-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76
Gentlemen! Just agree to disagree! Damn! No one can predict what's going to happen from day to day in the DVD industry! I just read an article on CE Pro website regarding the state of the HD DVD/Bluray format war and according to a high ranking executive of Sony, it's a stalemate. Please read the article and the replies to the article. It may put things into perspective for "Mr. Wizard, "Nostradamus", and "The Amazing Randy"! on this format war!
http://www.cepro.com/article/sony_bl...r_a_stalemate/
ldgibson76
By the way Peruvian, your last repaly was Funny! :lol:
The "high ranking executive" was Harold Stringer. He's the CEO. I was a bit suprised by his comment as well.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
The "high ranking executive" was Harold Stringer. He's the CEO. I was a bit suprised by his comment as well.
Yeah, I know! I didn't want to name-drop!:smilewinkgrin:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76
Gentlemen! Just agree to disagree! Damn! No one can predict what's going to happen from day to day in the DVD industry! I just read an article on CE Pro website regarding the state of the HD DVD/Bluray format war and according to a high ranking executive of Sony, it's a stalemate. Please read the article and the replies to the article. It may put things into perspective for "Mr. Wizard, "Nostradamus", and "The Amazing Randy"! on this format war!
http://www.cepro.com/article/sony_bl...r_a_stalemate/
ldgibson76
By the way Peruvian, your last reply was Funny! :lol:
I did not think that lex, umm I mean pervruvian comments were all that funny, a little juvenile and immature, but not funny.
Keep in mind, Stringer is referring to a studio stalemate, not a sales stalemate. He is also talking what is happening currently. He also has to balance stockholders expectations with reality.
Even with the Paramount defection, the only gains that have been made is a one or two percentage point shift in sales. HD DVD could not beat bluray in sales even when transformer was released, and Bluray had no exclusive new title released that week. The following week it was back to 71-29% in favor of bluray for weekly sales, pretty much where it has been all year.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
I did not think that lex, umm I mean pervruvian comments were all that funny, a little juvenile and immature, but not funny.
Keep in mind, Stringer is referring to a studio stalemate, not a sales stalemate. He is also talking what is happening currently. He also has to balance stockholders expectations with reality.
Even with the Paramount defection, the only gains that have been made is a one or two percentage point shift in sales. HD DVD could not beat bluray in sales even when transformer was released, and Bluray had no exclusive new title released that week. The following week it was back to 71-29% in favor of bluray for weekly sales, pretty much where it has been all year.
Look STT!
All that rhetoric you've just typed means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Both formats are going to be around for a long time. And don't underestimate the American public's intelligence when it comes to economics and their wallets! It's obvious that Blu ray will cost the consumer more money than HD DVD. The problem with that premise is that the quality of Blu ray in most applications is no better than HD DVD. Most of the time, when a movie is offered in both formats, the HD DVD is the better looking
version. The company I work for showcases both formats on very large screens and trust me when I tell you, that in our experience, when a client views both formats on a 92"+ size screen, the majority pick the image of HD DVD over Blu ray. And when I say majority, I mean virtually all! And we use a variety of 1080P projectors and all three HD DVD players from Toshiba and for Blu ray, The Samsung BDP1400; Pioneer Elite entry along with the Playstation 3. I'm not siding with either side. I'm just revealing what I've experienced. Bottom line is the $ will dictate which format emerges victorious in this competition.
And your opinion regarding Peruvian's observation is without a doubt, is how you described it! But it was also funny!:D
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76
Look STT!
All that rhetoric you are you just typed means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Both formats are going to be around for a long time. And don't underestimate the American public's intelligence when it comes to economics and their wallets!
Well, its does mean something. People do not always attribute cheaper as better do they? Despite HD DVD cheaper price, standalone player sales are pretty much a dead heat in America, and no contest in favor of bluray everywhere else in the world.
Quote:
It's obvious that Blu ray will cost the consumer more money than HD DVD. The problem with that premise is that the quality of Blu ray in most applications is no better than HD DVD. Most of the time, when a movie is offered in both formats, the HD DVD is the better looking
version. The company I work for showcases both formats on very large screens and trust me when I tell you, that in our experience, when a client views both formats on a 92"+ size screen, the majority pick the image of HD DVD over Blu ray. And when I say majority, I mean virtually all! And we use a variety of 1080P projectors and all three HD DVD players from Toshiba and for Blu ray, The Samsung BDP1400; Pioneer Elite entry along with the Playstation 3. I'm not siding with either side. I'm just revealing what I've experienced. Bottom line is the $ will dictate which format emerges victorious in this competition.
I respect all peoples opinion, but your comments do not mimick the reviews on both bluray and HD DVD on the most popular review sites on the web. A compulation of scores from DVDfile, The digital bits, hometheater spot, Hidefdigest, hometheater forum, DVDtalk shows the following results.
