the DVD.
These are just some examples and there are still hundreds of titles on LD that still have yet to be issued on DVD.
So why is this 'obsolete' format still desirable to some on eBay and other outlets? Well, because you can A. buy them cheap and B. there are still dozens and dozens of titles that are superior to anything to date on another format and are worth tracking down.
Update: My friend recently reported that the Blu-ray issue of BRAM STOKERS DRACULA is taken from the Superbit DVD and has not improved the picture much, still has those color issues and the sound is only marginally better than that DVD as well. Boooo. When will this film ever get proper treatment?????
-
Agreed!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightflier
This I have to disagree with - our money-grubbing society seems way to eager to dismiss the lessons of just yesteryear, perhaps better said by Santayana: "those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it." The fact is that SACD and DVD-A provide perhaps the most accurate comparison to what could very well unfold with this format war.
Any comparison between what happen with high resolution audio, and what is happening with HDM on disc is a comparison of convience, not one born out of critical thinking. The comparisons are not the same at the retail level, nor at studio or record company level. The couldn't be more different. Only at the surface does the comparison appear valid, but once you dig deeper, that when you realize it just apples and oranges.
Quote:
First of all, they where not at all stillborn at birth, whatever that means. I remember the lively discussions online about each format's supposed superiority, the sizable catalog for DVD-A that made me drool because I chose SACD, and the almost weekly growth, albeit very short lived, in shelf space at places like Tower, Fry's, GG, and others. There was a time, not too long ago when every record company was considering the formats and DVD-A was the clear leader, much like BR is now. SACD was first out of the gate, but they just didn't have the catalog or the rock and new releases that DVD-A could boast about. This sounds a whole lot like what I'm reading here about BR. By the way, much of the fear-mongering about SACD processing and DVD-A's 24/96Hz inconsistencies had been laid to rest, if not technically, at least in the marketplace, when both formats really seemed to take off.
Considering and supporting are at polar ends of the spectrum. One requires action, the other does not. They absolutely were stillborn at birth. At birth, SACD had no studio DSD post production tools. No editing, eq'ing, no mixing, and not even a clear workflow for studios to follow. The players had to convert the DSD stream to PCM to process bass management, speaker levels, and delay thereby killing any advantage the DSD stream had sonically. The only players that could process and pass the DSD bitstream where ultra expensive for a DVD player and a CD player for that matter. Not a receipe for success on a mass market level.
DVD-A was a very different animal. All the post processing tools were firmly in place, and all of the players supported PCM audio. No problem here except you could not get the support of the major record companies. Secondly, in order to access the high resolution bitstream, you need to use the analog inputs to the receiver because of copy protection. Another snag in widespread adoption. What you could access through the standard coaxial or Toslink outputs/input was nothing more than 24/48khz audio, which you could find on some movie soundtracks. This was right out of the gate, at both formats inception, hence there was no receipe for either to succeed out of the gate. Stillborn! The audio war was great for the audio press, and they were the only ones that got any benefit from it.
Quote:
I also remember reading articles about these formats being the perfect storm, just as we were reaching a market saturation of surround sound systems in people's homes. The argument went that these formats were riding the wave of HT buying witnessed across the industry. And let's not forget that while Laserdisk players are no longer made, more and more quality players are being introduced supporting SACD and to a lesser extent DVD-A.
Perfects storms can easily turn into imperfect ones with the change of the wind, humidity, and temperature. Conditions for perfect storms exist often without the storm even showing up. Since the industry could not get high resolution audio into homes without a hassle, the missed their opportunity to capitalize on it.
Just after I left audioreview I wrote an article in Surround Pro Magazine about the failure of multichannel music in the marketplace. I talked to Terry Beard the CEO of Dts and Dts Entertainment, and Michael Bishop of Telerc Records. Dts was the largest liscensing and distributor of DVD-A disc, and Telarc was a Record company who support SACD faithfully since its inception. When I asked Terry Beard why he thought DVD-A failed in the marketplace, his response was "we couldn't get the major record companies to participate directly, or liscense their music to us for repurposing and distribution". By the time we could get their tepid participation, the market changed completely to the distribution of music via MP3. We lost our opportunity to low rez audio".
When I asked Michael Bishop why SACD failed his response was this" Sony did not have any post production tools available, so there were limits to what kind of recording and genre of music that could be used with the format without conversion to PCM. When the tools did become available, they were too expensive for most studios who supported SACD". Once again he stated that the industry's big dogs didn't support SACD, it was the smaller boutique record labels that did. Without widespread adoption of the tools, Sony could not get the price down to more affordable levels. Both said there was little promotion and educuation of multichannel music. Both stated that once the recordings were done, very little support came from retailers in the form of shelf space. Combine that with very few multichannel productions produced from the ground up, and the industry reliance on repurpusing reissues with obvious sonic degredation, and the consumer wasn't impressed.
