As reported by BDA & news from IFA

[pixelthis]

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.

I agree with you about downloads, but even more threatening is VOD.
It allows pause, FF,REVERSE, and saving for 24hrs.
And its killing the rental market in my town.
Downloading is a bit in the future, but netflix is advertising it already.
You need terabytes of storage? Not really, just erase something like a DVR when you're through, not to mention that 500 gb of hard drive is available now, for 125$ yet.
And zip drives that will hold an entire movie, properly compressed.
Windows vista reccomends 2gb of memory, 4gb preffered, how long before we see a "format" based on a solid state memory? Or a small 30gb HD like you see in some
mp3 players?
Both sides are acting like the optical disc is going to be the standard for decades,
when the first optical disc, CD, is dying a fast death.
Both formats co-exsisting? heck, ONE might not make it.
But if one does it will be Blu ray.
The HDDVD camp is kinda like the black knight in the holy grail.
Cut off his arm, just a scratch, chop off his leg, just a flesh wound.
Wonder when they will see what is becoming increasingly obvious

[nightflier]

Sir T.,

I think your perspective might be a little too focused on the inside of the industry. For example, what happened behind the scenes with SACD & DVD-A is not at all what the consumer was privy to. I personally saw the selection of both formats increase in the stores, and catalogs like Acoustic Sounds get thicker and the number of players on store shelves grow. As someone who picked SACD after quite a bit of research, you can imagine my reaction when I saw the DVD-A selection outpace SACD. Likewise there was a lot of buzz online and in the trade rags about the new formats and how superior they were. The concept of the perfect storm was from an article in Sound & Vision, I believe.

Likewise the assumption that PCs were shipped with Windows pre-installed is only part of the picture. It may have been what was reported in the industry, but ten years ago, most PCs were home-built or shipped without an OS. DOS or Windows was a separate line item on the receipts (I know, I still have them). The rise in cassette popularity, whether for cars or not, was because it allowed people to copy LPs and other original cassettes so that they can be played elsewhere. This freedom is what is being taken away and is what is angering consumer.

"We don't live in that world anymore"? That's not true at all. Copy protection is not a fact of life, just look at why apple was pressured into removing DRM from so many of their downloads. People were pissed. Copy protection is not "here to stay" if people won't pay for the copy protected products. It is actually a huge irritation to people who want to have their music and movies in another format. People are ripping the commentaries and extra languages out of movies because they need to fit them on their iPods.

Copy protection is like a loose condom, a little vaseline and it falls appart. The Great Wall of China worked for about ten years or so, until the Mongol hordes figured out they could just walk around it. If there is one consistent truth about security, it is that it will be defeated. DVD's were cracked by some guy who just wanted to watch them on his Linux box. He was irritated by the fact that the license and the studios would not allow this, so he found a way around the "wall." And the jackals of the movie industry, the MPAA, tried to crucify him. One commentator said he should get the death penalty (well we know who butters his bread). All these abuses are a source of anger and frustration by the consumers. Think this is bad here in the US? Try asking someone in Europe what they think of Sony or Disney or Fox.

The same restrictions that existed on SACD/DVD-A now exist with HD-DVD/BR. The consumer can't copy it, move it to his iPhone, or to his SUV so his kids will be quiet. And if it just takes too much time to walk around a big enough obstacle, people eventually give up - not because they can't but because there are other options. HD movies are in grave risk of becoming niche technologies, much like SACD and Laserdisks. They are being threatened by downloaded non-HD content today and will be eclipsed by true HD content in a few short years because people will have become accustomed to the process during the non-HD period.

And HD isn't all that important. For all the extra goodies that BR & HD-DVD have to offer, for most people, it's pointless. Do you think Joe Sixpack, although perfectly happy with his HDTV to watch SundayTicket, is going to say: "hmmm, tonight I think I'll watch Bridges Of Madison County in French - might be fun..." No! It's all bloatware. You & I and the rest of the audio-videophiles here might Ooo and Ahhh over true DTS or 1080p, but our teen-age kids have no interest in them, and they are tomorrow's consumers.

You say that downloaded movies are in decline. Maybe for what can be measured: paid content, but is that the whole picture? What about downloaded free content like TV shows? What about Bit-Torrent downloaded video (legal & illegal)? What about streamed video? Personally, I get in a little R&R at lunch time by watching John Stewart on YouTube in a 2" window, and guess what, it's just as funny. Oprah, the news, South Park, and Porn don't need to be in HD and with thundering surround sound. Does Joe Sixpack want everyone in the neighborhood to know he's having his way with himself while watching a 20' tall Jenna getting freaky? I doubt it.

As I've already told Wooch I can't argue against the numbers - they may be partially true. But even stats can only give part of the picture. In Confessions of an Economic Hitman, Perkins says that statistics are twisted to reveal economic falsehoods as a matter of practice. Just as this was true in Chile, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia on a global scale, do you really think stats are not slightly skewed to show a particular point of view here in the good ol' US of A? How confident are we in the numbers we get from inside the industry? Remember those poll numbers before the last elections? Sure there are impartial sources, but that may not be the whole picture. Sales figures are only true for what is sold. They don't necessarily reflect what is seen in HD or SD.

I'll even wager that in 2 years people will be able to download or stream 1080p movies and content at will. If Japan has already figured out the technology, it's not like we have to invent it from scratch. Maybe we should copy it from them (wow, talk about role reversals). Who will pay for it? Well, how much money do Rummy, Cheney and Bush have? They won't need it when they're in jail. Personally, I'm of the opinion that our politicians should spend a little less time worrying about what's going on in the bedroom and a little more worrying about our infrastructure. If they don't like it, I'm going to vote them out.

But the white elephant here is the companies that profit from this. Most consumers believe that they already have this figured out and are holding off until they can figure out how to squeeze the most money out of it. The RIAA/MPAA are a perfect example of institutions created to hold back progress, criminalize minor transgressors, and spread FUD long enough until a new profit model can be created that will screw the consumer out of more money. Not true, you say? So what? Even if it's not true, the consumer believes it. And until he is convinced otherwise, he'll hold out for something that gives him greater freedoms, or at least the semblance of more freedom.

[musicman1999]

The reason that HD downloads are way off is that the infrastucture does not exist to handle that kind of bandwidth.In order for this to be a viable large scale alternative all the telephone cables in North America need to be replaced.That will take a while and cost a lot.

bill

[nightflier]

The reason that HD downloads are way off is that the infrastucture does not exist to handle that kind of bandwidth.In order for this to be a viable large scale alternative all the telephone cables in North America need to be replaced.That will take a while and cost a lot. bill

Cable can be aggregated. I believe that's what they did initially in Japan. Furthermore, different mediums can be aggregated together, so that for example, you could have your wireless phone join in on the effort to download that movie, while it is charging. Or you could borrow time from your employer's internet connection during off-hours and redirect it to you slingbox or PVR.

But more readily available will be the choice of what to download. For example, you could download an HD show w/o the stuff you don't need. Don't need Spanish language in DTS? No problemo. Don't care for the commentaries but you do want the deleted scenes? Just select from a checkbox list what you want.

And the infrastructure is changing, too. Fiber to the home is becoming more readily available in affluent neighborhoods. What is really hampering us here, is our dogged reliance on competition. If politicians actually did something useful like support standards bodies rather than their lobbyists, things would go a lot smoother in adopting faster standards. What I find striking is that for developed nations, the more "socialist" a government is (now don't start crying), the faster the internet access is - isn't that a kick in the jewels? Now, if the friggin' Canadians can surf twice as fast, why can't that happen here, 'Ay?

Are they smarter than us?

[musicman1999]

Why yes we are thank you.You see our socialist government gives everyone free medical care so our national iq is eight percent higher.

bill

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Sir T.,

I think your perspective might be a little too focused on the inside of the industry. For example, what happened behind the scenes with SACD & DVD-A is not at all what the consumer was privy to. I personally saw the selection of both formats increase in the stores, and catalogs like Acoustic Sounds get thicker and the number of players on store shelves grow. As someone who picked SACD after quite a bit of research, you can imagine my reaction when I saw the DVD-A selection outpace SACD. Likewise there was a lot of buzz online and in the trade rags about the new formats and how superior they were. The concept of the perfect storm was from an article in Sound & Vision, I believe.

It is said that the devil is in the details, and details cannot be found on the periphery. You must look on the inside of the industry to get the details. You may have seen SACD and DVD-A catalog growing, but the disc were not selling in great numbers. Players that could play both formats came too late to really save either. Sales of MC music hit its peak in 2003-2004, and even at its peak, was a drop in the bucket in terms of overall sales. While you could find SACD's and DVD-A at stores like Tower Records and Best Buy, not many other record or entertainment stores carried them. Online was the only place that either could be found in great numbers, but music sales WERE a brick and motar staple.

You made my point exactly. Sound and Vision may have called it the perfect storm, but in reality is was a perfect dud. That audio press got more mileage out of MC music than the consumer or retail did. They had tons of debates, talking points, and graphs that sold many a magazine. But all of the hype could not be translated into disc sales.

Likewise the assumption that PCs were shipped with Windows pre-installed is only part of the picture. It may have been what was reported in the industry, but ten years ago, most PCs were home-built or shipped without an OS. DOS or Windows was a separate line item on the receipts (I know, I still have them). The rise in cassette popularity, whether for cars or not, was because it allowed people to copy LPs and other original cassettes so that they can be played elsewhere. This freedom is what is being taken away and is what is angering consumer.

I think your dates are quite off. Ten years ago windows was pre-installed in every computer that left the factory. In 1993 there were 25 million windows users. In 1995 windows 95 was released and sold 1 million copies in 4 days. Most all computer manufacturers were pre-installing windows in the computer by 1995. The only time a consumer had to go out and purchase windows as a seperate line item was for upgrades. Windows was actually launched in 1983. Windows are on 95% of the worlds computers, and mostly all of those were pre-installed at the factory.

"We don't live in that world anymore"? That's not true at all. Copy protection is not a fact of life, just look at why apple was pressured into removing DRM from so many of their downloads. People were pissed. Copy protection is not "here to stay" if people won't pay for the copy protected products. It is actually a huge irritation to people who want to have their music and movies in another format. People are ripping the commentaries and extra languages out of movies because they need to fit them on their iPods.

When it comes to movies and music to Ebooks, copy protection is on all of them. If you want downloaded music legally, it will have DRM on it. That IS a fact of life that we cannot escape. Let's be truthful, music without copy protection is a minority even on Itunes. Not every tune on the website is DRM free. Only a few record companies are allowing their music to be downloaded without DRM. The majority of legal downloads have DRM on it. So it's a way of life we have to live with if we want to download legally. All legal movie downloads have DRM as well, so there is no place for the consumer to get free of it unless it is downloaded illegally. This is the world we live in, and its not gonna change thanks to the internet, and internet piracy.

Copy protection is like a loose condom, a little vaseline and it falls appart. The Great Wall of China worked for about ten years or so, until the Mongol hordes figured out they could just walk around it. If there is one consistent truth about security, it is that it will be defeated. DVD's were cracked by some guy who just wanted to watch them on his Linux box. He was irritated by the fact that the license and the studios would not allow this, so he found a way around the "wall." And the jackals of the movie industry, the MPAA, tried to crucify him. One commentator said he should get the death penalty (well we know who butters his bread). All these abuses are a source of anger and frustration by the consumers. Think this is bad here in the US? Try asking someone in Europe what they think of Sony or Disney or Fox.

Well, if copy protection was nothing more than a loose condom, then why didn't SACD and DVD-A get knocked up? Why aren't HD DVD and bluray files proliferated all over the net? Copy protection is not fullproof. It can be cracked. AACS was cracked months after HD DVD release. The issue is not the cracking, but the proliferation of the files. BD+ makes sure that you cannot steal its code. And if you are good enough to do it, if you try and playback the files, it bricks your player. If you try and alter the player, it bricks it. So the power doesn't have to be fully in the copy protection scheme, it can be in the authetification process as well. You may not be able to stop someone from cracking the code, but you sure can slow them down, and even discourage it if one knew it was going to brick his computer or media player.

The same restrictions that existed on SACD/DVD-A now exist with HD-DVD/BR. The consumer can't copy it, move it to his iPhone, or to his SUV so his kids will be quiet. And if it just takes too much time to walk around a big enough obstacle, people eventually give up - not because they can't but because there are other options. HD movies are in grave risk of becoming niche technologies, much like SACD and Laserdisks. They are being threatened by downloaded non-HD content today and will be eclipsed by true HD content in a few short years because people will have become accustomed to the process during the non-HD period.

I think you are going waaaaay overboard here. As long as anyone can insert a disc into a player, press play, and it plays, the public is not all up in arms about copy protection. The only folks that are up in arms about copy protection are the folks that want to burn movies, and the pirates. Most of the time when you find folks burning movies, they are distributing them to their friends and family. This is illegal no matter how you slice it, and no matter how right you think you are. You bought a single disc for a set price, and what you pay does not guarantee you the right to copy and distribute it for free. There is no need to copy a movie in most cases. I have over 2200 DVD's, 175 blurays, and 146 HD DVD's, and I have never had a reason to copy any one of them at any time. When I travel, I take the DVD's that I want to watch. The studios(no matter how much we dislike it) have a right to protect their intellectual property that the have invested millions in from proliferation for free. If they didn't act this way, then the value of that property is greatly diminshed.

For many folks downloads are not attractive. I have had too many hard drive crashes that has left me without important documents to leave my movies on a hard drive. If the hard drive crashes, you lose your entire investment, and they will not give you a second download for free. I would rather have the physical disc in my hand because that pretty much guarantees that I can play my disc anytime, and anywhere without the worry of it getting lost. If the disc does get lost, DVD's are so cheap I'll just go buy another. The average joe is not complaining about copy protection because many of them don't see it, don't hear it, and it doesn't effect the enjoyment of the movie.

And HD isn't all that important. For all the extra goodies that BR & HD-DVD have to offer, for most people, it's pointless. Do you think Joe Sixpack, although perfectly happy with his HDTV to watch SundayTicket, is going to say: "hmmm, tonight I think I'll watch Bridges Of Madison County in French - might be fun..." No! It's all bloatware. You & I and the rest of the audio-videophiles here might Ooo and Ahhh over true DTS or 1080p, but our teen-age kids have no interest in them, and they are tomorrow's consumers.

