Blockbuster chooses Blu-ray: is the war over?

[DereX888]

Comparing HD to BD is like comparing cat shit to dog shit. They both stink.

IMHO it sum up this entire thread
I see no point in discussing it further, let the HD & BR fanboys continue...

[videopoo]

Really?

The Descent BD had PIP last year.

Has the HD version? Oh no, wait.... there isn't a HD version.

I was referring to players not the films themselves. Too bad Descent wasn't released on HD DVD. That PIP option might look pretty cool.

[rhegedus]

What you would like (HD world) and what is truth (SD world) are just not the same. If you really want for HD to catch on, you cannot ignore the reality around you. That is what Sony does with their products. If you want to know why Sony failed at all those formats of yesteryear, it's because they lived in this bubble. You're doing the very same thing. You can say whatever you want, but the numbers and mass opinions don't agree with your HD zealotry.

The reality is that it's nigh on impossible to buy an SD TV that's anywhere near the viewing sizes we've become used to. Once people have bought a HDTV, they will want HD content since SD just won't cut it any more.

[rhegedus]

Really?

The Descent BD had PIP last year.

Has the HD version? Oh no, wait.... there isn't a HD version.

I was referring to players not the films themselves. Too bad Descent wasn't released on HD DVD. That PIP option might look pretty cool.

It was possible to watch The Descent on BD players with a firmware update.

[videopoo]

Comparing HD to BD is like comparing cat shit to dog shit. They both stink

I don't know about that. Not sure what else your looking for? If you want to watch some HD on discs you buy the discs and watch it - they play fine. They're both beta technologies like it or not - released way too soon before players and the authoring tools could mature a little. Once authors and developers get some more experience with the specs I think you'll see some really creative and useful features. Compare DVD-Video design now from when they first hit the market.

I'd love to see something better but unfortunately thats not the case as long as the studios back one or the other. DVD-Video had similar issues back in the day. Player incompatibilities, abstraction tools which sent players to reject discs, poor feature implimitations.

I'm perfectly happy with both formats from a consumers point of view. However, I make a living producing discs and HD DVD is the only format I can possibly work with right now because of price and available tools.

[DereX888]

Comparing HD to BD is like comparing cat shit to dog shit. They both stink

I don't know about that. Not sure what else your looking for? If you want to watch some HD on discs you buy the discs and watch it - they play fine. They're both beta technologies like it or not - released way too soon before players and the authoring tools could mature a little. Once authors and developers get some more experience with the specs I think you'll see some really creative and useful features. Compare DVD-Video design now from when they first hit the market.

I'd love to see something better but unfortunately thats not the case as long as the studios back one or the other. DVD-Video had similar issues back in the day. Player incompatibilities, abstraction tools which sent players to reject discs, poor feature implimitations.

I'm perfectly happy with both formats from a consumers point of view. However, I make a living producing discs and HD DVD is the only format I can possibly work with right now because of price and available tools.

I know I will start collecting HD movies when I see all my friends using HD (edit: I mean television sets, HDTV).
Which format I will choose? The one that will have the most cheap discs of course, because its a fact known for centuries that the factor is the only one that make 'winners'. To me personally it doesnt matter which one it will be.
Yes, I bought HD-DVD player for myself as soon as they came out, but I have only 40+ movies in this format that I really wanted for this or that reasons, but I am really not planning to "rebuild" my collection again on HD-DVD although I will continue to buy occasionally something I dont have on SD DVD.
And yes, there are few movies that are available on BR only that I could buy (as well as any best BR player since Im a gadget freak too), but I will not willingly do so for I will not support voluntarily (hence provide financial support) to jackasses like Sony or Microsoft.
If BR really "wins" the formats war that'll be a different story, same as Windows (market supremacy). But since buying a BR player or discs now is equal to voting for Sony...
I had BR player (by Sony) given to me as christmas gift.
First time in my life I returned the gift to store and took cash

[gotnotime]

I know I will start collecting HD movies when I see all my friends using HD (edit: I mean television sets, HDTV)....Yes, I bought HD-DVD player for myself as soon as they came out.... But anyone buying a BR player or discs now is voting for Sony...

Looks like you are starting to us your HD-DVD Fan-boy colors or should I say Fan-girl?