PQ SQ Total Studio
4.18 4.36 4.27 Buena Vista
3.99 4.16 4.08 Sony
3.81 4.08 3.95 Fox
4.01 3.84 3.93 Paramount
3.96 3.66 3.81 Warner
3.63 3.80 3.72 Lions Gate
3.80 3.63 3.71 Weinstein
3.71 3.63 3.67 Universal
These websites represent some of the largest visited websites on the net. As you can see these results do not mimick yours at all. The top three studios are all bluray exclusive. You are one source, showing a few movies, these are websites that have reviewed just about every HD DVD and Bluray movie released. I own both formats, and nobody can tell me that the PQ offered on Universal titles looks better than my Disney or Sony titles. Nobody can convince me of that period. When it comes to audio, bluray has over 200+ titles with lossless uncompressed audio. HD DVD has 57.
Quote:
And your opinion regarding Peruvian's observation is without a doubt, is how you described it! But it was also funny!:D
How could I miss, its a pretty consistant behavior that is very easy to describe.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76
Look STT!
All that rhetoric you've just typed means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Both formats are going to be around for a long time. And don't underestimate the American public's intelligence when it comes to economics and their wallets! It's obvious that Blu ray will cost the consumer more money than HD DVD. The problem with that premise is that the quality of Blu ray in most applications is no better than HD DVD. Most of the time, when a movie is offered in both formats, the HD DVD is the better looking
version. The company I work for showcases both formats on very large screens and trust me when I tell you, that in our experience, when a client views both formats on a 92"+ size screen, the majority pick the image of HD DVD over Blu ray. And when I say majority, I mean virtually all! And we use a variety of 1080P projectors and all three HD DVD players from Toshiba and for Blu ray, The Samsung BDP1400; Pioneer Elite entry along with the Playstation 3. I'm not siding with either side. I'm just revealing what I've experienced. Bottom line is the $ will dictate which format emerges victorious in this competition.
And your opinion regarding Peruvian's observation is without a doubt, is how you described it! But it was also funny!:D
So when I get a 92+ screen I need to look into HDDVD:crazy:
HDDVD proponents can't get past one main point, HDDVD has NO place to go, its storage capacity is already maxed out, meanwhile corporate is already getting 200 gigs
out of blu based storage devices.
A recession is coming on, maybe a depression , no way can the economy support two
formats when gas is four to five bucks a gallon.
Look for this "format" war to be pretty much over in a year.
Sorry groundbeef, FROM reading the description of your system I know you like cheap crap, but you're gonna haveta pay a little more for a disc player
(I mean, JBL? Get outta the seventies, man):15:
-
2 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76
Look STT!
All that rhetoric you've just typed means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Both formats are going to be around for a long time. And don't underestimate the American public's intelligence when it comes to economics and their wallets! It's obvious that Blu ray will cost the consumer more money than HD DVD. The problem with that premise is that the quality of Blu ray in most applications is no better than HD DVD. Most of the time, when a movie is offered in both formats, the HD DVD is the better looking
version. The company I work for showcases both formats on very large screens and trust me when I tell you, that in our experience, when a client views both formats on a 92"+ size screen, the majority pick the image of HD DVD over Blu ray. And when I say majority, I mean virtually all! And we use a variety of 1080P projectors and all three HD DVD players from Toshiba and for Blu ray, The Samsung BDP1400; Pioneer Elite entry along with the Playstation 3. I'm not siding with either side. I'm just revealing what I've experienced. Bottom line is the $ will dictate which format emerges victorious in this competition.
And your opinion regarding Peruvian's observation is without a doubt, is how you described it! But it was also funny!:D
HD-DVD also is improving with time as well, check out these screen captures from TROY HD-DVD....the one is the theatrical cut released a year ago, the other is the directors cut released one year later. You can see clearly by these two screen caps that the directors cut (which is lighter) gives more detail and better contrast.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
So when I get a 92+ screen I need to look into HDDVD:crazy:
HDDVD proponents can't get past one main point, HDDVD has NO place to go, its storage capacity is already maxed out, meanwhile corporate is already getting 200 gigs
out of blu based storage devices.
A recession is coming on, maybe a depression , no way can the economy support two
formats when gas is four to five bucks a gallon.
Look for this "format" war to be pretty much over in a year.
Sorry groundbeef, FROM reading the description of your system I know you like cheap crap, but you're gonna haveta pay a little more for a disc player
(I mean, JBL? Get outta the seventies, man):15:
Well, while I don't believe we are heading for a depression in the forseeable future... if there is a relatively moderate economic downturn in the short-run, those who still can afford to buy HD players will likely look to price more than normal. Advantage HD DVD.
Oh, and HD DVD has its own testing going on too for the future... "Stalemate" is the correct word for the format war... Sony's CEO got it right. Then again, I have been saying that all along. That is the reason I own both formats.
---Dave
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
So when I get a 92+ screen I need to look into HDDVD:crazy:
HDDVD proponents can't get past one main point, HDDVD has NO place to go, its storage capacity is already maxed out, meanwhile corporate is already getting 200 gigs
out of blu based storage devices.