I am going to give you a little flashback. When DVD was first introduced, there were people just like you saying that DVD was not important, and the better picture and sound quality over VHS is not important. VHS never had extra's so why are they so important? Well, DVD overtook VHS in sales just three years after it was introduced to the market. Alot of naysayers just like you were eating crow pie. HD DVD has been around just a year and a half, and there are more titles on shelves at this point than there were DVD's at this point in its history. There are more HD DVD players sold now, that DVD players at this point in its history. Bluray really solidly came on the market about a year ago. There are far more players now(thanks to the PS3) in the field than there were DVD players at this point in its history. Bluray has pressed well over a million disc worldwide at this point. DVD was even close to this at this same point in its history. There are approximately 500,000 HD DVD players in homes right now. DVD had less than this a year and a half after introduction. Bluray has over 1.8 million bluray players in consumer homes, and DVD wasn't even close to this a year after its introduction.

You say that downloaded movies are in decline. Maybe for what can be measured: paid content, but is that the whole picture? What about downloaded free content like TV shows?

TV shows are free anyway. You can get it off the air.

What about Bit-Torrent downloaded video (legal & illegal)?

You have to pay for bit torrent movies now, and its been tracking as a decline. Illegally, it cannot be determined whether its growing or in decline.

What about streamed video?

Streamed video you have to pay for. There is no site that is going to allow you to tie up its servers for free. Most streamed video is porn, and that showed a slight decline in 2006.

Personally, I get in a little R&R at lunch time by watching John Stewart on YouTube in a 2" window, and guess what, it's just as funny. Oprah, the news, South Park, and Porn don't need to be in HD and with thundering surround sound. Does Joe Sixpack want everyone in the neighborhood to know he's having his way with himself while watching a 20' tall Jenna getting freaky? I doubt it.

What you enjoy doing cannot be construed as a widespread thing. Its what you like to do. I can find 5 more people who have no interest in watching anything on a two inch screen unless its a menu, or a still picture. Youtube probably looks pretty good on a two inch window because the video is so highly compressed. Try watching it on a 65" HDTV.
Most marketing experts disagree with you about TV news in high definition. Almost all stations in large cities now broadcast their news in high definition. There must be a reason for that if not just for marketing purposes.

If joe6pack covered his mouth with the other hand, then nobody but him would know he is watching Jenna on a big screen. Somebody must want porn in HD because it sure is available.

As I've already told Wooch I can't argue against the numbers - they may be partially true. But even stats can only give part of the picture. In Confessions of an Economic Hitman, Perkins says that statistics are twisted to reveal economic falsehoods as a matter of practice.

So because this one person made this quote, we should all abandon using any kind of words or numbers? Utterly rediculous. If the idea of using statistics to fool people was your goal, then it can be easily done. If you goal is to use statistics to gauge trends, then its invaluable. The Bible can be twisted to reveal spritual falsehood if that was the intent. A textbook can be twisted to reveal educational falsehoods if that is the intent. It is not the statistics that is the problem, it's the intent.

Just as this was true in Chile, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia on a global scale, do you really think stats are not slightly skewed to show a particular point of view here in the good ol' US of A?

If that was the intent, yes. If that was not the intent, no.

How confident are we in the numbers we get from inside the industry?

If that industry intent was to survive and thrive, then very confident. If the numbers were ment to distort or two twist, not very confident. It all goes back to the intent. Do I rely on information I get from my industry sources? Yes I do, because the intent is not to deceive anyone, its to inform. Most folks that take the position you are taking, are people who cannot get access to the information. It makes it easier to dismiss the facts when someone else has the information, and you don't.

Remember those poll numbers before the last elections? Sure there are impartial sources, but that may not be the whole picture. Sales figures are only true for what is sold. They don't necessarily reflect what is seen in HD or SD.

The connection you are attempting to make cannot be made by this example. Poll numbers are guesses and estimates. They are not actual votes counted. Since getting poll numbers happens BEFORE the election, things can change very quickly. Sales figures are after the fact numbers that are exact. Sales figures don't change unless they were wrong in the first place.

If PQ and AQ were so unimportant to the average DVD buyer, then VHS would have been more than good enough. In reality it is important to many, or DVD would not have been adopted so quickly by so many. If we didn't have two competing format creating market confusion, I am not so sure we would be having this discussion. We know this from the DVD introduction. When DIVX and standard DVD were both on the market, neither flourished. When DIVX exited the market, DVD took off like a shot, inspite of the naysayers that said VHS and Laserdisc is good enough.

I'll even wager that in 2 years people will be able to download or stream 1080p movies and content at will. If Japan has already figured out the technology, it's not like we have to invent it from scratch. Maybe we should copy it from them (wow, talk about role reversals). Who will pay for it? Well, how much money do Rummy, Cheney and Bush have? They won't need it when they're in jail. Personally, I'm of the opinion that our politicians should spend a little less time worrying about what's going on in the bedroom and a little more worrying about our infrastructure. If they don't like it, I'm going to vote them out.

This is a foolish bet and not worth my time. It has already been said that this internet could not support mass market downloading. If it was attempted, it would just clog the system. It took years to build the infrastucture we currently have, and you think it will take just two years to build another. You have more balls than I with this thinking. There are far too many details to be worked out to get the job done in two years. That's a fact my friend.

But the white elephant here is the companies that profit from this. Most consumers believe that they already have this figured out and are holding off until they can figure out how to squeeze the most money out of it. The RIAA/MPAA are a perfect example of institutions created to hold back progress, criminalize minor transgressors, and spread FUD long enough until a new profit model can be created that will screw the consumer out of more money. Not true, you say? So what? Even if it's not true, the consumer believes it. And until he is convinced otherwise, he'll hold out for something that gives him greater freedoms, or at least the semblance of more freedom.

Alot of folks believe that Iraq was involved in the Twin Towers tragedy even in the face of facts. I think more people are worried about the middle class surviving than thinking about what the RIAA and the MPAA are doing. People know that corporation are screwing them, but it doesn't stop them from supporting these corporations. Look at Walmart. Everyone knows they screw their employees, and the American worker. They still have made the company the largest retailer in the world. The American public has no problem screwing themslelves with their own decisions. The midwest could clearly see that as Walmart stores proliferated throughout the region, manufacturering jobs were dissapearing. They saw whole business district dry up to dust, and they still went to Walmart. They watch the politician they voted into office screw them by supporting illegal immigration, but they never recalled, or even called their rep to the carpet. These days the American public is much more efficient at screwing themselves than a corporate conglomerate could ever be.

[PeruvianSkies]

This thread is insanely detailed and deep......took me forever to read through all of the commentary going on back and forth...wow. I am sure most people just skim over the stuff though.

[nightflier]

Sir T.,

If I give up on this debate, it'll be because of sheer exhaustion, not because I am coming around to your way of thinking. Again, with all the respect in the world, I don't think your facts add up. The examples you present, while well argued, only deal with what is legal, public, and from "official" sources. I believe that there are far more unknowns in this issue than is apparent.

"While you could find SACD's and DVD-A at stores like Tower Records and Best Buy, not many other record or entertainment stores carried them. Online was the only place that either could be found in great numbers, but music sales WERE a brick and motar staple. "

This may very well have been the case, but that does not explain why catalogs were increasing. If sales were stagnant, why did shelfspace, the number of articles, the number of players, and the size of online catalogs increase?

"Sound and Vision may have called it the perfect storm, but in reality is was a perfect dud. That audio press got more mileage out of MC music than the consumer or retail did. They had tons of debates, talking points, and graphs that sold many a magazine. But all of the hype could not be translated into disc sales."

While this may be true, there were very few if any naysayers at the time. Are you telling me that almost every magazine and newspaper writer was on the take?

"I think your dates are quite off. Ten years ago windows was pre-installed in every computer that left the factory. In 1993 there were 25 million windows users. In 1995 windows 95 was released and sold 1 million copies in 4 days. Most all computer manufacturers were pre-installing windows in the computer by 1995. The only time a consumer had to go out and purchase windows as a seperate line item was for upgrades. Windows was actually launched in 1983. Windows are on 95% of the worlds computers, and mostly all of those were pre-installed at the factory."

This is a perfect example of just looking at "official" numbers. Windows was only pre-installed on computers from the big manufacturers (Dell, HP, Compaq, etc.) but the number of white box systems sold in the US was about 1/4 of total sales. And that's for the US. - outside the US, the number was much higher. These people had to buy Windows separately. I was actually involved with sales to the UC of Cal. system. We purchased all our Windows licenses through a Microsoft volume contract, and I can tell you that well over 70% of the Windows boxes at UC at the time were licensed this way: separate line items. It was not until '97 that Microsoft mandated that only upgrades would be sold both to the retail and the high-volume channels, meaning that people had to buy a system with Windows pre-installed.

I also worked on a research project looking at the risks of piracy. I don't remember the exact figures, but I know they don't match up with yours. Our estimates were that perhaps 30% of Windows licenses in the US were pirated. Worldwide the numbers were as high as 60%. The idea that every license on every PC was pre-installed is ridiculous.

"When it comes to movies and music to Ebooks, copy protection is on all of them. If you want downloaded music legally, it will have DRM on it. That IS a fact of life that we cannot escape. Let's be truthful, music without copy protection is a minority even on Itunes. Not ever tune on the website is DRM free. Only a few record companies are allowing their music to be downloaded without DRM. The majority of legal downloads have DRM on it. So its a way of life we have to live with if we want to download legally. All legal movie downloads have DRM as well, so there is no place for the consumer to get free of it unless it is downloaded illegally. This is the world we live in, and its not gonna change thanks to the internet, and internet piracy."

Competely false. I remember reading that the RIAA estimated in 2003 that 90% of MP3 music was illegal - most of this music came from Napster users when the RIAA couldn't shut them down. I know that was a while ago, but those files are DRM-free and they are still out there, on iPods, music servers, and the Internet (that's the beauty of digital, it never gets old). I also happen to know that even today younger people trade files like rabits in heat. All it takes is to plug two players to the same computer. Most CDs are ripped as soon as they are purchased. If they have DRM on them, it is stripped off. I'm not saying I condone it, but its far more common than you think. I also don't know what the sales figure are for non-DRM files, but I can tell you that if they are not high, it's because they have no DRM! Only one person needs to download it.

"Well, if copy protection was nothing more than a loose condom, then why didn't SACD and DVD-A get knocked up? Why aren't HD DVD and bluray files proliferated all over the net?"

Simple: they were not around long enough nor did they become enough of a share of the market. Windows wasn't being widely cracked until it hit version 3.0.

"Copy protection is not fullproof. It can be cracked. AACS was cracked months after HD DVD release. The issue is not the cracking, but the proliferation of the files. BD+ makes sure that you cannot steal its code. And if you are good enough to do it, if you try and playback the files, it bricks your player. If you try and alter the player, it bricks it. So the power doesn't have to be fully in the copy protection scheme, it can be in the authetification process as well. You may not be able to stop someone from cracking the code, but you sure can slow them down, and even discourage it if one knew it was going to brick his computer or media player."

This is not a discouragement - it's a challenge. It will happen sooner or later. The only way to guard against copying is to make the content less valuable. Nobody cracks TV shows because they are free - if low-res movies (YouTube sized) and low-res music (128Kbps or less) were free as well, the number of hacks would be way down. Even DVD cracking is down, not because it's hard, but because it's so easy to get the movie illegally, if you really want it. A BlueRay disk, especially if it hasn't yet been released to the public, would be worth a lot in "online cash." There are plenty of people working on this. It's not a question of if it will happen but when it will happen.

"I think you are going waaaaay overboard here. As long as anyone can insert a disc into a player, press play, and it plays, the public is not all up in arms about copy protection. The only folks that are up in arms about copy protection are the folks that what to burn movies, and the pirates."

Not true. The people that are up in arms are the millions of consumers who don't believe they should pay for each medium that they need a song/movie in. If you bought the HD-DVD disk, why should you then also have to buy the DVD because your car doesn't have an HD-DVD player? Or having to buy the Shoutcast version of your favorite MP3? Etc.

"Most of the time when you find folks burning movies, they are distributing them to their friends and family. This is illegal no matter how you slice it, and no matter how right you think you are. You bought a single disc for a set price, and what you pay does not guarantee you the right to copy and distribute it for free. There is no need to copy a movie in most cases. I have over 2200 DVD's, 175 blurays, and 146 HD DVD's, and I have never had a reason to copy any one of them at any time. When I travel, I take the DVD's that I want to watch. The studios(no matter how much we dislike it) have a right to protect their intellectual property that the have invested millions in from proliferation for free. If they didn't act this way, then the value of that property is greatly diminshed."

I have no opinion on the matter, really. I'm still DVD only and I don't really care to rip my music unless I have to fly. I guess I'm a bit old-fashioned that way. Do you own the same movies on BR/HD-DVD that you have on DVD? What about VHS & Laserdisk? That must really be a kick in the pants! I don't know, maybe you have that kind of money, but most people don't. And what happens when a new format comes out and all your BRs, HD-DVDs and your players become the proverbial "bricks"? What if I'm right and downloads / paid subscription services become the norm? Will you buy them all again?

"For many folks downloads are not attractive. I have had too many hard drive crashes that has left me without important documents to leave my movies on a hard drive. If the hard drive crashes, you lose your entire investment, and they will not give you a second download for free."

Most people have had a hard drive crash at one time or another (interestingly, in the seven years that I've been using Linux, that's not happened on those machines). But you can always do backups (I do). Funny thing is people don't ever worry about their Tivo/PVR hard drive crashing or their music server blowing up - it's pretty much the same technology. This really is just fear mongering - how many hard drives have you really lost all your data from? Actually people never worried about their VHSes or Cassettes getting demagnitized too much either. That's because for most people (with the exception of some people here) the stuff gets old and stale over time so people don't really care to keep it - often times, they share it online to trade for something better.

"I would rather have the physical disc in my hand because that pretty much guarantees that I can play my disc anytime, and anywhere without the worry of it getting lost. If the disc does get lost, DVD's are so cheap I'll just go buy another. The average joe is not complaining about copy protection because many of them don't see it, don't hear it, and it doesn't effect the enjoyment of the movie."

Actually the average Joe is irritated by it. Sure this frustration won't be written up in the industry reports, the a/v mags, their websites, or any of the "official" sources. Industry "insiders" probably don't even realize this, or would rather not have anyone know it, so they're not going to talk about it either. But if you search online blogs, websites like the EFF and non-mainstream news, you'll find a lot of discontents.