[guns1inger]

@DereX888

So for you this isn't about which is the better format or produces the higher quality or is best for the consumer in general, but simply a matter of who you hate least. You would back the Microsoft approved and supported HD-DVD format over Blu-Ray simply because you hate Sony more than Microsoft ?

It seems typical of most of this debate - very little of it is about informed judgment, but who do you hate more or less, and therefore which format do you support.

To me the whole thing is moot until I see some sort of value proposition that works. I have yet to be impressed with any HD television under around AUD$4000, and none of them give me $4000 worth of improvement over my current SD set. Add to that at least another $1000 for a player (PS3 being the cheapest option), and it just doesn't make sense.

I look at it the way I look at buying wine. I can get a really good bottle of wine for $40. It tastes great, will cellar for years, and is great value. I can get a better bottle of wine for $400. It also tastes great, and will cellar well. But it isn't ten time better than the $40 bottle. It isn't even twice as good.

HD is the same. It will cost me 5 - 7 times what my current rig cost to move to HD, for an experience that, at the moment, isn't double my current experience. Where is the sense in that ? I have seen HD TV broadcasts. They are, at best, about 15% better than SD. Maybe.

So if the product isn't worth the money, and the experience is little better than what we have now, what is left to argue about ?

Apparently this is a religious war. It's not about quality or value or even if the product is valid. It's about how much you love or hate Sony or Microsoft or whoever else you want to blame or worship.

Like all religious stoushes, logic has no role. It's about dogma.

And to date no-one has made a convincing argument that either is that much better than what we have now that the money required is well spent.

[gotnotime]

I have seen HD TV broadcasts. They are, at best, about 15% better than SD. Maybe.

If you are talking about a PAL TV then you may have a valid argument, if you mean NTSC (as in the USA) then you are simply blind. The difference between quality from NTSC to HDTV is quite dramatic.

As far as cost, $4000 seems like a lot of money that would put you in the 1080P range with sets over 50" in size. When you get this big, the difference between SD (even PAL) and HDTV is quite dramtic.

[gotnotime]

Sorry,

hit the submit button before I realized your location was Australia. I think you have PAL there???

The US/Aussie dollar exhange is about 1 to 1.15, so AUD $4000 is still a lot of money, but maybe HD costs more there

[guns1inger]

I haven't seen NTSC broadcasts, but given PAL SD is a big leap of NTSC SD, I can believe that anything is an improvement.

I have watched and studied PAL SD and HD TVs. I have yet to see a quality set under around AUD$4000. People tell me they exist and show me what they have spent $2700 or less on, and I go back home to my SD CRT feeling happy that I didn't waste the money they did.

Yes, top of the line Bravias and Pioneer plasma look good. I'm not saying they don't. But there isn't a leap in quality worth the financial investment.

Remember, it isn't just the TV. You need a new player, a new amplifier, new cables.

It's not even a matter of cost. I have the money. I could throw $5000 - $7000 - even $10000. But I won't get any here near that value for th investment.

I happy for anyone who spends the money and feel sit was worth it. If you spend $2000 on a HD plasma and watch the HD AFL broadcasts and think it is good, then great for you. I have watched AFL football in HD on HD TVs and it is a muddy pixelated mess. I have grabbed HDTV streams of the AFL broadcasts and gone through them frame by frame and they are appalling. Most HD broadcasts are simply not that great a quality from an encoding perspective. That's without worrying about the TV they will be shown on.

I know I am a lot more critical of image quality than most of my friends and family. I accept that. I also accept that therefore I am not the one the marketing guys are going after. They are going after joe shmo who has really no idea what's what and will simply buy whatever he is told is good. And because joe shmo is an idiot, he does, and the marketers claim that this validates their product. It doesn't. It just proves they can sell anything to an idiot.

[DereX888]

@DereX888

So for you this isn't about which is the better format or produces the higher quality or is best for the consumer in general, but simply a matter of who you hate least. You would back the Microsoft approved and supported HD-DVD format over Blu-Ray simply because you hate Sony more than Microsoft ?

It seems typical of most of this debate - very little of it is about informed judgment, but who do you hate more or less, and therefore which format do you support.