A recession is coming on, maybe a depression , no way can the economy support two
formats when gas is four to five bucks a gallon.
Look for this "format" war to be pretty much over in a year.
Sorry groundbeef, FROM reading the description of your system I know you like cheap crap, but you're gonna haveta pay a little more for a disc player
(I mean, JBL? Get outta the seventies, man):15:
Hello "pixelthis"!
I will start by saying that your response to my statement regarding the 92"+ screen is appreciated. But when I refer to that larger screen size, it's because if a person really wants to see the true capabilities of a either format, the larger screen offers the consumer better platform than a 50" flat panel. Believe me when I tell you that video-noise is prevalent in most of the Blu Ray movies I've seen. On a smaller surface, like a flat panel or RPTV, you can't see it as much. but on the big screen, it's there! HD DVD seems to be a much cleaner transfer. And no, my company may not view every hi def format movie that becomes available and then write a synopsis on the quality, but we know what our average client thinks and sees! And HD DVD has the better showing.
By the way, HD DVD is improving on the storage capacity. It's at 30GB now because that's all that is needed for now. Do your research before you make a definitive statement.
With Microsoft backing, you better believe that if storage capacity is the only thing holding HD DVD back from dominating the market, Gates and company, not to mention Toshiba, will find a way to overcome that obstacle.
http://arstechnica.com/journals/hard...orage-capacity
Regards.
-
Ok STT.
You made your point, and like you I respect anyone's opinion. I can only go by what I and my colleagues experience everyday in our design center. Yes I read the websites and the magazines, and one thing is apparent, it's all subjective! Both formats are great! But for anyone to say that HD DVD will be gone in a year is asinine at best! I'll tell you what, If HD DVD players are available for under $200.00 for the holiday's and we've already seen the response to that type of pricing already, and Blu Ray fails to counter the aggressive pricing.....the people who purchase the HD DVD players, and there will be many that do, will without a doubt purchase HD DVD software. With gas reaching $4-5 dollars per gallon, consumers will be compelled to stay home for entertainment, and will want to be entertained at home the least expensive way they can. The so called advantages/benefits
that Blu ray may present does not justify the higher price point. Yes there may be more Bluray movies purchased as of right now, but that can change quickly especially during the holidays. The only reason why Blu ray movies has the advantage is because of the Playstation 3. Make no mistake, if more games were available at the PS3's inception, blu ray movies would not have sold as much as they did. Most people purchased movies because they had to in order to justify dropping $600.00 on a gaming system. And if you think that stand alone blu ray players are on pace with the HD DVD players, I want some of whatever you're trippin' on. There's no contest when it comes to stand alone players. Toshiba sells more players than Samsung, Sony, Panasonic, and Pioneer combined.
http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/943
-
So, lil't, let me get this straight....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Internet advertising was as widespread then as it is today.
Is that really true? No it's not - not by any measure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Now if you are referring to VHS, then you have an arguement.
Of course I have an argument. Thanks for agreeing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Advertising to reviews was around then, absolutely nothing with the exception of consumers moving to the internet to shop has change.
I'm not saying those factors were not around back then, but they had far less market penetration. The internet today accounts for far more sales than it did then. It's quite simple math really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
BR has sold far more discs and has far larger a player base than HD DVD....This is not what anyone would call a dead heat.
This is just your interpretation. Apparently the execs at Sony don't even agree with you. DVD's competition with DIVx was nothing like the competition between BR & HDDVD. So yes, this current format war makes the comparison with DVD very weak indeed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Video piracy plays no role in this, and there is no evidence that video piracy has effected any sales of any disc.
Well, not if you listen to the MPAA and RIAA. Yes, there are articles that say that piracy has had little impact, perhaps even boosting sales, but there is no way to know for sure because piracy isn't measured. There are no Nielsen's or NDP ratings for how much video is not purchased because of piracy. And since movie piracy via the internet is far more prevalent today than it was in 1997, one can't make the argument that the adoption rate of BR/HDDVD is or is not being impacted more than DVD was. Piracy is an unknown that makes the comparison between the formats murky.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
What does this have to do with anything? We are talking movie purchases, not renting stop trying to spin.
When people rent, it's pretty much a try-before-you-buy option for them. If the movie is very entertaining people will buy it too, but movies that don't measure up won't have the same sales figures. So the real question is how much have rentals affected the sale of DVDs and also the sale of HDDVD/BR? Another factor that sales figures really don't account for. Sales figures only give us so much information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Remember, as I pointed out to you, Amazon was around back then, and so was the ability to purchase online.
Amazon was selling far more books than movies back then. Today, the opposite is true. This is a perfect example proving my point that the Internet has had a substantial impact on movie sales so that the comparison with 1997 is weak.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
HTF had an online store, as did Widescreen Review, the Audioholics, AVS, this very website had links to various online stores. You could shop online then,and you can now.
