Blu-ray & HD-DVD already failed formats?

[RLT69]

RLT69 wrote:
You are going to have to explain that one. How is releasing a movie only on HD DVD an Anti-trust Violation? All kinds of media are only available in one format or another. There are entire catalogs of movies or music that will never be released on CD, DVD or HD DVD.


When large companies join together to force you to buy something you don't necessarily need or want, and at prices that are often high, that's a trust, and such activity is unethical and is why the anti-trust laws were enacted almost 100 years ago.

I'm not trying to be argumentative but I don't understand this. For example, say Universal Studios decides to release House MD Season 2 on Blu-Ray only. Is that illegal?

[lordsmurf]

No. That's different. I know it's confusing, but anti-trust is about unethical organized business practices. Think bigger picture is all I can say. I cannot think of any examples off the top of my head.

[rumplestiltskin]

No. That's different. I know it's confusing, but anti-trust is about unethical organized business practices. Think bigger picture is all I can say. I cannot think of any examples off the top of my head.

Let's say Microsoft...oh, never mind. In the current political environment, Microsoft becomes the victim. Ignore Judge Jackson's findings of fact.

[ROBERT BLACK]

I owned thousands of dollars in movies on VHS. I was mighty pissed to have to re-buy them again on DVD. But there is no freakin way I'm going to start this process all over again, especially since DVD's effective lifespan was only a few years

What planet are you from? I started collecting DVD in early 2000, and all of them work fine. Including the first I ever purchased. PROPER STORAGE is the key factor that determines lifespan for DVDs. I own a significant number of VHS tapes. I rarely replace them with DVDs. Usually only if the film is good enough to warrant it. Or the DVD version has more footage or extras I care enough to spend the money on.


At no point does anyone produce a weapon forcing you to buy into a format.

[lenti_75]

HD is coming, that's sure, but probably the media for it is the holographic disc, don;t think the regular disc will make it.

WE NEED A REALLY CHANGE, a change of the whole ideea, just like someone said about the Tupperware and Rubbermaid...

[SatStorm]

Let me jump on this conversation:
Some "facts" from the PAL side of the story.
Because of my job, I'm among the very first few capable to watch HDTV channels in Europe. All I can say is that HDTV indeed looks great, but it looks that way only on larger TV screens: 37" or more. When you watch HDTV on 32" screens (or less), the visual difference is not that great. In the matter of fact, HDTV looks as good as a superbit PAL DVD using a DVD player with a good scaler (or a DVB /S receiver).
Unfortunatelly in Europe, the average home don't have room space for a bigger TV screen. Flat screens and the LCD/Plasma technology, helped the average European to jump from 21" and 25" CRT TVs to 32" and 37" "Flat" TVs but beyond that mark, the size of the TV Set is too much for a typical European room. We simply don't have space!

The bottom line is, that since the vehacle for the success of HD-DVD and Blu Ray seems to be HDTV's picture clarity, I don't see a huge success very soon. The clarity ain't that great compared to typical PAL DVD movies on the TV Screens we are able to use here in Europe.

In a way, that situation reminds me VCDs and DVDs: They look alike on 21" PAL TV screens... And I remember people in this same forum, years ago, stating that "VHS (and VCD) is all I need" just because of this fact. When the move on bigger size TV Screens, then they realize that DVD is superior!


On the other hand, there is one other "fact":
VHS's heritage is the habbit to be able to record what we wish without limitations. This habbit continues with DVD (not straight for sure) but we all know that it's going to be forbitten or controled or degrated with BluRay and HD-DVD. I believe this is the main reason we won't see those two media have success. The limitations.

But the habbit or recording is not the only VHS's heritage. VHS established that a picture storage media to be acceptable from the mass, needs to be able to store up to 3 or 4 hours.

Dual Layer DVD-Rs are able for that kind of storage today, using desktop DVD Recorders and Standard TV sources. But DL DVD-Rs ain't popular yet, because of the cost.
The typical DVD5 DVD-Rs are limited on 2 hours and that explains well why many people still use VHS to record stuff. The 2 Hours the DVD-Rs offer, are simply to little..
The why the 3 or 4 hours is what the people wish to have on a media to store / record stuff, is something for a social study. But the fact is the average person wish to be able to record 3 or 4 hours on a media.