Now let's compare what these two said to HD DVD and Bluray now. Both of these formats have full studio support between them. All of the majors are engaged, all of the post production tools are in the field and well supported. HDTV sets sales are booming which both formats need, the retailers are stocking the product well, advertising is everywhere, in the case of Bluray many manufacturers are producing players. There are Bluray and HD DVD drives available for computers, and computer manufacturer are installing them in laptops. Replication plants are up and running, and marketing departments are in full spin mode. Player prices are dropping, though software prices are still quite high, or actually at the same pace as DVD at its inception. All the ingredients are there for mass adoption except consumer confusion is hampering its growth. Both formats do the same thing, have the studio split right down the middle in terms of support(if you look deeper, studio support heavily favor bluray as they have most of the top grossing movies released in the last two years). Where the two wars ARE the same is in the "window of interest". SACD and DVD-A allowed theirs to pass without addressing the problems with their respective formats. Bluray and HD DVD are not quite there yet, but time is really running out.
Quote:
So what happened? you nailed it on the head: you could not copy them. Yes, we can argue ad-infinitum about whether that was truly their undoing, but the more interesting comparison here is that no one really has hacked HD-DVD or BR in a way that can be widely exploited.
No, but they didn't hack and exploit the DVD format in its first two years either, but they did in a big way beginning in 2000. They have already permanently cracked AACS via the XBOX HD DVD drive, they just haven't figured out how to deal with the large file sizes. Bit torrent has made sure you can get any DVD or song you want off of the internet.
Quote:
And for all the evils that bootlegging might conjure up, from starving artists to links to terrorism and drugs to the possibility that it will grow hair on the palms of your hands, we cannot ignore the possibility that this may be any format's greatest impediment to market saturation.
Copy protection is largely transparent to the end user. The only time the end user is effected by copy protection is when they try and copy the disc. Copy protection has been on DVD and that didn't stop if from growing before piracy came into play.
Quote:
After all, it was the very reason DOS & Windows spread like wildfire throughout the world, that blank cassette sales outnumbered original recording sales in some years, and that, regardless of what the MPAA/RIAA may want you to believe, it made American pop culture the world standard from the deepest jungles of Indonesia to the plateaus of the Andes.
We don't live in that world anymore, and we are not going back to it. As much as I hate copy protection, it is here to stay. As long as you can put a disc in a player, press play and it plays, the consumer hardly notices copy protection. Windows spread thoughout the world because it was included in every computer. Not because of the lack of copy protection. The blank cassette allowed us to copy our records, and play them in the car. That is why it took off, it had a necessary purpose that everyone wanted to use it for. It wasn't the lack of copy protection, it was the ability to make music mobile just like MP3.
Quote:
This is where the greatest threat to these formats is, IMO: downloaded content. Downloads' greatest advantage over the greedy copy protection schemes (remember the Sony root-kit scandal?) of HD-DVD and BR, is convenience. I will even go so far as saying that below-DVD quality content such as what is growing like wildfire with the iMovie and the X-box, is eating into the profits of the hi-def formats. Ask any average Joe at BB or CC, what they would like more: unlimited and free access to 24 episodes via download at standard TV quality or the complete collection on HD-DVD / BR at outrageous cost to his pocketbook? It wouldn't even be about the money either. If he even knows what these formats are, he'll prefer the convenience of just clicking a few buttons on the remote and watch 6 episodes, commercial-free in a row than having to get up to switch disks. Heck, he'll probably prefer having it on his iPhone! This doesn't even get into the discussion of which format average Joe would choose.
Downloading high definition movies is a long way off. It can never compete directly with the disc because the pipeline currently is too small to carry a 1080p video stream along with a 1080i pip data stream, a 24/48khz or 24/96khz audio stream, multiple languages embeded within the audio stream simultaneously, and will not be able to do it for some time here in North America. Japan could do it tomorrow, but not here.
If you check your facts you will find movie downloading hit its peak in 2006, and has been on the decline every since. Study after study has shown consumers don't watch movies on their computers in any great numbers. Looking at highly compressed 480i is nothing like watching AVC or VC-1 compressed 1080p. Listening to a highly compressed stereo soundtrack is nothing like listening to a uncompressed 5.1 PCM soundtrack at 24bits. Looking at a 20" computer screen is nothing like looking at a 50" plasma or a 130" projection screen. Until downloading can equal the visual and audio experience of HDM on disc, it will not take the place of movie on disc.
Quote:
The bottom line is that this format war is killing hi-def - like the proverbial snake eating its own tail. Decades off? I doubt it. If Japan has 60Mb/s download speeds (I believe that's enough for a full BR download in about 5 minutes), then it's only a matter of a few short years before the iMovie/x-box subscriptions start offering usable HD content for download here in the US.
There have been several studies circulating online that state that you are incorrect in your thinking. We are years behind Japan in technology. We would have to rebuild or build a new internet from the ground up to get 60mbps speeds. We cannot upgrade what we have now to get that speed. Who will build it? How much would it cost? We haven't even began to ask these questions, have a plan, or allocated any money for feasibility studies on implementation. How will the video be stored? How does one get the video from the storage to the television. Terabytes of storage are still way to expensive, and the servers that are being marketed are still too expensive for the average consumer. Every study points to the fact that we are way off in getting HD content over the internet that can compete with HDM on disc.