So? I never said they were not around. But if you look at sales figures, you'll also see quite obviously that people are buying a whole lot more movies through these sites now than they did then. You're only proving my point that the Internet invalidates your comparison between DVD and BR/HDDVD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Nothing has changed THAT much, except people buying sources, they have moved to the internet, and that is it.
And that is significant to the comparison, or do you not see that?
Blockbuster was here back then, and now. - they were not online, were they?
Netflix, started back in 1998 and still here. - they were just starting out. Their current business has mushroomed now, hasn't it?
Amazon, Started in 1994, and still here today. - See above.
Audioreview, HTF, Audioholics, Widescreen review, DVDfile, The digitalbits, all around back then, still here today. - Yes, and if you look at website traffic, you'll also notice how much more popualr those sites are now than they were in 1997.
Online advertising, was there back then, and here today. - Far more pervasive today and also much more sophisticated using back-end technologies that were not even developed then.
Online promotions tied to reviews was there back then and here today. - See my last comment.
Purchasing online was around back then, and here today. - Never said otherwise, but look at sales figures: exponential growth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
If the internet was around then as it is now, where is your proof that information spread faster?
Well the most obvious is that more people have broadband now than they did then. Also, websites are programmed in ways that target and conform to user preferences and cross-linking-licensing-advertising is far more sophisticated and pervasive today than it was then. This makes information, especially sales-driven information much faster to get to intended audiences. Server hardware and software also makes the Internet faster and more commercially responsive, even if it may seem from your perspective that the Internet has slowed down (and actually even on your desktop, it hasn't).
One very simple example from Amazon is the inclusion of the "would-you-like-fries-with-that" suggestive sales technologies that the site has added that tell you what you might also like to purchase. Amazon has done extensive research into this and found that this is a substantial source of additional sales. That technology was not half as sophisticated in 1997.
Finally, searches are far more sophisticated today using code that is more geared towards sales than you actually finding the relevant information. When you type a search term in Google today, do you know how much is being tracked about that search and subsequent clicks as a result of that search? Well, I can tell you in no uncertain terms that this is far more complex than it was in 1997.
So if you can't see this, and I doubt this is an area you have much interest in anyhow, why don't you "shut the hell up and go about your business." You may know a thing or two about movie sales figures and have some insider secrets, but don't try to lecture me about the Internet and the underlying technologies. That's what I do on a daily basis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
We knew about DVD, VHS and Laserdisc titles before they were released. Advanced copies were sent to review sites then, and they are now. These reviews were posted on review sites long before the title was released just like they are now.
Well here's a perfect example of how piracy has a major impact on the dissemination of information about new movies. The number of popular movies that are bootlegged and distributed over the internet well before even the reviewers get their hands on them is far greater than it was in 1997. Oh, and no they are not HD quality at that point either, but the plot lines, character development, and conclusions are known to the hacker community well before they are to the public.
You don't travel in those circles, so you don't know about this. Heck, you would rather believe this doesn't even exist, I'm guessing. Well, sorry to drive another truck through the hole in your argument again - it's just that you don't want to consider anything that doesn't agree with it. Just ask yourself how many people saw 300 before it was released? Do you really think that your tiny circle of privileged reviewers were the only ones? 'Come on, this is a movie that was at the top of the hacker lists everywhere. Now the next question is how much did that affect sales? You'll probably say something like hardly at all, right? Well how would you know? After all, you are so far removed from that crowd... Well I'm not. I may not be pirating movies (no real desire to), but I do read what's online - and it's not what you're reading.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
There is no evidence that movie previews push sales even today.
Then why do they keep making them? That's like saying there is no evidence that advertising works. Are you really going to go out on that limb?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
So the internet was not around in 1997?
How the hell did you get that from what I wrote? I was there, and probably a lot more active than you were. And don't give me any more of your stupid crap about how I wasn't on AR back then. I was very much here, I just didn't have a tremendous interest in HiFi back then. Hell, I've been reading stuff online before you even had a computer, so don't try and one-up that one. I've been reading posts online when the whole Internet was text-only and it had just been made available to my school. Don't tread where you don't have an advantage, lil't, you'll get squashed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
When people got hip to the fact that they did not have to get into their cars, drive to a store, pick out what they want, wait in line at the register, and come home, all of which takes a great deal of time, they chose the convience of point and click. It was simple convience. You shop online, point and click, and wait for your package. No gas used, no traffic, no crowds, easy peasy.
You're proving my point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
This is tied exactly to the fact that as online purchasing has grown, B&M stores have lost business to online and that is it.
Oh, don't even go there. You're arguing from the gut, now, and you know it. If this is the crux of your argument, show me some sales figures that B&M sales dropped off at the same rate as online sales grew. I seriously doubt you'll find them. I'd wager that online sales grew much faster for the simple reason that it's a lot easier. Don't agree? Then show me the numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Oh,but you do not believe in facts and figures, just your gut and what you think.
Well, show me some sales figures. If I'm wrong about this, I'll cop to it. I don't have a problem doing that, unlike you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Right, and I walk the moon with the guys from Appollo 11, they did not see me, but I was in the chair right next to Buzz. He never saw me, and I did not check in with flight control, but I was there though. Sheesh....Right, I do believe.