"I am going to give you a little flashback. When DVD was first introduced, there were people just like you saying that DVD was not important, and the better picture and sound quality over VHS is not important. VHS never had extra's so why are they so important?"

No flashback needed. I never said BR/HD-DVD were not important - technologically they are very compelling to me. It's the extras that are not important. Aside from Film majors in college, very few people watch them.

"Well, DVD overtook VHS in sales just three years after it was introduced to the market. Alot of naysayers just like you were eating crow pie. HD DVD has been around just a year and a half, and their are more titles on shelves at this point than there were DVD's at this point in its history. There are more HD DVD players sold now, that DVD players at this point in its history. Bluray really solidly came on the market about a year ago. There are far more players now(thanks to the PS3) in the field than there were DVD players at this point in its history. Bluray has pressed well over a million disc worldwide at this point. DVD was even close to this at this same point in its history. There are approximately 500,000 HD DVD players in homes right now. DVD had less than this a year and a half after introduction. Bluray has over 1.8 million bluray players in consumer homes, and DVD wasn't even close to this a year after its introduction."

How many times does this falsehood have to be repeated? Things change much faster than they did 10 years ago - that's just a fact of society. What you describe as slower penetration then means very little today. Also do those BR numbers include PS3 players? How can you know that those owners watch BR on them? Yes X-box has an HD-DVD player add-on, but there are far fewer of those in people's homes, but at least we know that those are used exclusively for HD-DVD watching. The only usable statistics are rental and sales figures, with the caveat that those are still "statistics" (see below).

"TV shows are free anyway."

My point as well. That's content that is not reflected in your numbers.

"You can get it off the air."

Ever heard of a Podcasts?

"You have to pay for bit torrent movies now, and its been tracking as a decline. Illegally it cannot be determined with its growing or in decline."

But it is estimated that illegal bit torrents outnumber legal ones 10 to 1.

"Streamed video you have to pay for. There is no site that is going to allow you to tie up its servers for free. Most streamed video is porn, and that showed a slight decline in 2006."

Wow, I didn't know that CNN, CBS, ABC, and NBC mostly streamed porn. Since it's all free, I'll have to block those sites from my kid's computers.

"What you enjoy doing cannot be construed as a widespread thing. Its what you like to do. I can find 5 more people who have no interest in watching anything on a two inch screen unless its a menu, or a still picture. Youtube probably looks pretty good on a two inch window because the video is so highly compressed."

Ever consider how many people watch YouTube? It's by far the most popular content site on the internet. Even Myspace is replete with YouTube links (and I'm pretty sure they're gaining puopularity here on AR). I guess those millions of viewers are statistically insignificant? Interesting stats, then.

"Try watching it on a 65" HDTV."

People don't do that. What I'm trying to explain is that YouTube makes the general public expect the convenience of downloaded and streamed content. It won't be a big leap from there to get these same people to switch to downloaded content on their TVs when higher quality downloads are available using their existing gear. That's very different from making them go and buy a BR player, new cables, new disks, and possibly new TVs.

"Most marketing experts disagree with you about news in high definition. Almost all stations in large cities now broadcast their news in high definition. There must be a reason for that if not just for marketing purposes."

When Tivo, Cable, PS3 & X-box users can download HD movies for the same price as the current SD movies, this whole debate will be over. "Blue Ray, was that some kind of fish? Oh wait a minute, it was that DVD-thing that went the way of the dodo, right? Boy do I feel sorry for all the people that bought into that!"

"If joe6pack covered his mouth with the other hand, then nobody but him would know he is watching Jenna on a big screen."

Let's hope he remembers to pull the blinds.

"Somebody must want porn in HD because it sure is available."

My guess? It's the novelty thing. Is it selling better that regular movies (as a ratio to SD sales)? If it is, then I didn't know that.

"So because this one person made this quote, we should all abandon using any kind of words or numbers? Utterly rediculous."

No, but if you read the book, it's pretty damning: just about every single foreign aid package from the US in the last 50 years used fraudulent numbers to benefit American business at the cost of millions of lives - the kind of abuse that would make Pol Pot blush. It's not the same as the numbers we are looking at here, of course, but there are plenty of news sources for equally disturbing information. You can even search your movie collection for titles Silkwood, The Insider, Erin Brockovitch, Thank you for Smoking, and Sicko for evidence that the "official" corporate press release isn't exactly truthful. And bringing it back around to our discussion: the disks that are sold available on both formats - it's not like we're talking about a lot of fudging to make a point that one sells better than the other.

"If the idea of using statistics to fool people was your goal, then it can be easily done. If you goal is to use statistics to guage trends, then its invaluable. The Bible can be twisted to reveal spritual falsehood if that was the intent. A textbook can be twisted to reveal educational falsehoods if that is the intent. It is not the statistics that is the problem, it's the intent....If that was the intent, yes. If that was not the intent, no....If that industry intent was to survive and thrive, then very confident. If the numbers were ment to distort or two twist, not very confident. It all goes back to the intent. Do I rely on information I get from my industry sources? Yes I do, because the intent is not to deceive anyone, its to inform. Most folks that take the position you are taking, are people who cannot get access to the information. It makes it easier to dismiss the facts when someone else has the information, and you don't."

Don't be questioning the word of God, now. You're on your own to defend that one.

Regarding intent, that's precisely my point - there could very well be an intent to mislead. How much is this whole industry worth? Are you going to convince me that they're any different from the multinationals who lied to the rest of the world for half a century? Actually, some of them are those very same companies. Wait a minute, didn't you say that the mags and papers lied about SACD and DVD-A? Why would this be any different? Heck, I would say that the mags and papers are even more beholden to the media conglomerates now than they were when SACD and DVD-A had our attention.

"The connection you are attempting to make cannot be made by this example. Poll numbers are guesses and estimates. They are not actual votes counted. Since getting poll numbers happens BEFORE the election, things can change very quickly. Sales figures are after the fact numbers that are exact. Sales figures don't change unless they were wrong in the first place."

I was talking about how the exit polls were so inconsistent with the results. Ever heard of a state called Ohio? It may come as a surprise, but it's now been clearly shown that Kerry carried the state handily, just as the exit polls showed, but somehow that's not who was elected. I'm not a cheerleader for either side, but the numbers don't add up.

Sales figures are also estimates. And do they include returns, second-hand sales, promotional freebies, the grey market, the black market, and illegal copying? Nope. With BR and HD-DVD they might be slightly more accurate because they haven't been widely cracked, but that's a temporary security. With sales of regular DVDs, music CDs, online downloads, steaming video, and all the other media that we've been discussing, "official" statistics are much more questionable than that. It might very well be that sales figures show less than half of what's really changing hands.

"If PQ and AQ were so unimportant to the average DVD buyer, then VHS would have been more than good enough. In reality it is important to many, or DVD would not have been adopted so quickly by so many. If we didn't have two competing format creating market confusion, I am not so sure we would be having this discussion. We know this from the DVD introduction. When DIVX and standard DVD were both on the market, neither flourished. When DIVX exited the market, DVD took off like a shot, inspite of the naysayers that said VHS and Laserdisc is good enough."

Maybe maybe not. Are we certain, with all the other factors that are possible, that it was DIVx exiting the market that was the reason for DVD's meteoric rise? Maybe you're right, but I wouldn't say that unequivocally.

"This is a foolish bet and not worth my time. It has already been said that this internet could not support mass market downloading. If it was attempted, it would just clog the system. It took years to build the infrastucture we currently have, and you think it will take just two years to build another. You have more balls than I with this thinking. There are far too many details to be worked out to get the job done in two years. That's a fact my friend."

I was also said early on, that the Internet was a fad. Microsoft completely missed that boat. Remember how hard they had to fight, both above board and under the surface, to kill off Netscape when they realized they weren't surfing at all? (boy, that sentence kind of rolled like a wave...)

I'm not saying we need to rebuild the internet. I'm saying we have to build on what we have. Ever heard of Cal-IT2? Darpa-II? If we can just convert the guns of competition to plowshares of cooperation (isn't that a great phrase?), then we can easily improve the infrastructure. We used to be the Internet authority in the world, there's no need we can't be once again. It's not just a matter of improving the hardware, by the way, we can also improve the software layers to be more efficient and less prone to bloat with technologies like the Semantic Web / Web 3.0. Heck if Al Gore becomes president, who knows what he'll pull from that lockbox, the solar-powered internet?

"Alot of folks believe that Iraq was involved in the Twin Towers tragedy even in the face of facts. I think more people are worried about the middle class surviving than thinking about what the RIAA and the MPAA are doing. People know that corporation are screwing them, but it doesn't stop them from supporting these corporations. Look at Walmart. Everyone knows they screw their employees, and the American worker. They still have made the company the largest retailer in the world. The American public has no problem screwing themslelves with their own decisions. The midwest could clearly see that as Walmart stores proliferated throughout the region, manufacturering jobs were dissapearing. They saw whole business district dry up to dust, and they still went to Walmart. They watch the politician they voted into office screw them by supporting illegal immigration, but they never recalled, or even called their rep to the carpet. These days the American public is much more efficient at screwing themselves than a corporate conglomerate could ever be."

Not every American is a Wallmart-shopping, Hummer-driving, gun-toting-NRA-member, Limbaugh/O'Reily/Hannety/Dr.Laura-worshipping ignoramous bent on ruling the world with an iron fist and willing to re-ellect indefinitely the douche-bags who screw them over and over again. After a while it starts to chaff. The rising resistance to Wallmart and other abusive companies is indicative of that. Independent news sources like Democracy Now and Free Speech TV are gaining in popularity. Among young people, it's actually cool to be a non-smoker, tech-savvy, semi-vegetarian, Prius-driving, college-educated, liberal (Oh my goodness, Maybel, he used the "L" world - we're all going to hades, now!). Speaking of religion, even major churches throughout the Bible belt are realizing that indiscriminate rendering and torture isn't really the Christian thing to do. Gee, it did take a while, didn't it?

There is reason to be depressed, yes, but there is hope as well. I'm sorry if I'm an optimist, I can't really change that. I sincerely hope that BR or HD-DVD succeeds for it's technical merits (it really is a gorgeous picture in the store). Or better yet, I'd like to see a dual-format becoming the standard. But right now, I am more inclined to believe that downloads and/or streaming content will win the day.

[PeruvianSkies]

Sir T.,

If I give up on this debate, it'll be because of sheer exhaustion, not because I am coming around to your way of thinking. Again, with all the respect in the world, I don't think your facts add up. The examples you present, while well argued, only deal with what is legal, public, and from "official" sources. I believe that there are far more unknowns in this issue than is apparent.

"While you could find SACD's and DVD-A at stores like Tower Records and Best Buy, not many other record or entertainment stores carried them. Online was the only place that either could be found in great numbers, but music sales WERE a brick and motar staple. "

This may very well have been the case, but that does not explain why catalogs were increasing. If sales were stagnant, why did shelfspace, the number of articles, the number of players, and the size of online catalogs increase?

"Sound and Vision may have called it the perfect storm, but in reality is was a perfect dud. That audio press got more mileage out of MC music than the consumer or retail did. They had tons of debates, talking points, and graphs that sold many a magazine. But all of the hype could not be translated into disc sales."

While this may be true, there were very few if any naysayers at the time. Are you telling me that almost every magazine and newspaper writer was on the take?

"I think your dates are quite off. Ten years ago windows was pre-installed in every computer that left the factory. In 1993 there were 25 million windows users. In 1995 windows 95 was released and sold 1 million copies in 4 days. Most all computer manufacturers were pre-installing windows in the computer by 1995. The only time a consumer had to go out and purchase windows as a seperate line item was for upgrades. Windows was actually launched in 1983. Windows are on 95% of the worlds computers, and mostly all of those were pre-installed at the factory."

This is a perfect example of just looking at "official" numbers. Windows was only pre-installed on computers from the big manufacturers (Dell, HP, Compaq, etc.) but the number of white box systems sold in the US was about 1/4 of total sales. And that's for the US. - outside the US, the number was much higher. These people had to buy Windows separately. I was actually involved with sales to the UC of Cal. system. We purchased all our Windows licenses through a Microsoft volume contract, and I can tell you that well over 70% of the Windows boxes at UC at the time were licensed this way: separate line items. It was not until '97 that Microsoft mandated that only upgrades would be sold both to the retail and the high-volume channels, meaning that people had to buy a system with Windows pre-installed.

I also worked on a research project looking at the risks of piracy. I don't remember the exact figures, but I know they don't match up with yours. Our estimates were that perhaps 30% of Windows licenses in the US were pirated. Worldwide the numbers were as high as 60%. The idea that every license on every PC was pre-installed is ridiculous.

"When it comes to movies and music to Ebooks, copy protection is on all of them. If you want downloaded music legally, it will have DRM on it. That IS a fact of life that we cannot escape. Let's be truthful, music without copy protection is a minority even on Itunes. Not ever tune on the website is DRM free. Only a few record companies are allowing their music to be downloaded without DRM. The majority of legal downloads have DRM on it. So its a way of life we have to live with if we want to download legally. All legal movie downloads have DRM as well, so there is no place for the consumer to get free of it unless it is downloaded illegally. This is the world we live in, and its not gonna change thanks to the internet, and internet piracy."

Competely false. I remember reading that the RIAA estimated in 2003 that 90% of MP3 music was illegal - most of this music came from Napster users when the RIAA couldn't shut them down. I know that was a while ago, but those files are DRM-free and they are still out there, on iPods, music servers, and the Internet (that's the beauty of digital, it never gets old). I also happen to know that even today younger people trade files like rabits in heat. All it takes is to plug two players to the same computer. Most CDs are ripped as soon as they are purchased. If they have DRM on them, it is stripped off. I'm not saying I condone it, but its far more common than you think. I also don't know what the sales figure are for non-DRM files, but I can tell you that if they are not high, it's because they have no DRM! Only one person needs to download it.

"Well, if copy protection was nothing more than a loose condom, then why didn't SACD and DVD-A get knocked up? Why aren't HD DVD and bluray files proliferated all over the net?"

Simple: they were not around long enough nor did they become enough of a share of the market. Windows wasn't being widely cracked until it hit version 3.0.

