Newer DVD Formats...

[tekkieman]

adam- would you agree however, that with all the hype, and no product and limited services, that the end consumer will quickly grow weary, and lose interest?

(except for the die-hards, of course)

[adam]

Lose interest in a product that hasn't hit the market yet and hasn't been advertised once to the general public? No one but us egg heads follow these formats up until their release. HD-DVD and Blueray are both scheduled to hit the market soon. The public will decide which one wins, or whether they can both survive as competing technologies. I'm talking about a 10 year transition period here at least. But as HD sets become the de facto standard, yes even for Joe sixpack, then people will shift to HD-DVDs. You'd be a fool to buy a regular DVD once all your hardware already supports HD anyway...and its only a matter of time before this is reality.

DVDs aren't going to last forever. Our current hardware already supports much better. I'm just saying its time to start phasing in the next logical step. No one is going to lose interest in that.

[tekkieman]

Take my TV as an example. It is not quite 4 years old. I wanted a big screen to watch the things I like to watch. It took me three years to notice the gold letters on it that say "HD capable 1080i". Now while I understand what that means (to some extent). I have no clue how to take advantage of it.

You can't go anywhere today without hearing "HD". You know what? I don't really care. I watch mainly kids shows with my daughter, and play some DVDs. I guess that makes me Joe Sixpack. Even if what's next is 1 million times better, I don't see a need for it (in my life). And I'm certainly not going to pony up the cash to replace what I've got.

[AlecWest]

Even if what's next is 1 million times better, I don't see a need for it (in my life). And I'm certainly not going to pony up the cash to replace what I've got.

I think what we're witnessing is the same thing that happened during the Beta/VHS war. I'm not a serious videophile but, if memory serves, serious videophiles believed that the Beta format was superior to VHS. But in the end, VHS survived. It was cheaper so more people glommed onto the format.

But (grin) I could just by a cynic. You see, I was one of those people who bought into the hype back in the 1970s. I not only had JVC quadraphonic hardware, I bought an SQ decoder in case Sony's quadraphonic format survived the Discrete/SQ war. And, neither format survived the war. Now, we've got two competing HD formats, BluRay and HD-DVD. Another war with no survivor??? Maybe.

[adam]

Pony up what cash? You've already got the tv you need. HD-DVDs aren't going to cost anymore then regular DVDs do now. Before too long, the players will be about the same price as regular players as well, and at some point you will have to replace yours when it dies. Whether you need HD or not it will just make sense to buy it anyway.

And once again, HD-DVDs are not going to be mainstream for many years. Can you really say you will be just as content with DVDs in 10 years? If no, then its a good time to introduce HD to the market.

People were still satisfied with VHS when DVDs were introduced too. Its called phasing out older technology. It begins long before the format becomes unpopular or umarketable. If you want to ride DVDs out, like some people are still doing with VHS, that's fine. But the sooner HD hits the market the sooner it will settle in and become reasonably priced and more practical for those who can't afford the latest technology.

[AlecWest]

Its called phasing out older technology.

So was quadraphonic stereo. JVC and Sony were absolutely convinced that "stereo," as we knew it, would soon reside in the dustbin of history. But all too soon, it became clear that the consumer had other ideas. This didn't make quadraphonic stereo bad. I was mightily impressed with the few discrete and SQ-encoded titles on the market. It was a concert-hall type of experience. But, it didn't impress the majority of consumers who kept their wallets closed.

HDTV may be the wave of the future. I certainly wouldn't dismiss it entirely. But I'm not yet convinced that consumers are going to go for it.

[yoda313]

Hello,

HDTV may be the wave of the future. I certainly wouldn't dismiss it entirely. But I'm not yet convinced that consumers are going to go for it.

I don't think you're going to win that argument alec. HDTV will be the future and EVERYONE will adapt it. Just as soon as prices drop even more which they are doing right now...

Kevin

[offline]

I Want Them All Now! 720p hd material looks superb on my projector. I don't want any more crappy dvds.