Yeah, real mature. I was here. What do I need to do to prove this? I don't remember much. I remember that the forum was called TechTalk or something like that. I vaguely remember someone named Dr. T, I guess that was you (figures)? Some other names that come to mind: Flying Dutchman, Rex, come guy named Vic. I can't remember much else. It's been a long time. Now stop trying to be such a pr*ck and stay on point. You're starting to sound like a child again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
What a whiney plea.
Hey, I'm not trying to get into it with Wooch. At least he doesn't litter his posts with insults and childish remarks. I guess he must be the mature one on your team - do you pick up his laundry, too? I haven't always agreed with Wooch, but I respect his input. I just can't figure out for the life of me why he would hang out with you. It's kind of a mystery really, and apparently others here are wondering the same thing. Do you have something unpleasant on him? Wonder what that's all about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
First off, no matter what you say about the shifts in the market, the bottom line remains the same -- how many unit sales are made within a given time period.
Let's remember what we're talking about. Lil't said that BR/HDDVD sales had grown faster than DVD sales. Of course the numbers bear that out, but to suggest that this is somehow an indication of the strength of these new formats compared to DVD is nonsense. The environment is entirely different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
And the tracking trend data is collected using very much the same point-of-sale methodology that was in use when the DVD was introduced. The very same Videoscan data that was used to track the DVD format's adoption rate is now being used to track the Blu-ray and HD-DVD adoption rates. How's this an invalid comparison?
Look I never argued against those numbers, but I'm arguing that this is not only an indication of the superiority of these formats in the marketplace (over DVD). There are far more factors involved - most importantly the impact of the Internet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
You say that the internet is now a more important sales avenue than in 1997. Well, guess what the Videoscan data does cover online sales.
No argument here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
Like I said, you can make a market-driven argument as to why the adoption rates are higher now than at the same point in time when the DVD was introduced (i.e., the DVD entered the market when home video revenue was driven by rentals, while Blu-ray and HD-DVD enter a market driven by sales)
That's one of my premises, yes, thanks for repeating it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
But, the finding remains the same -- HD optical adoption has occurred at a faster rate than the DVD.
Again, no argument here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
Saying that this is not an argument that can be made "scientifically or academically" presumes that adoption rates therefore can only be argued based on hearsay and presumptions.
You're not reading what I posted. I said that the internet affected sales to a far greater extent - even if you consider the decline in B&M stores. If that is what you and lil't are trying to argue, I challenge you to point out the opposite. The impact of the internet, including those factors that are not accounted for in official sales figures, make the comparison with DVDs, when internet sales/advertising/technologies were in their infancy, a stretch. I really don't think this is hard to understand:
The growth of sales of DVDs cannot be accurately compared with the growth in HDDVD/BR.
We're talking about 15 years for technologies to change/mature/improve. There are just too many factors that muddy the comparison. You want to argue otherwise, be my guest. You may be able to make a tacit approximation, but it is far from a complete picture of what is and will be happening in the current format war. The disagreements about BR or HDDVD standings, notwithstanding.
Are you both really going to tell us that the growth of DVDs 15 years ago is comparable to the growth in BR/HDDVD today? You've got to be kidding me.
-
Even if Toshiba's numbers were correct the fact that Blu-ray is even that close with a significantly more expensive machine says something. Toshiba is practically giving their units away which means there must not be that much of a demand. Only an idiot would drop the price on a product they are selling good at a current price. Blu-ray prices have dropped some as you'd expect for a new product as new generations come out. Blu-ray is able to compete with HD-DVD while keeping their product profitable. HD-DVD is desperate and afraid of a level playing field which is proved by their buy off of Paramount.
The $99.00 HD-DVD player sure got people off the fence but on the other hand that's not much of a loss if one has to switch. Also, as owning a HD disc player access and prices of softward counts too, but not much if it's a title you wouldn't watch.
-
[QUOTE=ldgibson76]Ok STT.
You made your point, and like you I respect anyone's opinion. I can only go by what I and my colleagues experience everyday in our design center. Yes I read the websites and the magazines, and one thing is apparent, it's all subjective!
Yes you are correct, it is subjective. However when your findings are so polar opposite to reviewers, one has to conclude one of two things, the deck is getting stacked against bluray by purposely using titles that are inferior, or you are playing the same inferior title over and over, and playing the superior HD DVD titles over and over. There is just no way in heck with the video quality scores that bluray has been getting, and the fact that Paramount and Universal are squarely under all three bluray exclusive(Warner does not count since they use identical encodes for both) that your customers would choose HD DVD all the time. Something does not square.
Quote:
Both formats are great! But for anyone to say that HD DVD will be gone in a year is asinine at best! I'll tell you what, If HD DVD players are available for under $200.00 for the holiday's and we've already seen the response to that type of pricing already, and Blu Ray fails to counter the aggressive pricing.....the people who purchase the HD DVD players, and there will be many that do, will without a doubt purchase HD DVD software.