It is more than certain that DL DVD-Rs gonna turn cheaper and cheaper. And we already know that Blu-Ray / HD-DVD gonna use mpeg 2 for commercial reasons (at first at least). I see many people transfer that material compressed on various mpeg 4 versions. People all ready do this with commercial DVDs and CD-Rs. First tests shows that is possible to store 3 hours of HDTV on a dual layer DVD-R using mpeg 4, and we know that the standalones supports (or they shall support) those compression codecs. I don't see any reason for people to switch on BluRay/HD DVD discs, unless they reach the prices of CD-Rs/ DVD-Rs today. That is year ahead...

Also, the European HD DVB transmissions are based on mpeg 4 in the so called: DVB /S2 format. The bitrates are ~12 kb/s and I remind you all that the market already has DVB /S2 cards for the PCs...
The way I see it, those bitrates, are OK for DL DVD-Rs. People gonna store transmissions "as is" on DL DVD-Rs and I don't see any need to switch to discs of biggest storage!

It's true that storage is what people wants. But I doubt that optical discs are the future on this. People wish for huge storage and safety: Even if optical discs can indeed give us huge storage, nobody really feels safe with them. That's why we all back up!

[ozymango]

Exactly. I do not see the point of resale as it relates to this topic anyways. There is nothing limiting you from taking your original disc and posting a sale price on Ebay for the original price you paid. I doubt you'd get that value unless you found a buyer who had to have it. To say the Blu-ray or HD-DVD are already a failed format is impossible to predict.

Yeah, but it's fun to talk about and gives me something to do on a lazy afternoon.

My point was a bit oblique, I admit, but I was trying to get at the "value" side of things -- as you noted, you -- individual you -- have X factors that go into deciding what airplane and/or video format system you'll purchase, for your own reasons, all valid.

Now, when you bought your airplane, I'm guessing that you had to make a choice at least based somewhat on $$$. That is, you had X $ to spend, and -- I'm guessing -- you also factored in, at the time, for your own personal reasons, the re-sale value of your aircraft.

I would assume you would do so simply because the purchase price of an airplane can be very significant -- it may not be the primary reason you choose to acquire an airplane, but it often is a major factor in the general sale and use of airplanes.

And I'm guessing that the resale value of your airplane is affected very much by a complex interaction of market variables, personal tastes, etc. Okay.

Relating this to the larger debate here about HD/Blu-Ray already being failed formats -- it has nothing to do with usability. Your airplane was very usable -- for a certain time, for you. And it is still highly usable to other people, which keeps the resale value relatively high (I hope, anyway!)

Note the resale value of computers and most electronic stuff -- for the most part, unless it's relatlively new, the resale value is nil. We accept that as part of being on the cutting edge of things -- but I think it's very dangerous, from a "let's make something to take to market that people will want to buy" standpoint, to not consider the "resale" value in this HD debate. That is, as crass as it can be, people are often cheap -- a few people will spend $$$ on the latest and greatest thing, but to really make money in this world, it helps to sell to as many people as possible. And I just don't think -- based on the evidence I've yet seen -- that the current HD disc situation is anything close to a big deal to the majority of people out there, who have only $ to spend, not $$$.

Along those lines, one thing I've noted from many of your posts is that technological function and use is very important to you -- you need to upgrade things because they are no longer as useful as they need to be. This is important, on a personal level.

That being said, you admit that objectively, other people have different needs and values. Also important.

I'm looking at this big picture, as a hypothetical investor: What do I invest in, to maximize my return? And based on that, big picture, long term, I "predict" that HD and Blu-Ray will "fail" simply because the return on the investment is not gonna be worthwhile, due in large part to the reasons these products were created was not to serve the needs of the average customer, but to serve the needs of a limited number of people, for a (too) limited number of reasons.

Also I've got no personal investment in any of this, but it's fun to watch what happens just to see if any of my reasoning manages to hold up over the long term. An experiment in imagining the future!