To me the whole thing is moot until I see some sort of value proposition that works. I have yet to be impressed with any HD television under around AUD$4000, and none of them give me $4000 worth of improvement over my current SD set. Add to that at least another $1000 for a player (PS3 being the cheapest option), and it just doesn't make sense.

I look at it the way I look at buying wine. I can get a really good bottle of wine for $40. It tastes great, will cellar for years, and is great value. I can get a better bottle of wine for $400. It also tastes great, and will cellar well. But it isn't ten time better than the $40 bottle. It isn't even twice as good.

HD is the same. It will cost me 5 - 7 times what my current rig cost to move to HD, for an experience that, at the moment, isn't double my current experience. Where is the sense in that ? I have seen HD TV broadcasts. They are, at best, about 15% better than SD. Maybe.

So if the product isn't worth the money, and the experience is little better than what we have now, what is left to argue about ?

Apparently this is a religious war. It's not about quality or value or even if the product is valid. It's about how much you love or hate Sony or Microsoft or whoever else you want to blame or worship.

Like all religious stoushes, logic has no role. It's about dogma.

And to date no-one has made a convincing argument that either is that much better than what we have now that the money required is well spent.

Again, since when HD-DVD is Microsoft's format? :O

I want HD to be mainstream same as probably most of us here.
But given that the reality is that the majority of world is still in the SD, and will be for next few years at least (and the fact that the HD-discs of whatever format have less market share than usual error margin of 2%) I simply laugh at this thread's subject and at the HD-DVD vs BR-DVD fanboys debacles
I never said anything about HD-DVD being better than BR-DVD (or vice versa).
The content of the discs in both format might be exactly the same, and from a consumer's point of view it is irrelevant on what kind of disc with what kind of DRM-infection it has been pressed on, right?
Just on a personal note I'd prefer if it wasn't any Sony product that becomes mainstream or dominant since not only in my opinion Sony is a Microsoft of the home electronics.
In the same time I won't be the last guy on the block with Beta when everyone else switched to VHS, obviously

gotnotime, seems you have problem understanding posts with more than "LOL" in the reply, so I write it simpler again for you:
I dont give a flying F about HD-DVD, but again and again - it is NOT "Microsoft format".
Before you need me to repeat it for 3rd time, perhaps show some info stating MS had anything to do with HD-DVD format?

[guns1inger]

Over here, Blu-Ray is by far the dominant player is this very small pond. There are more players available - from different vendors, not just the PS3 - and more titles available. Until about 6 months ago, HD-DVD didn't even get discussed in the media - it was all Blu-Ray.

[DereX888]

Over here, Blu-Ray is by far the dominant player is this very small pond. There are more players available - from different vendors, not just the PS3 - and more titles available. Until about 6 months ago, HD-DVD didn't even get discussed in the media - it was all Blu-Ray.

Maybe I dont remember correctly now, but IMHO we all heard about Blue Ray much earlier than about actual HD-DVD format (not just "High Def DVD" in general I mean).
AFAIR from the first time I heard about Sony's BR concept it was coming... coming... and HD-DVD came out, LOL


BTW: what media do discuss and what they 'conveniently' omit on a daily basis is a whole another subject

[guns1inger]

That's the difference. HD-DVD was released first in the US. Not so over here. In fact the first HD DVD option for playback over here was the XBox360 add-on, and it is still probably the easiest and most cost effective solution.

[DereX888]

That's the difference. HD-DVD was released first in the US. Not so over here. In fact the first HD DVD option for playback over here was the XBox360 add-on, and it is still probably the easiest and most cost effective solution.

It really doesn't matter what format was first.
Im still betting on some yet-to-appear 3rd format of HD-discs to actually win this "HD war", because few years until HDTV (the tv sets) become dominant in public's homes is a really long time in electronic toys.

[Nilfennasion]

I know I am a lot more critical of image quality than most of my friends and family. I accept that. I also accept that therefore I am not the one the marketing guys are going after. They are going after joe shmo who has really no idea what's what and will simply buy whatever he is told is good. And because joe shmo is an idiot, he does, and the marketers claim that this validates their product. It doesn't. It just proves they can sell anything to an idiot.