Here is the problem with your theory. HD DVD has always been a cheaper alternative to Bluray. However player sales are so close, it does not appear this has been an advantage. Also you have to keep in mind that some of the most popular HD titles in terms of sales come from the bluray side. And when it comes to day and date exclusive titles, Bluray has HD DVD beat through the floor boards. Cheaper price is not helpful unless you have the widespread support from both studios and manufacturers, DVD has shown this. Toshiba has neither.
Currently Toshiba is the only manufacturer making HD DVD drives. They are making them for the computer manufacters, and for themselves. A price breakdown of the cost of making the A2 show it cost about $300 in parts. If they sell it for $199, they are taking a loss on every player. Keep in mind that the Venturer player was also priced at $199, but currently nobody wants to put it on their shelves when Toshiba already has that price point. You have just shoved another manufacturer to the curb here when you have already pissed off so many before. What is good for the consumer(in this case) is very bad for the manufacturer, and the format. A format that is supported by loses, is not something that can be built on. Those five free HD DVD's that comes along with the players, that comes from the HD DVD PG coffers of which Toshiba is the chair. Losses after losses just to support a format with very limited CE support. I cannot see that as a receipe for success. If a manufacturer cannot make money for producing a player, what incentive does that manufacturer to make the player. History has already shown that when a single entity attempts to launch a format by itself, it is a failure in the long run. Beta is that example.
The bluray side does not have to price match HD DVD downward push. They have the marketing prowess to sell their product at a price so everyone in the pipeline makes a profit, and still be cheaper than DVD was at this point in its life. By pricing themselves so a manufactucter can make a profit, more manufactuers are going to produce players at different price points. Next year 4 more manufactucters will join those who already produce bluray players. More computer companies have joined up to put bluray drives in their laptops and desktops. Bluray is spreading to the broadcast community via storage drives in cameras. With such widespread support(much like VHS had) you are pretty much guaranteeing a degree of success already.
Quote:
With gas reaching $4-5 dollars per gallon, consumers will be compelled to stay home for entertainment, and will want to be entertained at home the least expensive way they can.
That is a statement not supported by current events. HD DVD is not outselling bluray right now, not by a long shot when you count all players with internal drives.
Quote:
The so called advantages/benefits
that Blu ray may present does not justify the higher price point. Yes there may be more Bluray movies purchased as of right now, but that can change quickly especially during the holidays. The only reason why Blu ray movies has the advantage is because of the Playstation 3.
Well, it could change. But Universal has already closed the door on any new titles for the remainder of the year. Paramount could announce more, but given the fact that catalogue titles are not selling very well, I highly doubt they will announce any additional titles beyond what they already have. The Playstation can play bluray movies right? If Microsoft had chosen to put a internal HD DVD drive in the XBOX, then the field would be quite level.
Quote:
Make no mistake, if more games were available at the PS3's inception, blu ray movies would not have sold as much as they did. Most people purchased movies because they had to in order to justify dropping $600.00 on a gaming system. And if you think that stand alone blu ray players are on pace with the HD DVD players, I want some of whatever you're trippin' on. There's no contest when it comes to stand alone players. Toshiba sells more players than Samsung, Sony, Panasonic, and Pioneer combined.
http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/943
First, the PS3 does not cost $600. The 40GB version costs $399, and the 80GB $499. There is no evidence that what you say is true concerning disc sales and the PS3. There are plenty of people just like me who wanted the most advanced and upgradeable bluray player out there, and the PS3 fit the bill. I do not play games at all, but it plays SACD, and that was the thing that pushed me over to it. Many owners of the PS3 do not play games, but wanted the cheapest way into bluray.
Sorry, but the standalone arguement no longer stands. The PS3 has completely changed the old model and has flipped it on its head. Since it has a internal bluray drive just like any standalone, it cannot be excluded. So the standalone arguement is a red herring uncooked. Every since the PS3 has been released, this standalone argument has cropped up. Unfortunately it has not helped software sales, and neither has the Paramount defection at this point. Worldwide, Toshiba is getting its clock wiped in disc sales as a result of the PS3. The only competitive market, is in America. Everywhere else, its no contest.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Well, it could change. But Universal has already closed the door on any new titles for the remainder of the year. Paramount could announce more, but given the fact that catalogue titles are not selling very well, I highly doubt they will announce any additional titles beyond what they already have. The Playstation can play bluray movies right? If Microsoft had chosen to put a internal HD DVD drive in the XBOX, then the field would be quite level.
First, the PS3 does not cost $600. The 40GB version costs $399, and the 80GB $499. There is no evidence that what you say is true concerning disc sales and the PS3. There are plenty of people just like me who wanted the most advanced and upgradeable bluray player out there, and the PS3 fit the bill. I do not play games at all, but it plays SACD, and that was the thing that pushed me over to it. Many owners of the PS3 do not play games, but wanted the cheapest way into bluray.