"Copy protection is not fullproof. It can be cracked. AACS was cracked months after HD DVD release. The issue is not the cracking, but the proliferation of the files. BD+ makes sure that you cannot steal its code. And if you are good enough to do it, if you try and playback the files, it bricks your player. If you try and alter the player, it bricks it. So the power doesn't have to be fully in the copy protection scheme, it can be in the authetification process as well. You may not be able to stop someone from cracking the code, but you sure can slow them down, and even discourage it if one knew it was going to brick his computer or media player."

This is not a discouragement - it's a challenge. It will happen sooner or later. The only way to guard against copying is to make the content less valuable. Nobody cracks TV shows because they are free - if low-res movies (YouTube sized) and low-res music (128Kbps or less) were free as well, the number of hacks would be way down. Even DVD cracking is down, not because it's hard, but because it's so easy to get the movie illegally, if you really want it. A BlueRay disk, especially if it hasn't yet been released to the public, would be worth a lot in "online cash." There are plenty of people working on this. It's not a question of if it will happen but when it will happen.

"I think you are going waaaaay overboard here. As long as anyone can insert a disc into a player, press play, and it plays, the public is not all up in arms about copy protection. The only folks that are up in arms about copy protection are the folks that what to burn movies, and the pirates."

Not true. The people that are up in arms are the millions of consumers who don't believe they should pay for each medium that they need a song/movie in. If you bought the HD-DVD disk, why should you then also have to buy the DVD because your car doesn't have an HD-DVD player? Or having to buy the Shoutcast version of your favorite MP3? Etc.

"Most of the time when you find folks burning movies, they are distributing them to their friends and family. This is illegal no matter how you slice it, and no matter how right you think you are. You bought a single disc for a set price, and what you pay does not guarantee you the right to copy and distribute it for free. There is no need to copy a movie in most cases. I have over 2200 DVD's, 175 blurays, and 146 HD DVD's, and I have never had a reason to copy any one of them at any time. When I travel, I take the DVD's that I want to watch. The studios(no matter how much we dislike it) have a right to protect their intellectual property that the have invested millions in from proliferation for free. If they didn't act this way, then the value of that property is greatly diminshed."

I have no opinion on the matter, really. I'm still DVD only and I don't really care to rip my music unless I have to fly. I guess I'm a bit old-fashioned that way. Do you own the same movies on BR/HD-DVD that you have on DVD? What about VHS & Laserdisk? That must really be a kick in the pants! I don't know, maybe you have that kind of money, but most people don't. And what happens when a new format comes out and all your BRs, HD-DVDs and your players become the proverbial "bricks"? What if I'm right and downloads / paid subscription services become the norm? Will you buy them all again?

"For many folks downloads are not attractive. I have had too many hard drive crashes that has left me without important documents to leave my movies on a hard drive. If the hard drive crashes, you lose your entire investment, and they will not give you a second download for free."

Most people have had a hard drive crash at one time or another (interestingly, in the seven years that I've been using Linux, that's not happened on those machines). But you can always do backups (I do). Funny thing is people don't ever worry about their Tivo/PVR hard drive crashing or their music server blowing up - it's pretty much the same technology. This really is just fear mongering - how many hard drives have you really lost all your data from? Actually people never worried about their VHSes or Cassettes getting demagnitized too much either. That's because for most people (with the exception of some people here) the stuff gets old and stale over time so people don't really care to keep it - often times, they share it online to trade for something better.

"I would rather have the physical disc in my hand because that pretty much guarantees that I can play my disc anytime, and anywhere without the worry of it getting lost. If the disc does get lost, DVD's are so cheap I'll just go buy another. The average joe is not complaining about copy protection because many of them don't see it, don't hear it, and it doesn't effect the enjoyment of the movie."

Actually the average Joe is irritated by it. Sure this frustration won't be written up in the industry reports, the a/v mags, their websites, or any of the "official" sources. Industry "insiders" probably don't even realize this, or would rather not have anyone know it, so they're not going to talk about it either. But if you search online blogs, websites like the EFF and non-mainstream news, you'll find a lot of discontents.

"I am going to give you a little flashback. When DVD was first introduced, there were people just like you saying that DVD was not important, and the better picture and sound quality over VHS is not important. VHS never had extra's so why are they so important?"

No flashback needed. I never said BR/HD-DVD were not important - technologically they are very compelling to me. It's the extras that are not important. Aside from Film majors in college, very few people watch them.

"Well, DVD overtook VHS in sales just three years after it was introduced to the market. Alot of naysayers just like you were eating crow pie. HD DVD has been around just a year and a half, and their are more titles on shelves at this point than there were DVD's at this point in its history. There are more HD DVD players sold now, that DVD players at this point in its history. Bluray really solidly came on the market about a year ago. There are far more players now(thanks to the PS3) in the field than there were DVD players at this point in its history. Bluray has pressed well over a million disc worldwide at this point. DVD was even close to this at this same point in its history. There are approximately 500,000 HD DVD players in homes right now. DVD had less than this a year and a half after introduction. Bluray has over 1.8 million bluray players in consumer homes, and DVD wasn't even close to this a year after its introduction."

How many times does this falsehood have to be repeated? Things change much faster than they did 10 years ago - that's just a fact of society. What you describe as slower penetration then means very little today. Also do those BR numbers include PS3 players? How can you know that those owners watch BR on them? Yes X-box has an HD-DVD player add-on, but there are far fewer of those in people's homes, but at least we know that those are used exclusively for HD-DVD watching. The only usable statistics are rental and sales figures, with the caveat that those are still "statistics" (see below).

"TV shows are free anyway."

My point as well. That's content that is not reflected in your numbers.

"You can get it off the air."

Ever heard of a Podcasts?

"You have to pay for bit torrent movies now, and its been tracking as a decline. Illegally it cannot be determined with its growing or in decline."

But it is estimated that illegal bit torrents outnumber legal ones 10 to 1.

"Streamed video you have to pay for. There is no site that is going to allow you to tie up its servers for free. Most streamed video is porn, and that showed a slight decline in 2006."

Wow, I didn't know that CNN, CBS, ABC, and NBC mostly streamed porn. Since it's all free, I'll have to block those sites from my kid's computers.

"What you enjoy doing cannot be construed as a widespread thing. Its what you like to do. I can find 5 more people who have no interest in watching anything on a two inch screen unless its a menu, or a still picture. Youtube probably looks pretty good on a two inch window because the video is so highly compressed."

Ever consider how many people watch YouTube? It's by far the most popular content site on the internet. Even Myspace is replete with YouTube links (and I'm pretty sure they're gaining puopularity here on AR). I guess those millions of viewers are statistically insignificant? Interesting stats, then.

"Try watching it on a 65" HDTV."

People don't do that. What I'm trying to explain is that YouTube makes the general public expect the convenience of downloaded and streamed content. It won't be a big leap from there to get these same people to switch to downloaded content on their TVs when higher quality downloads are available using their existing gear. That's very different from making them go and buy a BR player, new cables, new disks, and possibly new TVs.

"Most marketing experts disagree with you about news in high definition. Almost all stations in large cities now broadcast their news in high definition. There must be a reason for that if not just for marketing purposes."

When Tivo, Cable, PS3 & X-box users can download HD movies for the same price as the current SD movies, this whole debate will be over. "Blue Ray, was that some kind of fish? Oh wait a minute, it was that DVD-thing that went the way of the dodo, right? Boy do I feel sorry for all the people that bought into that!"

"If joe6pack covered his mouth with the other hand, then nobody but him would know he is watching Jenna on a big screen."

Let's hope he remembers to pull the blinds.

"Somebody must want porn in HD because it sure is available."

My guess? It's the novelty thing. Is it selling better that regular movies (as a ratio to SD sales)? If it is, then I didn't know that.

"So because this one person made this quote, we should all abandon using any kind of words or numbers? Utterly rediculous."

No, but if you read the book, it's pretty damning: just about every single foreign aid package from the US in the last 50 years used fraudulent numbers to benefit American business at the cost of millions of lives - the kind of abuse that would make Pol Pot blush. It's not the same as the numbers we are looking at here, of course, but there are plenty of news sources for equally disturbing information. You can even search your movie collection for titles Silkwood, The Insider, Erin Brockovitch, Thank you for Smoking, and Sicko for evidence that the "official" corporate press release isn't exactly truthful. And bringing it back around to our discussion: the disks that are sold available on both formats - it's not like we're talking about a lot of fudging to make a point that one sells better than the other.

"If the idea of using statistics to fool people was your goal, then it can be easily done. If you goal is to use statistics to guage trends, then its invaluable. The Bible can be twisted to reveal spritual falsehood if that was the intent. A textbook can be twisted to reveal educational falsehoods if that is the intent. It is not the statistics that is the problem, it's the intent....If that was the intent, yes. If that was not the intent, no....If that industry intent was to survive and thrive, then very confident. If the numbers were ment to distort or two twist, not very confident. It all goes back to the intent. Do I rely on information I get from my industry sources? Yes I do, because the intent is not to deceive anyone, its to inform. Most folks that take the position you are taking, are people who cannot get access to the information. It makes it easier to dismiss the facts when someone else has the information, and you don't."

Don't be questioning the word of God, now. You're on your own to defend that one.

Regarding intent, that's precisely my point - there could very well be an intent to mislead. How much is this whole industry worth? Are you going to convince me that they're any different from the multinationals who lied to the rest of the world for half a century? Actually, some of them are those very same companies. Wait a minute, didn't you say that the mags and papers lied about SACD and DVD-A? Why would this be any different? Heck, I would say that the mags and papers are even more beholden to the media conglomerates now than they were when SACD and DVD-A had our attention.

"The connection you are attempting to make cannot be made by this example. Poll numbers are guesses and estimates. They are not actual votes counted. Since getting poll numbers happens BEFORE the election, things can change very quickly. Sales figures are after the fact numbers that are exact. Sales figures don't change unless they were wrong in the first place."

I was talking about how the exit polls were so inconsistent with the results. Ever heard of a state called Ohio? It may come as a surprise, but it's now been clearly shown that Kerry carried the state handily, just as the exit polls showed, but somehow that's not who was elected. I'm not a cheerleader for either side, but the numbers don't add up.

Sales figures are also estimates. And do they include returns, second-hand sales, promotional freebies, the grey market, the black market, and illegal copying? Nope. With BR and HD-DVD they might be slightly more accurate because they haven't been widely cracked, but that's a temporary security. With sales of regular DVDs, music CDs, online downloads, steaming video, and all the other media that we've been discussing, "official" statistics are much more questionable than that. It might very well be that sales figures show less than half of what's really changing hands.

"If PQ and AQ were so unimportant to the average DVD buyer, then VHS would have been more than good enough. In reality it is important to many, or DVD would not have been adopted so quickly by so many. If we didn't have two competing format creating market confusion, I am not so sure we would be having this discussion. We know this from the DVD introduction. When DIVX and standard DVD were both on the market, neither flourished. When DIVX exited the market, DVD took off like a shot, inspite of the naysayers that said VHS and Laserdisc is good enough."

Maybe maybe not. Are we certain, with all the other factors that are possible, that it was DIVx exiting the market that was the reason for DVD's meteoric rise? Maybe you're right, but I wouldn't say that unequivocally.

"This is a foolish bet and not worth my time. It has already been said that this internet could not support mass market downloading. If it was attempted, it would just clog the system. It took years to build the infrastucture we currently have, and you think it will take just two years to build another. You have more balls than I with this thinking. There are far too many details to be worked out to get the job done in two years. That's a fact my friend."

I was also said early on, that the Internet was a fad. Microsoft completely missed that boat. Remember how hard they had to fight, both above board and under the surface, to kill off Netscape when they realized they weren't surfing at all? (boy, that sentence kind of rolled like a wave...)

I'm not saying we need to rebuild the internet. I'm saying we have to build on what we have. Ever heard of Cal-IT2? Darpa-II? If we can just convert the guns of competition to plowshares of cooperation (isn't that a great phrase?), then we can easily improve the infrastructure. We used to be the Internet authority in the world, there's no need we can't be once again. It's not just a matter of improving the hardware, by the way, we can also improve the software layers to be more efficient and less prone to bloat with technologies like the Semantic Web / Web 3.0. Heck if Al Gore becomes president, who knows what he'll pull from that lockbox, the solar-powered internet?

"Alot of folks believe that Iraq was involved in the Twin Towers tragedy even in the face of facts. I think more people are worried about the middle class surviving than thinking about what the RIAA and the MPAA are doing. People know that corporation are screwing them, but it doesn't stop them from supporting these corporations. Look at Walmart. Everyone knows they screw their employees, and the American worker. They still have made the company the largest retailer in the world. The American public has no problem screwing themslelves with their own decisions. The midwest could clearly see that as Walmart stores proliferated throughout the region, manufacturering jobs were dissapearing. They saw whole business district dry up to dust, and they still went to Walmart. They watch the politician they voted into office screw them by supporting illegal immigration, but they never recalled, or even called their rep to the carpet. These days the American public is much more efficient at screwing themselves than a corporate conglomerate could ever be."

Not every American is a Wallmart-shopping, Hummer-driving, gun-toting-NRA-member, Limbaugh/O'Reily/Hannety/Dr.Laura-worshipping ignoramous bent on ruling the world with an iron fist and willing to re-ellect indefinitely the douche-bags who screw them over and over again. After a while it starts to chaff. The rising resistance to Wallmart and other abusive companies is indicative of that. Independent news sources like Democracy Now and Free Speech TV are gaining in popularity. Among young people, it's actually cool to be a non-smoker, tech-savvy, semi-vegetarian, Prius-driving, college-educated, liberal (Oh my goodness, Maybel, he used the "L" world - we're all going to hades, now!). Speaking of religion, even major churches throughout the Bible belt are realizing that indiscriminate rendering and torture isn't really the Christian thing to do. Gee, it did take a while, didn't it?

There is reason to be depressed, yes, but there is hope as well. I'm sorry if I'm an optimist, I can't really change that. I sincerely hope that BR or HD-DVD succeeds for it's technical merits (it really is a gorgeous picture in the store). Or better yet, I'd like to see a dual-format becoming the standard. But right now, I am more inclined to believe that downloads and/or streaming content will win the day.