What projector did you get in the end? The Panasonic?

[bmiller]

I've been watching HD broadcasts here in Canada for over a year now.Once you watch it it's hard to watch a sd broadcast,espacially sports.There is no way i would give it up.
NTSC R.I.P.

[yoda313]

I've been watching HD broadcasts here in Canada for over a year now.Once you watch it it's hard to watch a sd broadcast,espacially sports.There is no way i would give it up.
NTSC R.I.P.

Hello,

Actually isn't hdtv still dependent on Ntsc/pal??? It's the broadcast resolution not the video standard that was changed

Kevin

[adam]

NTSC should still die.

[yoda313]

NTSC should still die.

Hello,

Then we'd have nothing to watch in North America!!!

Kevin

(j/k of course - I know you mean we should adopt PAL :P)

[solarfox]

So was quadraphonic stereo. JVC and Sony were absolutely convinced that "stereo," as we knew it, would soon reside in the dustbin of history. But all too soon, it became clear that the consumer had other ideas. This didn't make quadraphonic stereo bad. I was mightily impressed with the few discrete and SQ-encoded titles on the market. It was a concert-hall type of experience. But, it didn't impress the majority of consumers who kept their wallets closed.

Part of the problem with Quad was that back then, the kind of high-quality speakers that would make the experience worthwhile were generally BIG, BULKY, and EXPENSIVE... and those first two attributes caused no end of trouble when it came to figuring out where you were going to put the bloody things (and run the wires to them!) so that people wouldn't trip over them, bump into them, and so that your wife wouldn't give you grief over how much she hated the layout of the living room furnishings afterwards. Had Quad been rolled out a couple of decades later, setting it up would've been far less of a hassle, since the intervening advances in acoustic modeling and such have made it possible to get much fuller sound out of small, conveniently wall-mountable speakers.

Also, "the few discrete and SQ-encoded titles on the market" is a key phrase. There just wasn't enough of a variety of Quad material available to get a broad enough segment of the market interested.

Maybe we are in different countries. HD sets aren't that expensive in the US. You can get one for under $1000 which isn't too expensive for a tv, especially when you consider how many years of use you get out of it.

Must be nice to have that kind of disposable income. :P To me, anything that's more than $100 is a major purchasing decision... and frankly, considering how often I actually watch TV these days, there's no way you'd convince me to cough up $1000+ for a true HDTV set, or even $700 for an "HDTV-ready" set...

I'm curious, have any of you seen HD broadcasts? I can't understand how you guys can't be excited about this.

I've seen them, and I'm not excited primarily because while the image quality is indeed improved, I have yet to see any evidence that the entertainment quality of the shows themselves is improved along with it. High-resolution crap is still crap.

[adam]

Well solarfox just about any tv is going to be a major purchasing decision for you then. TV's are a major device and you have to view their price relative to other tvs, not relative to other products. The question is not whether you are willing to spend $1000, its whether you are willing to spend an extra $300-$400 when you enevitably have to replace your tv anyway...assuming you are still in the market for one.

I am right with you on the quality of television broadcasts. In my opinion the last good series on tv was/is Everybody loves Raymond, and before that it was Cheers. That is why I am excited about HD-DVD/Blue Ray. I will finally be able to watch the movies that I like in the quality I always envisioned them in. I bring up HDTV broadcasts to point out the sheer visual quality that the format can achieve. And that's with things like sports which are captured live and not even given the "Hollywood" filtering and mastering process.

[solarfox]

The question is not whether you are willing to spend $1000, its whether you are willing to spend an extra $300-$400 when you enevitably have to replace your tv anyway...

And the answer to that would be... no.

assuming you are still in the market for one.