I am a good deal more critical of picture quality than anyone I have met outside of this site, offline or otherwise. The fact that I am also interested in the actual content of the disc, ie the film, as opposed to a bunch of flashy features that overcomplicate things or who owns what, generally means I get asked for my opinion of transfers with some regularity by major distributors. Not as much as I was when I was writing for a review site in 2001, but enough that I can get a look under the hood of whatever the distributors propose to bring out.

Thing is, they are not, never have been, and never will be, going after just Joe Schmoe. Joe Schmoe is a market tier, just like Joe Cinemaphile or Joe Audiophile. And what is ironic about that is that Joe Schmoe is in fact the last market tier the marketeers need to conquer in order to establish a format. Part of the reason DVD-Audio and SACD both failed is because Joe Audiophile became confused as to which disc to buy, and the independent content producers were not invited to the table until it was too late. Sony has quite apparently learned their lesson from that format war and decided to make this one as short and painful for the enemy as is possible.

I happen to occupy a tier in the marketplace that the marketeers never plan for. The visually-hypersensitive neurodivergent who can see the borders between pixels on an 80cm CRT that is (obviously) limited to 576I. One of the funniest things I keep hearing from Joe Schmoe types is that the difference is not noticed in the three-second inspection that they give, so it must not be there. I have even had an idiot try to tell me I wasted my money importing the new 16:9 Enhanced DVD of The Thing because there was a perfectly good DVD of it in Australia. Showing him the Australian DVD's rendition of the scene in which we pan through the halls of the outpost with the dog, then this remastered American version, fortunately, soon sets them straight. Setting people straight on the "no improvement over SD" claim would be as easy as putting a TV that shows the full effect of interlacing next to one that supports progressive scan, load up discs of the same title appropriate to each TV, make them watch, and point out each interlacing artefact. A Blu-Ray of The Phantom Menace in 1080P would not just kill the market for films on SD dead, it would urinate all over the corpse. Especially since I cannot watch the SD-DVD of that film on any display without it making my eyes water.

These, of course, are all things that the markeeters are vaguely aware of, but do not consider all that important to demonstrate. So I will just close by saying that contrary to what seems to be popular belief, a market for SD-DVD and whichever format of HD wins the war can in fact coexist. In point of fact, they will have to. Not because there are SD-only televisions out there (eventually, they will go the same way as monochrome), but because there are plenty of titles out there that will not benefit one iota from a HD transfer, such as the real Doctor Who or similar shot-on-video television shows.

[lordsmurf]

Thing is, they are not, never have been, and never will be, going after just Joe Schmoe. Joe Schmoe is a market tier, just like Joe Cinemaphile or Joe Audiophile.
...... a market for SD-DVD and whichever format of HD wins the war can in fact coexist.

And this is why it will be relegated to the same fate as S-VHS, Super Beta and Laserdisc. This is what I've been saying all along. HD is not the DVD-killer some would like to pretend.

Enjoy your HD product while it lasts.

[Nilfennasion]

That is not what I said at all, and you know it.

Coexist does not mean "SD Only". It means coexist. As more and more content is produced on film and HD video, the percentage of content that will not benefit from being placed on a HD format is diminishing. Even television shows from the 1960s such as The Addams Family will benefit from HD formatting of some sort because it was shot on film.

But hey, I bet http://journal.media-culture.org.au/9807/dvd.php's author probably feels pretty silly with the benefit of hindsight, too.

[DereX888]

Its been said many times (at least I know I did): without mass-marketed affordable real HD TVs, any HD disc format is just the toy of gadget freak's (like me, so no offense anyone).

[lordsmurf]

Coexist does not mean "SD Only". It means coexist.

History has shown that formats cannot coexist. One is on top, the others occupy a tiny insignificant portion of the market.

[valvehead]

Honestly, it doesn't really matter to me which format wins. I just hope that I will be able to author my own discs from my own source material for a reasonable cost. Aside from a few technical differences, both formats appear to be capable of delivering HD material just fine.

I'm not really picking sides, but I do currently own Vegas 6+DVD. As much as I would like to upgrade in the future, I am holding off until I know what the future of HD media is. I can only hope that no matter which format succeeds, Sony will not forget the people who use their software. Come on Sony, you've got HDTVs, HD camcoders, BD players, an HD NLE, a BD burner and media. Close the gap! Let us author our own! And don't charge us $10k to do it!