Sounds to me like you are referring to what often times happens in the market or with a certain product and that is the 'phenomenon' of marketing. There are sometimes no real rational explanations for why something does well, does poorly, etc etc. Even with hard facts it becomes way too complicated to really decipher the real cause of certain events, thus they are unexplainable or illogical, yet can still happen. For some people this is bothersome because they want an explanation for everything that makes logical sense, and yet there just is no hard evidence that supports why the market turns one way or another. It's an enigma.

Even the word: explain
Doesn't make sense that the word: explanation is spelled without the 'i', as in explaination. Can anyone explain that?

[ldgibson76]

My last reply to this subject was pretty much ignored and that's cool. But I'm here to tell all of you, this new format called "HD VMD" is coming. New Medium Enterprises will become very relevant soon. http://www.nmeinc.com/. If you've never heard of NME....you will. And for those of you who prescribe to the theory regarding number of movies available at inception, VMD is way ahead of the DVD, HD DVD and Blu ray. Check out the number of movies available in the HD VMD format. It has the potential to make both HD DVD and Blu-ray come down in price very quickly.

Peace!

[drseid]

My last reply to this subject was pretty much ignored and that's cool. But I'm here to tell all of you, this new format called "HD VMD" is coming. New Medium Enterprises will become very relevant soon. http://www.nmeinc.com/. If you've never heard of NME....you will. And for those of you who prescribe to the theory regarding number of movies available at inception, VMD is way ahead of the DVD, HD DVD and Blu ray. Check out the number of movies available in the HD VMD format. It has the potential to make both HD DVD and Blu-ray come down in price very quickly.

Peace!

I honestly believe this format will be DOA in the US. It has little major US studio support and few distribution outlets. It also does not support the new lossless audio formats. The early buzz on the format has been "cold" to put it mildly.

My feeling is it is way too late in the game to join the party, as HD DVD and Blu-ray already have gained enough traction to create relatively strong barriers to entry. Had this format been released a lot earlier, I might be singing a different tune, as its low price is certainly appealing.

---Dave

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Sir T.,

If I give up on this debate, it'll be because of sheer exhaustion, not because I am coming around to your way of thinking. Again, with all the respect in the world, I don't think your facts add up. The examples you present, while well argued, only deal with what is legal, public, and from "official" sources. I believe that there are far more unknowns in this issue than is apparent.

Nobody can make a judgement based on unknows. They're unknown. One can only make a decision or analysis based on knowns. Trying to throw a bunch of unknowns into a debate just muddies the debate, and keeps it from being clear and understandable.

This may very well have been the case, but that does not explain why catalogs were increasing. If sales were stagnant, why did shelfspace, the number of articles, the number of players, and the size of online catalogs increase?

Have you ever heard of the line "you can lead a horse to water, but cannot make him drink". Well, this is a case of the product was created, and the public didn't buy it. The articles were there to increase magazine sales. As long as there were two audio formats battling it out, it created enough buzz to write an article about. It was the competition flavor of the period, but it didn't develope enough interest with the public to spur sales.

While this may be true, there were very few if any naysayers at the time. Are you telling me that almost every magazine and newspaper writer was on the take?

I do not think I said that. I said the audio format war created a nice press buzz, but it didn't create sales of the software.

This is a perfect example of just looking at "official" numbers. Windows was only pre-installed on computers from the big manufacturers (Dell, HP, Compaq, etc.) but the number of white box systems sold in the US was about 1/4 of total sales. And that's for the US. - outside the US, the number was much higher. These people had to buy Windows separately. I was actually involved with sales to the UC of Cal. system. We purchased all our Windows licenses through a Microsoft volume contract, and I can tell you that well over 70% of the Windows boxes at UC at the time were licensed this way: separate line items. It was not until '97 that Microsoft mandated that only upgrades would be sold both to the retail and the high-volume channels, meaning that people had to buy a system with Windows pre-installed.

I am sorry man, it is incredibly ingenious to make a point on 25% of sales. That is like dismissing the other 75% as irrelevant just to make a point. I also dispute your 25% as well. Within your ten year period(that would be 1997) Dell, HP Compaq and Gateway represented about 86% of all computers sold. All of their computers came with Windows pre-installed. Windows proliferated because it was in every computer sold inside and outside this country. Just to check my facts, I called a buddy of mine who marches in the same drum corps as I do. Going over the history of windows, he stated to me that before 1995, most window products were sold over the counter as upgrades to previous window products. By the time 1998 rolled around, there was more software pre-installed in computers, than bought over the counter. What you are attempting to do is expand the time frame of your original statement. Remember, you said ten years ago, which would be 1997, and even you admit in your last statement that I am indeed correct

It was not until '97 that Microsoft mandated that only upgrades would be sold both to the retail and the high-volume channels, meaning that people had to buy a system with Windows pre-installed

. I appreciate you confirming my point.

I also worked on a research project looking at the risks of piracy. I don't remember the exact figures, but I know they don't match up with yours. Our estimates were that perhaps 30% of Windows licenses in the US were pirated. Worldwide the numbers were as high as 60%. The idea that every license on every PC was pre-installed is ridiculous.

Your ESTIMATES that PERHAPS doesn't negate my statements at all. When I made my point, I was not referring to Asia or Europe. Their markets are much different than ours. I was referring to the United States. Since you already made my point on pre-installs, I will not belabour that point.

Competely false. I remember reading that the RIAA estimated in 2003 that 90% of MP3 music was illegal - most of this music came from Napster users when the RIAA couldn't shut them down. I know that was a while ago, but those files are DRM-free and they are still out there, on iPods, music servers, and the Internet (that's the beauty of digital, it never gets old). I also happen to know that even today younger people trade files like rabits in heat. All it takes is to plug two players to the same computer. Most CDs are ripped as soon as they are purchased. If they have DRM on them, it is stripped off. I'm not saying I condone it, but its far more common than you think. I also don't know what the sales figure are for non-DRM files, but I can tell you that if they are not high, it's because they have no DRM! Only one person needs to download it.

You critisized me over my insider information, yet you are quoting one of the most inside sources in the music industry. First, the RIAA is notorious for overstating their points to bring a sense of "urgency" as a means of obtaining more strict rules in congress. Not only that, but Napster is an outdated point, as it is no longer in existance. Music creation is not a static action. For every song that is still out there, more are being created. Not only are those files still out there, but so are dummy files, and files with digital distortion rendering them unplayable(thank you RIAA sarcasm off). As far as copying CD's, there is no evidence whatsoever that links the ordinary joe CD ripper to the online propagation of illegal files. If there is, could you provide a link with some substanative information that confirms such.

I also don't know what the sales figure are for non-DRM files, but I can tell you that if they are not high, it's because they have no DRM! Only one person needs to download it

So you are stating that people are downloading non DRM files, and propogating illegally as a practice?. I would like to see some evidence that this is true, because you are essentially calling alot of folks crooks!

Simple: they were not around long enough nor did they become enough of a share of the market. Windows wasn't being widely cracked until it hit version 3.0.

This is not a discouragement - it's a challenge. It will happen sooner or later. The only way to guard against copying is to make the content less valuable. Nobody cracks TV shows because they are free - if low-res movies (YouTube sized) and low-res music (128Kbps or less) were free as well, the number of hacks would be way down. Even DVD cracking is down, not because it's hard, but because it's so easy to get the movie illegally, if you really want it. A BlueRay disk, especially if it hasn't yet been released to the public, would be worth a lot in "online cash." There are plenty of people working on this. It's not a question of if it will happen but when it will happen.

Come on, do you really think that anyone is willing to brick their bluray player, or bluray drive in their laptop just to crack a code. I don't think so. I agree about DVD because I have seen those files show up in my email coming out of a yahoo group. As far as bluray and folks breaking its code, you really have to figure out if the disc has BD+, that it can be easily exploited, and that it is worth it to do so. I think cracking it will take time, but the real problem for any hacker will be getting the player to play the hacked files.

Not true. The people that are up in arms are the millions of consumers who don't believe they should pay for each medium that they need a song/movie in. If you bought the HD-DVD disk, why should you then also have to buy the DVD because your car doesn't have an HD-DVD player? Or having to buy the Shoutcast version of your favorite MP3? Etc.

Well there are no portable HD DVD drives available for cars number one. Number two is you cannot play HD DVD files on a regular DVD player. So anyone with half an operational brain would understand that I will need a DVD copy for the DVD player, and a HD DVD copy for an HD DVD player. Either that or they believe a round peg will fit in a square hole.

I have no opinion on the matter, really. I'm still DVD only and I don't really care to rip my music unless I have to fly. I guess I'm a bit old-fashioned that way. Do you own the same movies on BR/HD-DVD that you have on DVD? What about VHS & Laserdisk? That must really be a kick in the pants! I don't know, maybe you have that kind of money, but most people don't. And what happens when a new format comes out and all your BRs, HD-DVDs and your players become the proverbial "bricks"? What if I'm right and downloads / paid subscription services become the norm? Will you buy them all again?
[I]

The answer to your first question is yes. I have some copies on all three formats so I can take the DVD on trips, and not worry if I lose them. Its never happened, but you never know. The answer to your second question is, as long as players are made, your invest in software is always safe. When they stop making players, the sell the movies on Ebay, just like they have done with laserdisc. Some things I worry about, but not this.

Most people have had a hard drive crash at one time or another (interestingly, in the seven years that I've been using Linux, that's not happened on those machines). But you can always do backups (I do). Funny thing is people don't ever worry about their Tivo/PVR hard drive crashing or their music server blowing up - it's pretty much the same technology. This really is just fear mongering - how many hard drives have you really lost all your data from? Actually people never worried about their VHSes or Cassettes getting demagnitized too much either. That's because for most people (with the exception of some people here) the stuff gets old and stale over time so people don't really care to keep it - often times, they share it online to trade for something better.

Okay, so you have 500GB of movie files on your sever, then you need another 500GB or so as a back up. First this takes know how, which joe6pack doesn't either want to know, or doesn't want to go through all of the trouble. I could not imagine my best friend ever doing this. Then there is the cost of the drives, interfaces etc. Before you know it, it cost more than a HD DVD or bluray player and the disc.
I am somewhat surprised you accuse me of fear mongering when you have done you best to do the same concerning bluray and HD DVD. To give the appearance that all will be wonderful all the time with storage drives is very deceiving. Hard drives crash every day. I have been temporaily assigned by Disney to one of the television stations they own. Every day there is a drive failure somewhere in their system, so to make any attempt to play down this reality is just plain disengenious.

Actually the average Joe is irritated by it. Sure this frustration won't be written up in the industry reports, the a/v mags, their websites, or any of the "official" sources. Industry "insiders" probably don't even realize this, or would rather not have anyone know it, so they're not going to talk about it either. But if you search online blogs, websites like the EFF and non-mainstream news, you'll find a lot of discontents.

This is a statement of convience to support an arguement. Oh sure you can say anything and then add that its not reported in main stream A/V press, or official sources. Well, it has to be reported somewhere that the masses are upset. The only place you do see it, is from HD DVD supporters, who are upset that DRM has not been implemented on their format. No bluray supporter is crying about AACS or BD+. If somebody is upset, it should show up somewhere. I think THIS is FUD. I am not going to pay any attention to someone with a alternative agenda on this issue, like bloggers and fringe groups. They have their own agenda, and that doesn't include offering any studio or record any protections on their intellectual property.

No flashback needed. I never said BR/HD-DVD were not important - technologically they are very compelling to me. It's the extras that are not important. Aside from Film majors in college, very few people watch them.

This doesn't appear to be consistant with your earlier statements, but I guess we have to take your word for it.

How many times does this falsehood have to be repeated? Things change much faster than they did 10 years ago - that's just a fact of society. What you describe as slower penetration then means very little today. Also do those BR numbers include PS3 players? How can you know that those owners watch BR on them? Yes X-box has an HD-DVD player add-on, but there are far fewer of those in people's homes, but at least we know that those are used exclusively for HD-DVD watching. The only usable statistics are rental and sales figures, with the caveat that those are still "statistics" (see below).

Nothing I said was a falsehood. That is just an excuse for not knowing, or willing to deal with the facts. In audio and video, things do not change THAT fast. Since 1982 there has only been VHS, Laserdisc, DVD and now HDM on disc. Unlike the computer industry, the A/V industry cannot support such quick changes, as each change requires retooling player manufacturing line, manufacturering video and audio encoders and decoders, and building the infrastructure to handle the new format.

Please, do not go down the "how do you know that people play BD on the PS3" crap. When the PS3 was released, sales figures and rental figures BOTH went up simultaneously as the PS3 sales grew. How in the heck do you think that the bluray side can maintain a sales lead of 2-1 since January with less standalones sold? Think about it before you mention this. I own one and play nothing but movies and music on it. Go to bluray.com and there are thousands using it as their primary bluray player.

Once again, you cannot dismiss sales and rental figures at your convience.

Wow, I didn't know that CNN, CBS, ABC, and NBC mostly streamed porn. Since it's all free, I'll have to block those sites from my kid's computers.

They are all streaming free TV programs shown directly off air. I can speak directly for ABC, while they support it, it is not a big revenue stream for the network. Based on the last DTV magazine I read, its not big for the other major players either. I don't major in minors like you are attempting to do. I am talking about MAJOR revenue sources, not little to insignificant ones. Porn is a significant revenue stream, and while online sales of products have significantly increased, online streaming as fallen.

Ever consider how many people watch YouTube? It's by far the most popular content site on the internet. Even Myspace is replete with YouTube links (and I'm pretty sure they're gaining puopularity here on AR). I guess those millions of viewers are statistically insignificant? Interesting stats, then.

I watch youtube on occasion. But what the tea in china has that got to do with HDM on disc, and its sucess of it? There are no full length HD movies on youtube, so it is irrelevant in the contexted of this debate.

People don't do that. What I'm trying to explain is that YouTube makes the general public expect the convenience of downloaded and streamed content. It won't be a big leap from there to get these same people to switch to downloaded content on their TVs when higher quality downloads are available using their existing gear. That's very different from making them go and buy a BR player, new cables, new disks, and possibly new TVs.

People do not look to youtube for their movie watching needs. They look at youtube for its unique content. There is no evidence that movie downloads really have a market at this time. The last poll taken showed that most folks do not sit in front of their computer to watch movies. That is still the domain of the disc based formats.