I just replaced my TV about two years ago (and yeah, I sweated that $250 purchase for a week or two before finally going down to Fry's and forking over the cash, too!), so hopefully I won't be in the market for another one for a good long while yet. (The impending phase-out of analog broadcast in 2006 doesn't overly concern me yet since (a) I don't believe it's actually going to happen on schedule, abd (b) there isn't a heck of a lot on broadcast that I would actually miss if I'm no longer able to receive it anyway. )

I am right with you on the quality of television broadcasts. In my opinion the last good series on tv was/is Everybody loves Raymond, and before that it was Cheers.

There's been a few shows I liked in recent years, but I've just gotten tired of being jerked around by the networks who keep putting on "New! Innovative! Nothing Else Like It On Television!" shows, then immediately start pre-empting them in favor of "a special 90-minute episode of (insert (un)reality-show-du-jour here)" and pulling them from the schedule before they even get through a half-season's worth of episodes.

I bring up HDTV broadcasts to point out the sheer visual quality that the format can achieve. And that's with things like sports which are captured live and not even given the "Hollywood" filtering and mastering process.

True, but I don't tend to watch sporting events, as such; my "watching" usually consists of listening to the play-by-play while occasionally glancing at the 320x240-sized ATI-TV window pinned into the corner of my 1280x1024 desktop. (And for UT Longhorns games, as often as not I mute the TV sound and listen to the AM radio broadcast, since AM1300's play-by-play announcers don't feel compelled to natter on about irrelevancies while there's a play in progress like the TV guys do.)

Anyway, my point, such as it was, was simply to respond to your comment that "I can't understand how you guys can't be excited about this" by showing how it can be that some of us are, in fact, not overly excited by it at the moment.

[Greg12]

I am very interested in things like blue ray divx players. I'm ok with 100 vhs quality simpsons episodes on one disk

[funkguy4]

I am very interested in things like blue ray divx players. I'm ok with 100 vhs quality simpsons episodes on one disk

u can prolly fit about 40 of those ona DVD right now, doing the right things .

[Capmaster]

I am very interested in things like blue ray divx players. I'm ok with 100 vhs quality simpsons episodes on one disk

u can prolly fit about 40 of those ona DVD right now, doing the right things .

40? You need to let me in on your secret 8)

[adam]

Today I saw a 24 inch HDTV at Sams for $400. The prices are getting pretty reasonable here in the States.

[funkguy4]

I am very interested in things like blue ray divx players. I'm ok with 100 vhs quality simpsons episodes on one disk

u can prolly fit about 40 of those ona DVD right now, doing the right things .

40? You need to let me in on your secret 8)

put 'em on there in vcd resolution using Cg/Animation matrix at a nice low bitrate
40 might be a *little* exaggeration, but u can defintely put a lot.

[Rookie64]

Well the HD movies are coming (pardon the pun )


But might not be exactly what you had in mind


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050109/tc_nm/tech_show_dvd_dc_1

[offline]

PrOn dictates technology... as it should be

[Capmaster]

PrOn dictates technology... as it should be

Right on!

[pepegot1]

Just remember, "the older you get the better the old stuff looks." Same for sound, as frequency response drops.
Quite frankly, the HD I see in Circuit City etc., does not look any better to me than my DVD's, especially at a distance. These guys are out for the buck! Imagine, 40 years from now you take out your DVD's to show your Grand son, but you cannot play it on the new Gamma Disc Recorder! Too much too fast=trouble, but as long as the bucks are there they will keep pushing us.
Let DVD's have a life and improve on them.

[pijetro]

The cart is ahead of the horse as far as HD and displays go...

Considering that there's people that buy expensive Plasma's, (never mind that it isn't proven, burns the screen, and might be a paperweight in a few years), it doesn't surprise me that so many people can get fooled..

I think the trend these days is that the consumer market is pushing the envelope for once, and industry is lagging :P

As far as broadcasts go, yeah, if you're a sports nut, and you can afford the HD broadcast, then you're in luck..

As far as Canadian broadcasting goes....
By the time the government hits you with taxes, fuel, etc...i'm surprised anybody can afford HD sets...