[ntscuser]

For the same price as Blu-Ray disc player I could buy a near state-of-the-art PC and I know which of the two would give me most usage.

[Cunhambebe]

ntscuser...

That's a good point!

[SingSing]

For the same price as Blu-Ray disc player I could buy a near state-of-the-art PC and I know which of the two would give me most usage.

Good point, why there are no imformation of bluray or hd dvd drive ?

[adam]

You are going to have to explain that one. How is releasing a movie only on HD DVD an Anti-trust Violation? All kinds of media are only available in one format or another. There are entire catalogs of movies or music that will never be released on CD, DVD or HD DVD.

Choosing which format to release your content on is one thing, sabotaging an existing product to increase demand for another is anticompetitive and illegal. Phasing DVDs out, even abruptly, is ok but don't expect for a minute that it will happen. But brining in every studio and their distributors, the retailers, the DVD consortium, and anyone else who would have their licenses affected, and getting them to work together to block DVDs? That's conspiracy.

In any case the point I'm trying to get at is that the transition to blu-ray/HD-DVDs will most likely mirror the transition from VHS to DVD. Both formats will co-exist for many years before the newer technology takes over. There's countless variables. The HD formats have more obstacles going for them then DVDs did, but studies consistently show that newer technologies become viable faster now....much faster. These formats are very open about how they have long term goals. I just don't see how anyone can write them off so soon.

[ntscuser]

If the manufacturers simultaneously dump their unsold stocks on the open market like they did with laserdisc, that will kill the DVD market stone dead.

[edDV]

If the manufacturers simultaneously dump their unsold stocks on the open market like they did with laserdisc, that will kill the DVD market stone dead.

?? Did that kill DVD?

[ntscuser]

If the manufacturers simultaneously dump their unsold stocks on the open market like they did with laserdisc, that will kill the DVD market stone dead.

?? Did that kill DVD?

DVD hadn't yet been launched.

[terjeber]

First off you can still buy VCRs. Think about that, 26 years after the VCR was introduced you can still buy them. Technology has a habit of hanging on longer than you think.

I agree, I had to laugh when I read alot of this thread, and laugh hard when I read we won't be able to buy things like DVDs in a few years.

Just for the record, I never stated that you would not be able to buy DVDs in a few years. Really, go back and read what I wrote.

And yes, you can still buy VCRs, some places. I had a ton of VHS stuff I needed to convert to digital recently and my old VCR is long gone. I wanted a decent VCR, the quality of the player is important when capturing this stuff. As with most stuff, when I get an idea to start doing something, I want to start immediately, so I drove to the nearest few shops that sold electronic stuff. Same story everywhere. No, we no longer stock or sell VCRs. There were one or two combo players, but not of a reasonable quality. My only option for a decent VCR is in online specialty shops.

I geuss the poster about how DVDs and players won't be available

You really need to brush up on your reading skills, I never said anything of the kind.

[DVD] Quality is better maybe in some cases

Than VHS??? So, what kind of seeing-eye dog are you using? I have heard that golden retrievers are good.

DVD is not going to go away!!

Noone ever said it would.

I have SEVERAL DVDs I am going to re-author, it was nice they gave me the deleated scenes as extra's so I can put them back in where they belong!!! They should NEVER have been cut in the first place! Parts of the movie does not make much sence because the scene showing WHY something happened was deleted.

This is actually relatively rare in movies. Most deleted scenes were cut for very good reasons.

If they don't care about the content of the movie why care about the quality of the media??

Do you care about the quality of the movie? The visual quality? The audio quality? Well, if you are watching most of your movies on your PC as you stated, and you can't see much difference between VHS and DVD, then perhaps not. For the seeing people in the world on the other hand...

[terjeber]

What kind of content could any disk producer possibly put on a 50 GB disk that would appeal to enough people to make it worth the extra cost?

Quality. You re correct that content providers could put HD content on current DVDs. The original work on the next gen DVDs were assuming similar compression technologies as MPEG-2, hence the increase in format capacity. Today we can compress HD content down to, at least, a dual layer disk and get quite decent quality. But, as I said, the studios are not going to. Nobody is doing any standardization of HD content on DVD-9 disks (DivX doesn't count, they own no content). Studios are going to put their HD content on either of the two formats. They may possibly go with a streaming solution if HD content doesn't take of on either of the two formats the next 5 years.