Your second point makes no sense whatsoever. In order to enjoy higher quality downloads or HD, you need a HD television. So if they don't have one, whether they pick downloads or the disc, they have to replace their current equipment. If they expect uncompressed audio and don't have access to HDMI capable receiver, then they have to purchase new equipement. Even if they wanted to experience the advanced codecs(which are more efficent than PCM) they still have to replaced their old equipment. There is no scenario where a consumer can just plug in their existing equipment into the grid, and poof, there is high quality audio and video.

When Tivo, Cable, PS3 & X-box users can download HD movies for the same price as the current SD movies, this whole debate will be over.

You have a looooong time for this to happen. In case you didn't know it, HD movies have to be digitally scanned and encoded before release. Right now it is very expensive(look at HDM on disc's pricing), and the only encoders that are in widespread use is MPEG-2 which is not efficient enough for downloads. VC-1 is next in line, but not in widespread use. Same goes for AVC. Also if you look at the pricing of audio downloads, it has been steadily going up. I seriously doubt that any studio(and that includes the one I work for) would undercut disc sales for downloads at this point. Keep dreaming

"Blue Ray, was that some kind of fish? Oh wait a minute, it was that DVD-thing that went the way of the dodo, right? Boy do I feel sorry for all the people that bought into that!"

I prefer debating with adults, which precludes the inclusion of such comments as this.

My guess? It's the novelty thing. Is it selling better that regular movies (as a ratio to SD sales)? If it is, then I didn't know that.

The costs associated with producing such content would prevent a novelty status.

No, but if you read the book, it's pretty damning: just about every single foreign aid package from the US in the last 50 years used fraudulent numbers to benefit American business at the cost of millions of lives - the kind of abuse that would make Pol Pot blush. It's not the same as the numbers we are looking at here, of course, but there are plenty of news sources for equally disturbing information. You can even search your movie collection for titles Silkwood, The Insider, Erin Brockovitch, Thank you for Smoking, and Sicko for evidence that the "official" corporate press release isn't exactly truthful. And bringing it back around to our discussion: the disks that are sold available on both formats - it's not like we're talking about a lot of fudging to make a point that one sells better than the other.

I am not interested in the disinformation of the government, which is what this book goes into. The SEC has rules againist the purposeful spread financial misinformation. The company's boards do not like it, stockholders absolutely don't like it.

Don't be questioning the word of God, now. You're on your own to defend that one.

Reading comprehension is a wonderful thing. I didn't question the word of God. I said the word of God can be manipulated, used in a evil way, and twisted to make a point. Southern Baptist do it all of the time, as does the catholic church. Nothing to defend, so tuck your self rightousness back into your pocket.

Regarding intent, that's precisely my point - there could very well be an intent to mislead. How much is this whole industry worth? Are you going to convince me that they're any different from the multinationals who lied to the rest of the world for half a century?

This is the same industry that will support your theories on movie downloads. If you have an issue with them concerning BR or HD DVD, then you should have the same issues with them concerning downloads. Or are you picking and choosing your evils to fit your arguement?

Actually, some of them are those very same companies. Wait a minute, didn't you say that the mags and papers lied about SACD and DVD-A? Why would this be any different? Heck, I would say that the mags and papers are even more beholden to the media conglomerates now than they were when SACD and DVD-A had our attention.

Once again, reading comprehension is a wonderful thing, twisting ones words is not. I said the audio press made more hay about high resolution music, but that HAY(or fluff) do not turn into disc sales. That is a fair fetch from lying. SACD and DVD-A sold magazines, not discs. I hope that is clear.

I was talking about how the exit polls were so inconsistent with the results. Ever heard of a state called Ohio? It may come as a surprise, but it's now been clearly shown that Kerry carried the state handily, just as the exit polls showed, but somehow that's not who was elected. I'm not a cheerleader for either side, but the numbers don't add up.

This has nothing to do with HD DVD or BR. This is mud designed to cloud the issue, much like mud does with water.

[quoteSales figures are also estimates. And do they include returns, second-hand sales, promotional freebies, the grey market, the black market, and illegal copying?[/quote]

It is not the job of sales figures to cover all of the items, it covers sales. Profit and loss reports cover the other issues.

Nope. With BR and HD-DVD they might be slightly more accurate because they haven't been widely cracked, but that's a temporary security. With sales of regular DVDs, music CDs, online downloads, steaming video, and all the other media that we've been discussing, "official" statistics are much more questionable than that. It might very well be that sales figures show less than half of what's really changing hands.
[I]

I'll leave that up to you to prove, since you claim they are all inaccurate and therefore unuseful.

Maybe maybe not. Are we certain, with all the other factors that are possible, that it was DIVx exiting the market that was the reason for DVD's meteoric rise? Maybe you're right, but I wouldn't say that unequivocally.

Studies have already tied the two together in this way. You can doubt, and you can be paranoid enough to doubt everything and discount everything. But it doesn't make it so.

I'm not saying we need to rebuild the internet. I'm saying we have to build on what we have. Ever heard of Cal-IT2? Darpa-II? If we can just convert the guns of competition to plowshares of cooperation (isn't that a great phrase?), then we can easily improve the infrastructure.

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. If there is no financial incentive to re-develope the internet infrastructure, then don't expect business to contribute to the cost. If the government cannot regulate it, then they won't contribute as well. There has to be something in it for someone, or it will never be done. Pie in the sky thinking, but not very realistic.

We used to be the Internet authority in the world, there's no need we can't be once again. It's not just a matter of improving the hardware, by the way, we can also improve the software layers to be more efficient and less prone to bloat with technologies like the Semantic Web / Web 3.0. Heck if Al Gore becomes president, who knows what he'll pull from that lockbox, the solar-powered internet?

I cannot argue with this. But any attempts to control free access of all kinds is going to be a problem.

Not every American is a Wallmart-shopping, Hummer-driving, gun-toting-NRA-member, Limbaugh/O'Reily/Hannety/Dr.Laura-worshipping ignoramous bent on ruling the world with an iron fist and willing to re-ellect indefinitely the douche-bags who screw them over and over again.

Oh really? Well the elected one stupid douche bag twice, even when they knew he was pooch screwing them. I often question the intellect of the middle of our country, and I have reason after reason to do so.

After a while it starts to chaff. The rising resistance to Wallmart and other abusive companies is indicative of that.

What resistance to Walmart? I do not see any massive fall in revenue or their stock price. Americans are still going there by the droves, even though it is well documented that they recommend their vendors manufacture their product in China.

Independent news sources like Democracy Now and Free Speech TV are gaining in popularity. Among young people, it's actually cool to be a non-smoker, tech-savvy, semi-vegetarian, Prius-driving, college-educated, liberal (Oh my goodness, Maybel, he used the "L" world - we're all going to hades, now!). Speaking of religion, even major churches throughout the Bible belt are realizing that indiscriminate rendering and torture isn't really the Christian thing to do. Gee, it did take a while, didn't it?

Democracy now, and Free Speech TV are mere noise compared to the signal of the Networks and Cable news. Smoking at all ages is down in America, and up in the rest of the world. There are still more SUV's sold than Prius, fewer high schoolers going to college(cost is killing the middle and low class), definately turning more liberal.

As far as the bible belt churches, they are still judgemental, seperatists, racial bigots, and continually take the bible out of contexted, and the helped get the worst president in the history of this nation back into office. I wonder if these are "Christian" things as well.

There is reason to be depressed, yes, but there is hope as well. I'm sorry if I'm an optimist, I can't really change that. I sincerely hope that BR or HD-DVD succeeds for it's technical merits (it really is a gorgeous picture in the store). Or better yet, I'd like to see a dual-format becoming the standard. But right now, I am more inclined to believe that downloads and/or streaming content will win the day.

Dual format is not going to exist. Forget it. It cost the industry too much to support two formats that do exactly the same thing. Its too expensive to do seperate encodes that maximises the technology of both, and Warner doing the same encodes for both formats just isn't working out.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

My last reply to this subject was pretty much ignored and that's cool. But I'm here to tell all of you, this new format called "HD VMD" is coming. New Medium Enterprises will become very relevant soon. http://www.nmeinc.com/. If you've never heard of NME....you will. And for those of you who prescribe to the theory regarding number of movies available at inception, VMD is way ahead of the DVD, HD DVD and Blu ray. Check out the number of movies available in the HD VMD format. It has the potential to make both HD DVD and Blu-ray come down in price very quickly.

Peace!

I have to agree with Dave here, its not going to do anything in the US, Japan, or China in that case. Its 40mbps bitrate does not tell you what is devoted to audio, and what is devoted to video. And lastly, the article incorrectly mentions that BR data rate is 36mbps, the same as HD DVD. That is incorrect. For BD-Rom which is what all movies are released on, the video bitrate is 40mbps by itself, with the capability(within the buffer stage) for peaks of 48mbps. The totally bitrate is 54mbps. That is a vastly larger pipline than 40mbps for everthing.

[Mr Peabody]

I'm with the Doc here, the US has two formats battling out and there isn't any room for #3. NME is on their own and it would be very difficult to get the market penetration that the other two already have. I'd have to think that wind of VMD would have gotten around to the manufacturers long ago yet they seem to be choosing BR or HD-DVD. NME would have to get movie companies on board and get retailers to stock their product. They'd have more than an up hill battle.

Also NME don't really offer any real advantage over the other 2 formats, except they claim red laser is superior to blue. I don't know if that's true or not. VMD can hold up to 100 GB but a company showed at 2007 CES a HD-DVD that can hold 150 GB. At present nothing can read all the layers of a disc like that. Actually, the movie companies aren't even using near the available storage now, so a storage race don't mean much except to maybe computer users. With Microsoft behind HD-DVD and the BDA member companies putting out BR computer products, I think even the PC market is already taken up.

The US market has already shown that pricing is not a factor so far in this war. This has me puzzled but the fact is, it's going to take more than a cheap price to get VMD into the fight. According to many published sales reports Blu-ray seems to be selling even better overseas. Bottomline, I wouldn't buy any stock in NME. My prediction is, instead of them taking over, they will fade away without a ripple in the US. They were supposed to be here in the 3rd quarter yet no one has heard of them.

[Woochifer]

I'm with the Doc here, the US has two formats battling out and there isn't any room for #3. NME is on their own and it would be very difficult to get the market penetration that the other two already have. I'd have to think that wind of VMD would have gotten around to the manufacturers long ago yet they seem to be choosing BR or HD-DVD. NME would have to get movie companies on board and get retailers to stock their product. They'd have more than an up hill battle.

Also NME don't really offer any real advantage over the other 2 formats, except they claim red laser is superior to blue. I don't know if that's true or not. VMD can hold up to 100 GB but a company showed at 2007 CES a HD-DVD that can hold 150 GB. At present nothing can read all the layers of a disc like that. Actually, the movie companies aren't even using near the available storage now, so a storage race don't mean much except to maybe computer users. With Microsoft behind HD-DVD and the BDA member companies putting out BR computer products, I think even the PC market is already taken up.

The US market has already shown that pricing is not a factor so far in this war. This has me puzzled but the fact is, it's going to take more than a cheap price to get VMD into the fight. According to many published sales reports Blu-ray seems to be selling even better overseas. Bottomline, I wouldn't buy any stock in NME. My prediction is, instead of them taking over, they will fade away without a ripple in the US. They were supposed to be here in the 3rd quarter yet no one has heard of them.

I'm fishing for conspiracies here, but wasn't the Chinese government pushing their own red-laser HD disc format a while ago to try and circumvent the HD-DVD and Blu-ray royalties? This sounds an awful lot like a new variant on that concept.

If so, that would make plenty of sense since China's domestic market alone has 1.4 billion potential customers, and the VMD Wikipedia entry mentions that Bollywood titles will be among the first available in the VMD format (India contributes another 1+ billion customers, and ranks as the most prolific movie industry in the world). With just the domestic markets in China and India, this format can take off even if none of the North American and European production houses support it.

And with much of China's domestic production capacity owned by the government, they can easily mandate VMD as the home market standard for domestically produced content, and completely lock Blu-ray and HD-DVD out altogether. Toshiba has been signing up Chinese manufacturers to make off-brand HD-DVD players, but I've read speculation that the Chinese want to jettison DVD player manufacturing altogether along with the HD-DVD format in order to avoid paying royalties.

For North America, I think the only potential market for VMD would be imported content, particularly movies and TV shows from India and China if both of those countries widely adopt VMD as the HD format of choice. It's no different than how a lot of the movies from that part of the world commonly used the Video CD (VCD) format rather than VHS, and took a long time before switching a lot of the content from VCD to DVD.

[Woochifer]

I agree with you about downloads, but even more threatening is VOD.
It allows pause, FF,REVERSE, and saving for 24hrs.
And its killing the rental market in my town.
Downloading is a bit in the future, but netflix is advertising it already.
You need terabytes of storage? Not really, just erase something like a DVR when you're through, not to mention that 500 gb of hard drive is available now, for 125$ yet.
And zip drives that will hold an entire movie, properly compressed.
Windows vista reccomends 2gb of memory, 4gb preffered, how long before we see a "format" based on a solid state memory? Or a small 30gb HD like you see in some
mp3 players?
Both sides are acting like the optical disc is going to be the standard for decades,
when the first optical disc, CD, is dying a fast death.
Both formats co-exsisting? heck, ONE might not make it.
But if one does it will be Blu ray.
The HDDVD camp is kinda like the black knight in the holy grail.
Cut off his arm, just a scratch, chop off his leg, just a flesh wound.
Wonder when they will see what is becoming increasingly obvious

There's one problem with your VOD theory -- the movie downloads come locked down with all kinds of onerous time and use restrictions. It's not like you can download a HD movie and watch it as many times as you want indefinitely. So long as the studios insist on DRM and self-destructing files, it will not completely replace physical disc media.

The DVD turned the home video industry upside down by transforming it from a primarily rental market to a purchase/collecting market, since the DVDs themselves don't cost that much more than movie tickets, and you get to keep the movie and mine through the bonus features for favorite films. As Terrence pointed out, the broadband pipelines aren't fast or reliable enough for on-demand HD streaming, which is the kind of instant gratification that consumers will want in order to displace disc media to a significant degree. And once residential networks get upgraded to higher speeds, will they come with progressive pricing structures based on usage? DSL and cable providers are already clamping down on heavy usage customers, and I can easily see the broadband providers getting even more restrictive once video downloading becomes more commonplace.

[PeruvianSkies]

Anyone else remember the short-lived attempt to do HD-LD?