Sorry, but the standalone arguement no longer stands. The PS3 has completely changed the old model and has flipped it on its head. Since it has a internal bluray drive just like any standalone, it cannot be excluded. So the standalone arguement is a red herring uncooked. Every since the PS3 has been released, this standalone argument has cropped up. Unfortunately it has not helped software sales, and neither has the Paramount defection at this point. Worldwide, Toshiba is getting its clock wiped in disc sales as a result of the PS3. The only competitive market, is in America. Everywhere else, its no contest.
I guess you guys told me!!!! What the hell was I thinking about?! STT, you really put alot of thought into your last reply, not to mention time and effort. I really don't mind having a healthy debate, but geez! OK, it's your "Blu ray world" and the rest of us are just living in it! To tell you the truth, I could care less which format wins out. As I said before, both are great technologies and both will be around a long time. By the way, when the PS3 was first introduced, it was $600.00!....for several months. If I'm wrong I'm sure you will write a thesis on how wrong I am. Anyway, the debate was entertaining.
Regards!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76
I guess you guys told me!!!! What the hell was I thinking about?! STT, you really put alot of thought into your last reply, not to mention time and effort. I really don't mind having a healthy debate, but geez! OK, it's your "Blu ray world" and the rest of us are just living in it! To tell you the truth, I could care less which format wins out. As I said before, both are great technologies and both will be around a long time. By the way, when the PS3 was first introduced, it was $600.00!....for several months. If I'm wrong I'm sure you will write a thesis on how wrong I am. Anyway, the debate was entertaining.
Regards!
You've pretty much summed up how most of us are feeling, which is that a debate with someone who refuses to acknowledge that their opinion could be wrong or that it's not a fact is pretty much a useless debate that in the end only exhaust time, energy, and you may as well just go post somewhere else and have a more productive time.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeruvianSkies
you may as well just go post somewhere else and have a more productive time.
Great advice!!!!! Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by L.J.
Great advice!!!!! Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.
By posting elsewhere I meant somewhere else on this site, but nice try. It would seem that you'll do just about anything to get rid of me, but I am not going anywhere, so you may as well get used to my presence.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeruvianSkies
You've pretty much summed up how most of us are feeling, which is that a debate with someone who refuses to acknowledge that their opinion could be wrong or that it's not a fact is pretty much a useless debate that in the end only exhaust time, energy, and you may as well just go post somewhere else and have a more productive time.
This pretty much sums up what you post about. Nothing. The problem you are having with me is that you cannot debate me on the facts, and that is why you try and attack me personally. You are a gutless wonder who has nothing more to do than to talk about movie trivia(of which nobody appears all that interested) and when you can get a dig in, you do it. Well pervian, nobody is all that interested in either. You cannot hurt me with your infantile comments, you are only shining a spotlight on how bankrupt you are about most things audio and video.
What you need to do is hop back into your crip with you bottle, and wait till the next changing time. You are boring far too many to absolute tears with this juvenile bunch of mess. Since when have you been graced with special powers that tell you exactly what most folks are feeling?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76
I guess you guys told me!!!! What the hell was I thinking about?! STT, you really put alot of thought into your last reply, not to mention time and effort. I really don't mind having a healthy debate, but geez! OK, it's your "Blu ray world" and the rest of us are just living in it! To tell you the truth, I could care less which format wins out. As I said before, both are great technologies and both will be around a long time. By the way, when the PS3 was first introduced, it was $600.00!....for several months. If I'm wrong I'm sure you will write a thesis on how wrong I am. Anyway, the debate was entertaining.
Regards!
Look, if you do not like the heat, stay away from the fire. If you do not like water, stay away from the shower. If you do not like to debate, then do not throw your hat in the ring.
The PS3 has not been $600 since August. We are not at introduction period anymore.
This took no time or effort. Just a little homework over the years, some careful analysis, and a clear look at the obvious. For some, this is time and effort, for me, its nothing more than fun, and an exchange of information.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by L.J.
Great advice!!!!! Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.
Heck no, I want the door to hit him. Maybe it will propel him into an alternate universe where people are actually interested in his 1 million word analysis complete with movie trivia.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
What you need to do is hop back into your crip with you bottle, and wait till the next changing time. You are boring far too many to absolute tears with this juvenile bunch of mess. Since when have you been graced with special powers that tell you exactly what most folks are feeling?
What's a crip??? Where are the bloodz???
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
Look, if you do not like the heat, stay away from the fire. If you do not like water, stay away from the shower. If you do not like to debate, then do not throw your hat in the ring.
The PS3 has not been $600 since August. We are not at introduction period anymore.
This took no time or effort. Just a little homework over the years, some careful analysis, and a clear look at the obvious. For some, this is time and effort, for me, its nothing more than fun, and an exchange of information.