Unfortunately for Blu-Ray, there is plenty of competition (especially cheaper) from other technologies in the mass-storage arena.

If the only thing Blue-Ray has got going for it, is storage capacity, it will die. It needs pre-recorded HD content.

[TheMadHatter]

I know this subject has been beaten to death, but now it's my turn to take a whack!

I don't see HD-DVD or Blue-Ray replacing DVDs anytime soon. Not even if they adopt a single format (which they should do soon, or it will definitely fail). The situation reminds me of when Laserdisc and SVHS came out during the VHS era. Yes, the quality of the picture was better, but it still only thrived in the "videophile" market. No one wanted to re-buy ALL their movies over again. Not to mention the lack of product, and that they cost more.

Zip ahead to the DVD era (or now). Yes, it took DVDs awhile to catch on, , but people liked the idea that they lasted forever (supposedly), they were relatively cheap, they had extras that were never on VHS, and the picture looked great. So the masses bought them up. Now here comes HD discs. Yes, the picture looks even better, but how much detail do you need? HD is only going to look really good on newer movies. How much more definition can you get from The Maltese Falcon, or even The Godfather? Sure they can try to digitally clean it up for HD, but then you are giving them license to fix things that shouldn't be fixed (everyone please point an accusing finger at George Lucas and Steven Spielberg right now please).

I don't want to buy my movies over again. I already have 3 sets of the Disney Classics, Star Wars, The Godfather, etc. The quality is good enough for these films. I don't need to see every pore on Marlon Brando's face when he has the the orange slice in his mouth.

Just my opinion (and you know what opinions are like...)

[rumplestiltskin]

Recently read how HD shows are making it much more difficult for the makeup artists to do their jobs effectively simply for the reason that TheMadHatter mentioned (about seeing every pore on Brando's face). Airbrushing won't be limited to PlayBoy models; they've had to do it with actresses in these HD shows, as well.

So I'll ask again what I've asked since the first hints of BlueRay & HD-DVD appeared: Are these not answers to questions no one has asked?

[Conquest10]

oh the poor makeup artists actually have to do their jobs. I could care less about how much they have to work to make the "supposedly" hot actors presentable. One of my favorite sitcoms is Curb Your Enthusiasm. Seems people have forgotten that tv shows are supposed to be about the story and not the looks of the star. I don't watch football to see how dreamy Tom Brady is nor baseball to see how hot Derek Jeter is either.

[rumplestiltskin]

oh the poor makeup artists actually have to do their jobs. I could care less about how much they have to work to make the "supposedly" hot actors presentable. One of my favorite sitcoms is Curb Your Enthusiasm. Seems people have forgotten that tv shows are supposed to be about the story and not the looks of the star. I don't watch football to see how dreamy Tom Brady is nor baseball to see how hot Derek Jeter is either.

Absolutely. It's all about the quality of the content and not the resolution of the image.

[Conquest10]

Wait, wait, wait. Nobody said that. Higher resolution does make a difference when watching certain things. Movies and sports being two. Hell, if it didn't make a difference, we'd all be watching tv on a 13" black and white with the aluminum foil antenna. What I was ranting on was the notion lately that in order to have a hit comedy, it has to be starred by a "drop-dead beauty" that really isn't and then complain about that its the technology that's wrong.

[rumplestiltskin]

Wait, wait, wait. Nobody said that. Higher resolution does make a difference when watching certain things. Movies and sports being two.

Movies? Now you're back to caring about counting the pores on Nicole Kidman's nose. As for sports - yes, I've seen the HDTV broadcasts of football, basketball, etc. Frankly, I can do without watching the sweat coming out of Shaq's nose.

With any luck, the networks will discover the one method of distribution they haven't tried yet: MP4 TV shows -with- the ads. I like the ads; really, I do. They give me time to visit the bathroom or get a cup of coffee. If the ads are part of the download, do you think anyone will even bother to go through the trouble to remove them? (Probably; there are those for whom the word "anal" was coined.)