[pixelthis]

There's one problem with your VOD theory -- the movie downloads come locked down with all kinds of onerous time and use restrictions. It's not like you can download a HD movie and watch it as many times as you want indefinitely. So long as the studios insist on DRM and self-destructing files, it will not completely replace physical disc media.

The DVD turned the home video industry upside down by transforming it from a primarily rental market to a purchase/collecting market, since the DVDs themselves don't cost that much more than movie tickets, and you get to keep the movie and mine through the bonus features for favorite films. As Terrence pointed out, the broadband pipelines aren't fast or reliable enough for on-demand HD streaming, which is the kind of instant gratification that consumers will want in order to displace disc media to a significant degree. And once residential networks get upgraded to higher speeds, will they come with progressive pricing structures based on usage? DSL and cable providers are already clamping down on heavy usage customers, and I can easily see the broadband providers getting even more restrictive once video downloading becomes more commonplace.

This is an exelent demo of hobbyist thinking, people who love movies and collecting them
just don't have the thinking process of those who want to just look at a flick with the family
ONCE.
My VOD service stores the movie for 24 hrs, and I have never felt the need to watch one
more than once.
Lets face it, most movies just aren't collectible. And the convience of not having to take a movie back is very important. Exibit A... NETFLIX.
hi-def? A lot of movies on my system are high def, most have 5.1, there is almost no
downside to this service.
And copy protection? I usually have no trouble copying a copy for my own use.
But most of what I am interested in keeping is concerts, music vids, etc, and theres
quite a few hd concerts on MHD.
BUT even with stringent copyguards it still doesnt matter, most will find that VOD
is just fine for their needs.
I used to have a VCR, "timeshifted" stuff all of the time.
Now I have a DVR, and delete stuff all of the time. If its really special I just shoot it to my dvd recorder. As a result I no longer have a closet of unwatched tapes.
And It has to be very special for me to copy it. I watched Chuck, that new NBC show
in glorious HD, loved it, and then, ZAP, gone!
And a lot of shows, especially on basic cable, replay all of the time anyway.
VOD is a baby now, but flat screen TV was a baby a few years ago.
Moviegallery is closing 500 stores, Blockbuster is imitating Netflix.
And people tell me all of the time about watching a new movie on the "payperview"
Quite a few disc sales are for rental, if rentals collapse it will soon be only collectors
who are buying discs.
And don't forget ordinary HDTV, I watched "jagged edge" on MOJO tonight, and the print was glorious, absolutely beautiful, and while I was watching it I wasn't watching a disc.
The new season is starting, and its a wonder just how good "ordinary" TV looks in HD,
Not to mention sports, etc.
ALL is a competition for disc, the ONLY thing disc can do is be a collectors item,
and how many collectors are out there?

[nightflier]

Sir T.,

We can sit here and quote point for point, but the continuity of each section is lost because the original statement is not maintained and nobody wants to go back and read previous posts.

First of all, I'm speaking with the utmost respect for your facts and figures, which I cannot dispute. What I am merely saying is that they represent the "official" story from the commercial interests. Furthermore they are only a representative percentage of the whole picture and do not take many other important factors into account. My comment is that you place too much trust in them. They are useful, as estimates, but not complete.

Take the discussion about the use of statistics to corrupt government officials for the last 50+ years (according to Perkins' book). You dismissed it with

"the SEC has rules against the purposeful spread financial misinformation. The company's boards do not like it, stockholders absolutely don't like it."

You have complete faith in the SEC and the institutions in place to fight disinformation. Yet this book, and many other, by the way, describe exactly how there is a collusion between government and business to arrive at desired (& profitable) results.

We live in a fantasy that these collusive agreements only exist in distant China or Japan, but this country is the model these countries have followed. Consider many of the other books that have appeared about this disturbing relationship like The Fox in the Henhouse: How Privatization Threatens Democracy, Media Mythmakers: How Journalists, Activists, and Advertisers Mislead Us and that ubiquitous primer of econ101 How to Lie With Statistics. Since you obviously have a gripe with the current administration, you should read up on the Chicago school of Friedman disciples like Cheney, Rummy, and Shultz who have pretty much single-handedly destroyed whole national economies with their fuzzy math and have done the same here.

And this isn't all just Macroeconomics - let's bring this back around. You insinuated yourself that the magazines lied about SACD & DVD-A sales. If so, then wasn't there a widespread agreement from the magazines to disseminate false information? Now couldn't it be possible, just possible, that we are witnessing the same thing here with BR & HD-DVD? I don;t know this for sure, but it's not like there's no precedent. Many companies are corrupt, just Google "Computer Associates", "Martha Stewart", heck, just Google "SEC investigates..."

We can sit here and poke at each other with witticisms and petty humor using distant arguments about MS Windows sales (by the way, I don't at all agree with your argument), election results and the Bible, but they only seem to detract from the original argument so I'll stop with them. Certainly I am as guilty as anyone for using humor in this debate. But my main argument, and I think I do have a strong case, is that the "official" stats and reports from the industry cannot be taken as the gospel truth.

You would argue that they are overwhelmingly representative of the complete picture, and I, well, would argue that they are less than that, perhaps even a whole lot less. Where in the middle can we meet? Or can't we even get to within a stone's throw? We are debating a format war. And while one side does seem to be gaining, let's say, just to keep the peace, by a 2-1 lead, does that mean that it's all over? The answer to that question is entirely dependent on how accurate the official stats are and how much is unknown.

But even if we left these troublesome statistics out of the equation. You, Pixel, Whooch and some others who have obviously already decided which format will win in your homes, are not shying away from cheering on your own side. Perhaps your comments will also have an impact as people obviously use the internet and thus this forum to make their own purchasing decisions. But is that an impartial opinion? After all, you would have to eat some humble pie if HD-DVD pulled ahead, if a dual-format arrived, if a Chinese or Indian format would pull ahead, if VOD suddenly took off, or a whole host of other technologies that have been mentioned by others here, were to slowly creep ahead. You are basically betting the family farm against all the many other possibilities. It's already been established that all it would take to tip the balance (your own words) is a shift of one of the major studios to the other camp. I'm not much of a gambler, but those are some stiff odds.

Personally, I'm not cheering on any side, I'm only pointing out that we put far too much faith in "official" information. This can be dangerous. Maybe some of us have the resources to absorb the costs of switching formats, but that doesn't mean everyone else can. I'm only urging caution. Ultimately, no one has a crystal ball, so we'll find out next year who takes the first bite of that humble pie. In the meantime, we all have some reading to do.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Sir T.,

We can sit here and quote point for point, but the continuity of each section is lost because the original statement is not maintained and nobody wants to go back and read previous posts.

I do not think that is the issue. I think you are attempting to include something that cannot be tracked or measured, that nobody seems to know the impact of, to make your point. That is not what I am trying to do, I like using things that are known to make a point.

First of all, I'm speaking with the utmost respect for your facts and figures, which I cannot dispute. What I am merely saying is that they represent the "official" story from the commercial interests. Furthermore they are only a representative percentage of the whole picture and do not take many other important factors into account. My comment is that you place too much trust in them. They are useful, as estimates, but not complete.

You cannot make this assumption because you have no idea that its true. You want to dismiss everything that IS "official" so it puts us on a equal footing, and completely muddies the debate. I have to resist that, because unless you have some inside information that definately point to a purposeful attempt to decieve, then that arguement has not merit here. You sound paranoid that everyone is out to get everyone else through disinformation.

Take the discussion about the use of statistics to corrupt government officials for the last 50+ years (according to Perkins' book). You dismissed it with

I dismissed it because you have no proof of relevance. Its just your theory, and not reality. If you can prove to me the relevance as it pertains to this particular debate, then I would take it into consideration. Just mentioning it as a talking point with no evidence of its truth makes it appear to me that you are just throwing crap against the wall to see what sticks. That approach just confuses the issues.

"the SEC has rules against the purposeful spread financial misinformation. The company's boards do not like it, stockholders absolutely don't like it."

You have complete faith in the SEC and the institutions in place to fight disinformation. Yet this book, and many other, by the way, describe exactly how there is a collusion between government and business to arrive at desired (& profitable) results.

Once again you are putting words in my mouth. If you read what is bolded, I made no mention that I have complete faith in anyone, or anything. I stated a point of fact. Do I think corporations deceive that public? Yes, I sure do. Is there any evidence that either Sony or Toshiba, any studio or manufacturer is out right lying about everything? I see absolutely no evidence of that up this point. Since most of my figures come from sources that does not include Sony, Toshiba, studios, or any manufacturer from either side(it comes from unrelated third parties), then I do have faith in the figures I site. I never use any information from the BDA or the HD DVD PG. I automatically assume that information from them is already twisted in each's favor.

As far as this book relating to the current situation, you will have to prove that point.

We live in a fantasy that these collusive agreements only exist in distant China or Japan, but this country is the model these countries have followed. Consider many of the other books that have appeared about this disturbing relationship like The Fox in the Henhouse: How Privatization Threatens Democracy, Media Mythmakers: How Journalists, Activists, and Advertisers Mislead Us and that ubiquitous primer of econ101 How to Lie With Statistics. Since you obviously have a gripe with the current administration, you should read up on the Chicago school of Friedman disciples like Cheney, Rummy, and Shultz who have pretty much single-handedly destroyed whole national economies with their fuzzy math and have done the same here.

I do not think anyone believes in the fantasy that you mention. This is fluff and blather. WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE THAT MAKES THIS APPLICABLE TO THIS DISCUSSION!!!!!

Rummy, Cheney and Schultz have nothing to do with video downloads, Bluray, or HD DVD. You are venturing far from the topic of discussion, and you have no proof that what you are injecting into the debate applies to the debate.

And this isn't all just Macroeconomics - let's bring this back around. You insinuated yourself that the magazines lied about SACD & DVD-A sales. If so, then wasn't there a widespread agreement from the magazines to disseminate false information? Now couldn't it be possible, just possible, that we are witnessing the same thing here with BR & HD-DVD? I don;t know this for sure, but it's not like there's no precedent. Many companies are corrupt, just Google "Computer Associates", "Martha Stewart", heck, just Google "SEC investigates..."

Here you go again, and for the third time, please do not change my words or put any in my mouth. I NEVER said the magazines lied, I said(and for the third time now) that SACD and DVD-A created a nice buzz in the audio press. There were many graph, opinions, technical pieces, and software reviews, but it didn't translate to sales or apparently from the lack of sales, any interest.

We can sit here and poke at each other with witticisms and petty humor using distant arguments about MS Windows sales (by the way, I don't at all agree with your argument), election results and the Bible, but they only seem to detract from the original argument so I'll stop with them. Certainly I am as guilty as anyone for using humor in this debate. But my main argument, and I think I do have a strong case, is that the "official" stats and reports from the industry cannot be taken as the gospel truth.

They also cannot be discounted because it convient to your arguement. You may "think" you have a strong case, but its really is in your head. Its your paranoia. You have not shown one piece of evidence to support what you say, you are just saying it, and believing you have a strong case. You every heard of "legend in your own mind". This smacks of it man. No joke, no petty humor, and no distant argument here.

[/quote]You would argue that they are overwhelmingly representative of the complete picture, and I, well, would argue that they are less than that, perhaps even a whole lot less. Where in the middle can we meet?[/quote]

I have presented facts and figures to support my arguement. These are figures coming from third party sources with no connection to the BDA or the HD DVD PG. Since businsses PAY for this information, it HAS to be accurate, or the business who business it is to collect this information(with no opinion attached) would lose credibility and business. The sources are not in the business to twist facts, only report what is gleaned from the businesses who support HD DVD and bluray. You on the other hand have not presented a single piece of credible information to support your statements. Not one piece!!!! Its all what you think, and let's face it, a whole new world can be created on what you do not know.

Or can't we even get to within a stone's throw? We are debating a format war. And while one side does seem to be gaining, let's say, just to keep the peace, by a 2-1 lead, does that mean that it's all over? The answer to that question is entirely dependent on how accurate the official stats are and how much is unknown.

Its not a let's say situation when it comes to sales figures. The last sales figures from Nielsons showed a 61:39% for the weekly sales ending September 16. This was a week where there were three exclusive releases on the HD DVD side, and zero from the bluray side. This is for sales only, not P&L entries such as returns, and exchanges. 300 on bluray has for seven weeks outsold all HD DVD titles in that same period. Sales are what everyone is looking at, and since these sales figures come from Nielsons(a third unrelated party) everyone pays attention to these figures. Even the studio's use these figures as their source for sales numbers.

But even if we left these troublesome statistics out of the equation. You, Pixel, Whooch and some others who have obviously already decided which format will win in your homes, are not shying away from cheering on your own side. Perhaps your comments will also have an impact as people obviously use the internet and thus this forum to make their own purchasing decisions. But is that an impartial opinion? After all, you would have to eat some humble pie if HD-DVD pulled ahead, if a dual-format arrived, if a Chinese or Indian format would pull ahead, if VOD suddenly took off, or a whole host of other technologies that have been mentioned by others here, were to slowly creep ahead. You are basically betting the family farm against all the many other possibilities. It's already been established that all it would take to tip the balance (your own words) is a shift of one of the major studios to the other camp. I'm not much of a gambler, but those are some stiff odds.

Nobody has an impartial opinon. I made my decision based on inside sources, trends that I have noticed, the titles that I intended on replacing, and the cost and stability of the player I chose. I have players from both formats, but I am only replacing DVD's from on format.

I have no worry for cheap chinese players. Cheap chinese DVD players have already degraded the market for cheap chinese players in terms of quality, and the recent negative press of all product from china have pretty much put a wet heavy blanket on that issue. Walmart is not even carry the cheap chinese player from Ventura, and neither is Target. Those are the #1 and #2 electronic device retailers in the country. Without these two outlets, the propogation of these players is slowed tremedously. Not my worry. HD DVD has always been cheaper, but that has not helped player sales all that much. HD DVD has 500,000 players sold, bluray has 400,000 standalones(does not include PS3). HD DVD players are half the price of bluray players, and have only sold 100,000 more units. HD DVD also had a 6-7 month head start to get there. Low prices only work when all of the studios are supporting the format. This is not the case with HD DVD.

The chinese format is not compatible with HD DVD, and cannot play HD DVD disc. No worry here. The Chinese format is for China only, not for the rest of the world.