So if it's nothing more than fun, then act like it's exactly that. To respond with the heat/fire; water/shower analogies was in a word, unnecessary. I work in the industry. And I'm sure I hear and read about the subject as much as you do. I speak with Manufacturer reps from Toshiba, Samsung, Marantz, Denon, Optoma, Epson, JVC, Mitsubishi, Stewart, Planar, Key Digital, Panasonic, Pioneer, etc,.....distributors and R&D people constantly. So I believe I have an intimate knowledge of the industry. Just because someone has a different perspective doesn't make them wrong. And just because a website makes a prediction or states an opinion or states a claim, does not make it gospel. So get a grip, it's not that critical. Opinions vary!
By the way, for every factoid you or anyone else submits onto this site, anyone can find a fact that can counter the said entry and be just as accurate and credible.
Have a good evening!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ldgibson76
I guess you guys told me!!!! What the hell was I thinking about?! STT, you really put alot of thought into your last reply, not to mention time and effort. I really don't mind having a healthy debate, but geez! OK, it's your "Blu ray world" and the rest of us are just living in it! To tell you the truth, I could care less which format wins out. As I said before, both are great technologies and both will be around a long time. By the way, when the PS3 was first introduced, it was $600.00!....for several months. If I'm wrong I'm sure you will write a thesis on how wrong I am. Anyway, the debate was entertaining.
Regards!
Both are not "great tech" both are the SAME tech, which is why one will die a painfull death, and pretty soon.
I think Blu ray simply because it has more storage, more support, more versatility,
and more sales.
But the similarities between the two types of player are more than the differences.
Which is why one will fall, no reason to keep two different ways of doing the same thing
around long.
A recession will speed things up somewhat, this "format" war is expensive, bleeding
red ink out the ying yang the two camps will HAVE to either come to an understanding,
or one will have to eat cake and throw in the towel
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeruvianSkies
It would seem that you'll do just about anything to get rid of me,
There you go thinking your all important again. It's not all that serious. I mean, what would a team be without it's mascot, a king without his jester? What would a village be, without it's idiot? AR.............well, we have Lex, AKA PeruvianSkies. What would we be without ya?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
The Playstation can play bluray movies right? If Microsoft had chosen to put a internal HD DVD drive in the XBOX, then the field would be quite level. .
I doubt that very much. Sales for the PS3 for the last year have at best been "anemic". Not until the much ballyhooed price drop in the last 2 months has the PS3 started to move units even close to initial projections. Remeber last Christmas? Sony had units sitting on the shelf collecting dust, as consumers rejected the high price point.
If MS HAD included an HD-DVD drive in the 360, I think sales would have taken a similar track. By giving consumers a choice, (and keeping costs lower than Sony) MS was able to make a much more palatable price point.
I do think that MS stumbled a bit by not initially offering HDMI out of the box, but that is neither here nor there.
Sony has taken a gamble, and at least initially the PS3 has driven the BluRay player into millions of homes. HOWEVER, as a GAMING machine, I think that this advantage will begin to wane as "GAMERS" can now begin to actually use their "GAMING" machines. Of course there are those who have purchased PS3's specifically for the "media" side, but those are a minority of owners. Read the game rags, and PS3 owners are begging for games. Now that they are starting to come out, I think those $$ availble for BluRay movies is going to dry up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
First, the PS3 does not cost $600. The 40GB version costs $399, and the 80GB $499. There is no evidence that what you say is true concerning disc sales and the PS3. There are plenty of people just like me who wanted the most advanced and upgradeable bluray player out there, and the PS3 fit the bill. I do not play games at all, but it plays SACD, and that was the thing that pushed me over to it. Many owners of the PS3 do not play games, but wanted the cheapest way into bluray.
Sorry, but the standalone arguement no longer stands. The PS3 has completely changed the old model and has flipped it on its head. Since it has a internal bluray drive just like any standalone, it cannot be excluded. So the standalone arguement is a red herring uncooked. Every since the PS3 has been released, this standalone argument has cropped up. Unfortunately it has not helped software sales, and neither has the Paramount defection at this point. Worldwide, Toshiba is getting its clock wiped in disc sales as a result of the PS3. The only competitive market, is in America. Everywhere else, its no contest.
Technically, you are correct. The PS3 doesn't cost $600. Now, but up to 2 short months ago it DID. For 11 months, Sony held the line on the price, praying for costs to drop, and urging consumers to "get a second job" if they wanted to own a PS3.
As for the highlighed portion of your text, that is nonsense. PS3 owners are BEGGING for games. As I stated earlier, of course there are some PS3 owners that don't want to game, but they are NOT the majority, but a very small minority.
And once the games start rolling in, (and they have begun to) the BluRay advantage will diminish. Consumers (most unlike yourself) have a limited budget. And with games running $60-$70 (special addition) that WILL chew up any money for movies.
As for "flipping" the model on its head, we will see. Sony may have driven the BluRay into the living room, but that is not an indication of how well the format will fare, once the PS3 can actually play games that people want to buy. Again, it comes down to money. Games are expensive, and last longer than a movie. I would suspect this will have a negative impact on BR movie sales. It may not tilt the battle, but I don't have a crystal ball either!
|