[Wile_E]

I don't know what to think about this whole mess. The industry made a mistake not standardizing on one format and combining their efforts. I just hope they don't start artifically rescaling 480i/p content to 1080i/p, and labeling it as "HD" content. If they do, they better put a disclaimer on the discs, or they may have people sueing. The studios will need to take the original film stock and scan them in HD.

The storage space of 50GB is still very limited for HD content. How many hours can fit on one disc? 2? We will still have to juggle discs.

[CrayonEater]

What planet are you from? I started collecting DVD in early 2000, and all of them work fine. Including the first I ever purchased. PROPER STORAGE is the key factor that determines lifespan for DVDs.

I wasn't talking about the longetivity of the discs themselves, I was talking about the effective longetivity of DVD as a format. If you had read my post you'd have figured that out. DVD only really took off in 2001-2002. Now, 4-5 years later, it's outdated. There is little doubt that'll happen again with HD/BD as there are higher-capacity technologies already out like HVD. More importantly, you need to understand the market forces at work: Why sell you a movie once and forever when studios can sell it to you again and again?


SatStorm-

Well thought out post even though I disagree with some of it. There already ARE higher-capacity optical formats out e.g. HVD, mentioned above. Eventually, there will be ther interest to, say, put an entire season of a TV show - perhaps even the entire series - on one disc, along with copious extras. And/or there will be a push towards miniaturization. Either way, BD/HD won't cut it, and consumers will be expected to purchase or repurchase titles in each sucessive format.

[terjeber]

The storage space of 50GB is still very limited for HD content. How many hours can fit on one disc? 2? We will still have to juggle discs.

This is not at all correct. Yes, 50G is only a small step (considering the time elapsed) up from 8G, but that is not the only thing that has changed. HD contains more picture information than SD, so with the same compression scheme, you should easily be able to fit 2 hour of HD onto a 50G disk. The compression scheme isn't the same though, compression has come a long way since 1995. With the new HD compression, you can fit a lot more content on a 50G disk than you can on a dual layer DVD.

Yes, you may still have to juggle disks. For boxes like 'The complete set of "Friends", all seasons with directors commentary, outtakes and some video of the direcors kids thrown in for free.'

[ntscuser]

Yes, you may still have to juggle disks. For boxes like 'The complete set of "Friends", all seasons with directors commentary, outtakes and some video of the direcors kids thrown in for free.'

Is there anything available on HD-DVD yet that doesn't feature Jennifer Aniston?

[Wile_E]

The storage space of 50GB is still very limited for HD content. How many hours can fit on one disc? 2? We will still have to juggle discs.

The compression scheme isn't the same though, compression has come a long way since 1995. With the new HD compression, you can fit a lot more content on a 50G disk than you can on a dual layer DVD.

Yes, you may still have to juggle disks. For boxes like 'The complete set of "Friends", all seasons with directors commentary, outtakes and some video of the direcors kids thrown in for free.'

I don't want more lossy compression, aka MPEG4. Why don't they add DV-AVI playback support or non-lossy codec support, such as HuffyUV? I'm tired of seeing everything compressed down to shit. This "HD digital revolution" is not helping the theaters either. The digital transfer of movies on the big screen looks poor. I recently saw Superman Returns and XMEN 3. These were digital transfers put back to film. There were many scenes in each movie that looked very grainy, and also lacked the sharpness of a straight film-to-film transfer. 4000K digital transfers suck for the big screen, yet many directors think it is enough.

[Marvingj]

I don't see a great technological jump with either Blu-ray or HD. Just a bigger price. I'll wait a year to see if the cost comes way down.

[lenti_75]

the only way to succeed, is to bring the prices as low as a regular dvd, so pleople instead of buying regular dvd, to buy an HD dvd.

[celtic_druid]

You are sick of lossy, but you wouldn't mind DV? That makes no sense. DV is lossy. High bitrate MPEG-2, AVC or VC-1 should cause no more quality loss than DV.

AVC actually supports lossless encoding, I doubt either format allows for it though.