The indian format does not have the spec's to compete with either bluray or HD DVD. It has absolutely no support from the major Hollywood studios which represent 85% of the worldwide movie sales. It does not have many sales outlets, and consumer response so far has been to say the least beyond cold. VOD has been around alot longer than both bluray and HD DVD. VOD has a long way to go before it can even be consider along side of HDM on disc. Comcast and Time Warner have stated that VOD has been pretty flat for the last couple of years.

Personally, I'm not cheering on any side, I'm only pointing out that we put far too much faith in "official" information. This can be dangerous. Maybe some of us have the resources to absorb the costs of switching formats, but that doesn't mean everyone else can. I'm only urging caution. Ultimately, no one has a crystal ball, so we'll find out next year who takes the first bite of that humble pie. In the meantime, we all have some reading to do.

What you are doing is spreading FUD. Your knowledge of this field is pretty limited, and your paranoia is pretty profound. No matter how I explain that what you call "official" sales figures don't come from the studios or manufacturer themselves, your paranoia will not allow you to trust in them. The idea of downloads over taking HDM on disc is pretty much not going to happen for many years to come. The infrastructure just is not there, and there are too many people who are not ready to part with disc as their movie sources.

Your problem is that you trust nothing, so you are left pretty much knowing nothing. This is not meant to insult you, but you just do not understand the movie marketplace. I have been in this industry 25 years. In that time you learn which information to trust, and which to discard because of bias. To make the assumption that I trust too much biased information just outlines how little you understand about this subject. Not all sources are biased, and not all information can be discounted. You demonize statistics without understanding the intent of the stat's. You discount sales figures as anyone would be stupid enough to believe information coming from interested parties, as opposed to third unrelated parties. You make wild claims without a shred of support for them. While I respect your opinions, opinions are no substitute for facts.

[Woochifer]

This is an exelent demo of hobbyist thinking, people who love movies and collecting them
just don't have the thinking process of those who want to just look at a flick with the family
ONCE.
My VOD service stores the movie for 24 hrs, and I have never felt the need to watch one
more than once.
Lets face it, most movies just aren't collectible. And the convience of not having to take a movie back is very important. Exibit A... NETFLIX.
hi-def? A lot of movies on my system are high def, most have 5.1, there is almost no
downside to this service.
And copy protection? I usually have no trouble copying a copy for my own use.
But most of what I am interested in keeping is concerts, music vids, etc, and theres
quite a few hd concerts on MHD.
BUT even with stringent copyguards it still doesnt matter, most will find that VOD
is just fine for their needs.
I used to have a VCR, "timeshifted" stuff all of the time.
Now I have a DVR, and delete stuff all of the time. If its really special I just shoot it to my dvd recorder. As a result I no longer have a closet of unwatched tapes.
And It has to be very special for me to copy it. I watched Chuck, that new NBC show
in glorious HD, loved it, and then, ZAP, gone!
And a lot of shows, especially on basic cable, replay all of the time anyway.
VOD is a baby now, but flat screen TV was a baby a few years ago.
Moviegallery is closing 500 stores, Blockbuster is imitating Netflix.
And people tell me all of the time about watching a new movie on the "payperview"
Quite a few disc sales are for rental, if rentals collapse it will soon be only collectors
who are buying discs.
And don't forget ordinary HDTV, I watched "jagged edge" on MOJO tonight, and the print was glorious, absolutely beautiful, and while I was watching it I wasn't watching a disc.
The new season is starting, and its a wonder just how good "ordinary" TV looks in HD,
Not to mention sports, etc.
ALL is a competition for disc, the ONLY thing disc can do is be a collectors item,
and how many collectors are out there?

And your post is a perfect illustration of VHS-era thinking. The home video industry is now a purchase-driven market, whereas in the VHS era it was a rental-driven market. All of your points address rentals, but don't speak at all to the behavior of the purchase market, which grew by leaps and bounds because of the DVD. Downloading will basically take over the market niches currently occupied by PPV and rentals. But, in order to completely supplant disc media, video downloads cannot come locked down with DRM and play restrictions.

Plenty of people like to watch favorite movies more than once, loan DVDs to friends, take movies with them when they travel, take their time to mine through the bonus features, etc. All of the video download services out there currently don't allow for that kind of flexibility -- the files are restricted to a specific device, they lack portability, they expire/self-destruct, etc. The people for whom this does not matter are the same people who currently subscribe to Netflix and/or watch PPV. With restrictive DRM, self-destructing files, and no true "on demand" downloading speeds, video downloads are nothing more than a lateral market shift away from existing rental/PPV sources.

You think that parents will be willing to shell out a view fee for 30th time when their kids want to watch Cars yet again? Or if you paid to download a movie, but didn't have time to watch it before the file expired -- are people going to be fine with paying the rental fee a second time to watch a movie that they already have sitting on their hard drive?

Downloading might have the potential displace disc media if the download files allow for unlimited viewing and portability from device to device, but I doubt that the piracy paranoid studios will make it that easy. If anything, a new emerging model that's coming online is the Burn-to-Disc download purchase, which would get around the limitations inherent in video downloads by giving consumers additional options and flexibility.

[Mr Peabody]

In addition to what Wooch already pointed out, VOD will remain insignificant because the cable companies are ran by complete and total idiots. I'm surprised they are still able to stay in business. Another thing is their PPV selection is too limited to really effect rentals.

[PeruvianSkies]

And your post is a perfect illustration of VHS-era thinking. The home video industry is now a purchase-driven market, whereas in the VHS era it was a rental-driven market. All of your points address rentals, but don't speak at all to the behavior of the purchase market, which grew by leaps and bounds because of the DVD. Downloading will basically take over the market niches currently occupied by PPV and rentals. But, in order to completely supplant disc media, video downloads cannot come locked down with DRM and play restrictions.

Plenty of people like to watch favorite movies more than once, loan DVDs to friends, take movies with them when they travel, take their time to mine through the bonus features, etc. All of the video download services out there currently don't allow for that kind of flexibility -- the files are restricted to a specific device, they lack portability, they expire/self-destruct, etc. The people for whom this does not matter are the same people who currently subscribe to Netflix and/or watch PPV. With restrictive DRM, self-destructing files, and no true "on demand" downloading speeds, video downloads are nothing more than a lateral market shift away from existing rental/PPV sources.

You think that parents will be willing to shell out a view fee for 30th time when their kids want to watch Cars yet again? Or if you paid to download a movie, but didn't have time to watch it before the file expired -- are people going to be fine with paying the rental fee a second time to watch a movie that they already have sitting on their hard drive?

Downloading might have the potential displace disc media if the download files allow for unlimited viewing and portability from device to device, but I doubt that the piracy paranoid studios will make it that easy. If anything, a new emerging model that's coming online is the Burn-to-Disc download purchase, which would get around the limitations inherent in video downloads by giving consumers additional options and flexibility.

Talk about hitting the nail on the head! I remember back in the day of working at a video store and parents would come in renting THE LION KING week after week after week, eventually it became (once DVD came out ) more profitable to offer people a buy option, which is exactly what happened. They could either rent the movie for 4 bucks or after the movie was out for 4 weeks they had the option to buy it for 10. What ended up happening though is that store went out of business because they couldn't keep up with the demands of buying versus renting. Good idea at first, but a long-term death blow.

[pixelthis]

And your post is a perfect illustration of VHS-era thinking. The home video industry is now a purchase-driven market, whereas in the VHS era it was a rental-driven market. All of your points address rentals, but don't speak at all to the behavior of the purchase market, which grew by leaps and bounds because of the DVD. Downloading will basically take over the market niches currently occupied by PPV and rentals. But, in order to completely supplant disc media, video downloads cannot come locked down with DRM and play restrictions.

Plenty of people like to watch favorite movies more than once, loan DVDs to friends, take movies with them when they travel, take their time to mine through the bonus features, etc. All of the video download services out there currently don't allow for that kind of flexibility -- the files are restricted to a specific device, they lack portability, they expire/self-destruct, etc. The people for whom this does not matter are the same people who currently subscribe to Netflix and/or watch PPV. With restrictive DRM, self-destructing files, and no true "on demand" downloading speeds, video downloads are nothing more than a lateral market shift away from existing rental/PPV sources.

You think that parents will be willing to shell out a view fee for 30th time when their kids want to watch Cars yet again? Or if you paid to download a movie, but didn't have time to watch it before the file expired -- are people going to be fine with paying the rental fee a second time to watch a movie that they already have sitting on their hard drive?

Downloading might have the potential displace disc media if the download files allow for unlimited viewing and portability from device to device, but I doubt that the piracy paranoid studios will make it that easy. If anything, a new emerging model that's coming online is the Burn-to-Disc download purchase, which would get around the limitations inherent in video downloads by giving consumers additional options and flexibility.

They do like to do these things, with certain movies, whichthey will buy, but not with most.
And DVD became a purchase market when DVD started selling for five to 20 bucks
DVD was the revolution, HDDVD and blu are the evolution.
Trust me, to an enthusiast HD on disc is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but most will compare the price to DVD and stick to DVD, it just wont be worth it to them.
Why pay 25 to 30 bucks for a copy of CARS with marginal improvement (to them)
when you can make a copy off of premium channels with a DVD recorder for free?
Or buy a copy on DVD for ten bucks?
As for VCR era thinking, we are back in the era of the VCR.
GO INTO SEARS, WALLMART, etc, and you will find dvd recorders taking up most of the shelf space, why buy a player when you can have a recorder for a few bucks more?.
I HAVE HAD A STANDALONE dvd recorder for a few years, have a rather large collection of movies and concerts, videos, TV series, the discs record once, but they're cheaper than dirt, and the PQ ain't bad really.
FOR marginally collectible stuff, a bootleg is just fine, and with lightscribe the lables
look great.
And heres the rub, and the largest hurdle for the new disc formats,
to many there is just not enough improvement to justify the investment.
most think of a homemade DVD as a hugh improvement over VCR, AND THEY'RE CORRECT. They don't care if a storebought DVD is "better".
And if they don't care about that they sure wont care about a 30$ HD disc.
Its deja vu all over again, I couldn't "sell" laserdisc to friends, they loved mine, were amazed by it sometimes, but just didn't want to pay the high prices for discs.
And when you can "buy" an HD view on vod, and make a standard def copy if you like it,
(which I HAVE HAD NO TROUBLE DOING) then HDDVD and Bluray become more problematic.
They sold 288 million C.D's in 1990, don't know how much they sold last year, but not that much by far. THEY underestimated the DL threat, if they thought about it at all,
will hollywood do the same with VOD?
I mean, I was downloading tv shows, movies, music, entire programs off of peer to peer
over a cable modem five years ago!
What will happen in another five?

[nightflier]

Sir T.,

The books that I listed, while definitely political in nature, do a very good job of describing political collusion with the corporate sector. They each describe in detail how stock prices, white papers, research funding, corporate reports, media releases, statistics and news stories are manipulated, twisted, and realigned to meet a business goal. No they do not discuss BR and HD-DVD sales, many of them were written well before those were on the radar and they are focussed on much larger market segments. What they do describe, however, is a pattern of behavior that should call the "official" information into question.

In my reference to the Friedman / Chicago school of economics, the pattern is that changes, particularly revolutionary changes, create a sense of shock in society that allows corporations to further their agenda in ways that would in a slower, evolutionary progression be unacceptable (think the Pariot Act after 9/11/01 or Pinochet after 9/11/71). For a full explanation, read The Shock Doctrine. There's no point in discussing who or what caused the revolutionary changes, but what is significant is that this is a pattern of behavior that is a standard sequence of events, accepted as the way to get things done in business. This, by the way, is not unfounded, marginal, or really disputed in the literature.

While our discussion about BR & HD-DVD is on a much smaller scale, what we do have is a sudden reversal earlier this year of HD-DVD's lead in the market place. A small, tiny revolution, if you will, that many people attribute to the release of the PS3. What I am concerned about, and I don't think I am alone, is how much of what is being reported in the press, the sales figures, and even the Nielsen ratings is, if not hyperbole, at least marginally off by a few percentage points in order to force a dramatic change in the purchasing choices of the general public.

It also does not need to be a big fudging of the numbers. A few percentage points is perhaps all that is needed, if you consider all the many other factors that do come into play such as margins of error, misjudgment in the selection of the survey sample, and the emphasizing of favorable stats over less favorable ones. If you then add the unknowns related to returns, freebies/coupons, the black/gray market; the difference grows. Then just to add to the confusion, we throw in fervent online debates, that for the most part are from people who have already chosen their format of choice - as a result, the whole picture of what is really happening in this industry becomes very murky.

You mentioned the Nielsen ratings. I know they pride themselves on impartiality, but they have a few skeletons in their closet too (from a quick search online):

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4864036
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...6/ai_n18349292
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...3/ai_n10023764

These are not necessarily reasons for dismissing them outright, I know, but it shows that every "official" source should be scrutinized. Since I believe that it only takes a few percentage points to tip the scales of a format war, I don't think it is too much of a stretch to suggest that even a 2-1 lead is not the whole picture.

To say that I am a paranoiac, that all this is in my head, or to marginalize my opinion is missing the point. The fact is that we don't know, we can't know, in this industry, if a format war is over (as Pixel contends), that the statistics are overwhelming correct, or that unforeseen future products/announcements/events will not reverse the 2-1 ratio. A year ago, I would have been arguing the same to people who professed that HD-DVD was the clear winner.

I can accept that the SACD/DVD-A scenario may not be an ideal fit for an example that may be similar in direction, if not scale, but you have to admit that there are some similarities worth noting. I certainly didn't have the insight into the events that followed the release of those formats (after all who has access to interview leading figures from Sony & Telarc), but it is still disturbing to me, and I think it should also be troubling to everyone else, that during that format war, the status of the industry and profits for both formats was by and large kept from the public. Was it collusion? Who knows? But it certainly leaves me a little more doubtful of the "official" story than I was before.

Again, I am not saying either format will win, I'm only urging caution at proclaiming a winner this early in the war. If I may say so, your early negative experience with HD-DVD makes me wonder where you would stand had that negative experience been with BR. Likewise, your ability to purchase new disks/players at a rate that most of us can only wish for, also makes you an unlikely typical consumer or commentator. Finally, you have to admit, that the zeal with which many BR proponents are proclaiming victory is in some way affecting the format war, if not making people feel just a bit uncomfortable.