Quote:
Given all the other stuff that is going on in the world right now that will distract people in the coming year, this x-mas season is crucial. I'll paraphrase from Drumline: "whatever the beef is between those two, they better grill it up and eat it," because if they don't, there's an eager new drummer sitting on the sidelines who can dance circles around them.
While I agree that the window of opportunity for both formats is quickly closing, I highly doubt there is a NEW drummer that can dance circles around them. Consumers will just keep supporting standard definition DVD because it is already here, cheap, and thanks to upscaling, looks decent. That line works on drumline because it is applicable. It doesn't work in this case because it is not.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeruvianSkies
Update: My friend recently reported that the Blu-ray issue of BRAM STOKERS DRACULA is taken from the Superbit DVD and has not improved the picture much, still has those color issues and the sound is only marginally better than that DVD as well. Boooo. When will this film ever get proper treatment?????
He must have gotten his information from hidefdigest.com. Out of all of the online reviewers, he is the worst. Those who have seen the print the bluray was encoded from say its soft, but not nearly as bad as Peter describes it. Peter has been wrong quite a few times before, and other reviewers have commented about it.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
He must have gotten his information from hidefdigest.com. Out of all of the online reviewers, he is the worst. Those who have seen the print the bluray was encoded from say its soft, but not nearly as bad as Peter describes it. Peter has been wrong quite a few times before, and other reviewers have commented about it.
Nope, my friend has the Blu-ray disc.
-
According to thedigitalbits.com this release is all new,no carry over from previous editions.It is a 50gig dual layer,with uncompressed pcm and mpeg4. Two disc,also regular dvd gets new treatment.
bill
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicman1999
According to thedigitalbits.com this release is all new,no carry over from previous editions.It is a 50gig dual layer,with uncompressed pcm and mpeg4. Two disc,also regular dvd gets new treatment.
bill
Well, he wouldn't lie to me about it. Excerpt from his review:
The prized collector’s item continues to be the 12” Criterion Collection LaserDisc that still has extras even these new versions do not. Previously, the best DVD was the Superbit edition with more room for picture and sound. Unfortunately, both did not capture the film well and the Superbit version even had an HD master. The 1080p digital 1.85 X 1 High Definition image on the Blu-ray (and to a lesser extent, the anamorphically enhanced DVD picture, where shadow detail is weak(er)) was expected to be a correction of years of inadequate telecine work. The film was shot by the great Michael Ballhaus, with amazing work on his resume, including with Rainer Werner Fassbinder and Martin Scorsese. His work here is sometimes complex and is the one thing that appreciates after years of awful digital work. Unfortunately, it looks like the Superbit’s HD master is being used here and that is bad. It is even worse on the DVD set, where the picture is a tad weaker than the Superbit release.
Why anyone thought this was a good idea is beyond me, but it is not good and the Blu-ray by default is the slimmest bit better than the Superbit. That master must have been 1080i, but could it have been 720p? So what does that mean for the sound? More bad news.
Before the fall of Cinema Digital Sound and rise of three new digital sound formats that all survived (DTS, Dolby and SDDS), Sony issued the film in Dolby Digital theatrical and that was a 5.1 mix that won the Sound Effects editing Academy Award. The DTS on the Superbit Edition was even better than the Dolby on previous version, that version or this new DVD set, but the Dolby here is especially compressed in English. If that was not bad enough, the French Dolby Digital 5.1 track has more detail than the English mix!
What’s worse, you would think the PCM 16/48 5.1 mix sounds compressed too and the Superbit DTS could easily rival it. What happened? Down to Wojciech Kilar’s score, nothing sounds as good as it should or look as good as my Dolby Digital 35mm screening when the film opened. Compare to the Superbit DTS, French Dolby on both of these new versions or even the PCM 16/44.1 2.0 Stereo with Pro Logic surrounds on the Criterion LaserDisc and you’ll hear what is missing.
-
Al Gore built this internet and he will build the new one too! I'm sure he already has the new one ready, he is just waiting for the right time.
-
I did not say he was lying.All i was doing was giving you the technical specs of the disc and they appear to be as good as it gets--1080p,5.1 pcm. It also has a directors commentary and production features and a new transfer.As to quality i have not seen it so I can't comment but i would like to see it.
bill
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicman1999
I did not say he was lying.All i was doing was giving you the technical specs of the disc and they appear to be as good as it gets--1080p,5.1 pcm. It also has a directors commentary and production features and a new transfer.As to quality i have not seen it so I can't comment but i would like to see it.
bill
I am curious as well, mostly for color-accuracy. There is a big discrepancy in the areas of oranges and greens. Plus, the darkness of that film was never really solid in any DVD edition of the film. Video black and video red are two of the hardest things to get right and that film contains a bunch of both colors. The DVD's were too smeary and even the Superbit had limitations, I'll really be curious to see the Blu-ray myself.
|