[Nilfennasion]

There is more than enough evidence on Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (Blu-ray) to prove it's worth its weight in Aztec gold, be it cursed or not. If you're on the fence about investing in a Blu-ray player or a Sony Playstation 3, the syren song of this release should easily pull you in. And if you've decided to wait out the format war for a clear winner, you're missing out on something special.

Source: http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/piratesblackpearlbluray.php

I agree that winning a format war and market acceptance are two different things, but with the way studios are leaning and with reviews like this, I would be surprised if HD-DVD discs were being pressed at all in another 30 months.

Coexistence is also not just a matter of two formats simply being there. Obviously, one will have to be modified to fit the other. For instance, it is all too easy to program players to look at the video stream it is decoding and decide "hey, the disc author encoded this in 576I for a reason, let's not mess with it". Old television shows are the most obvious candidate for this, but to claim that either all material must be HD or SD or die is being way too simplistic. Films will look good in 1080P, most television shows from before 2000 or so will not. Even if the marketeers are morons (and I have met a few in person - they aren't), the savage reality is that the people who encode content onto discs are not.

All this is beside the point, however. What is important to bear in mind is that new consumers are born every second of every day. New consumers do not say "what is good enough for my dad is good enough for me". New consumers look at things and evaluate them based on the merits of the new experience. Hell, a lot of old consumers have been anxiously awaiting the death of interlacing since The Thing was first released on DVD. The first 1080P TVs are here, there is no going back. Regardless of whether it gains a mass market in 2009 or 2029, shimmer-free picture is the way of the future. In fact, it is past, present, and future. Just ask the people who thought TV would never catch on, trying to supplant a 4000P picture with 200I.

[gotnotime]

gotnotime, seems you have problem understanding posts with more than "LOL" in the reply, so I write it simpler again for you:
I dont give a flying F about HD-DVD, but again and again - it is NOT "Microsoft format".
Before you need me to repeat it for 3rd time, perhaps show some info stating MS had anything to do with HD-DVD format?

I don't believe I stated that it was a Microsoft format (Toshiba first produced it), if I did it was an error. However, they have clearly taken sides:

Microsoft support for HD-DVD is directly evidenced by XBox 360 as stated previously. Do they make a blu-ray player for XBox? No. Is it just a concidence that you can also play HD-DVD movies with a "gaming" system? No. This is analogous to the movie studios that exclusively produce one type of HD disks. In addition, Microsoft is quite aware that the majority of both bluray and HD-DVD players that are currently sold are those with their respective gaming systems. Microsoft's recent drop in price of their HD-DVD player for XBox reveals their support for the HD-DVD format.

I did not intend personal insult to your opinion, but only to point out your personal bias in the format war. First your dislike of Sony and second the fact you already own a HD-DVD player supports this assumption.

I freely admit my dislike of Microsoft and realize this creates bias in my opinion also. I also admit that I thought there was a stronger link between Microsoft and HD-DVD then just the XBox. You helped me to realize that this was not the case. and my personal research also supports your statement. For this I thank you

IMHO the bottom line will still be that size matters as I stated before. More capacity allows for future improvments to meet some "new" HD format, thus allowing the technology to last longer before we are forced to move up again to some new DV media. Please don't argue that HD-DVD media with multi layers can keep up. This is not a valid argument, have you seen any 3 layer SD-DVD?? No. Dual layer still has its problems. Compression technologies are not the answer either, we have nearly reached the theoretical limits of these technologies. They also are not perfect, artifacts are always introduced on playback.

The best analogy is a hard drive for your computer. If the price of a 500 GB drive is the same as a 250GB then people will buy the 500GB, its really that simple. Well, not quite. The encryption, DRM's, HDCP, etc.. has muddied the waters.

Damn!!!, its never really simple

[somebodeez]

When/If the day comes when something becomes available that can handle my classic shows and movies just as nicely (or better - I certainly don't consider something that will make them look bad as an upgrade!) as my current TVs can without having to stretch them out of proportion and without worrying about burn-in ect and prices are within reach and the content that I want is available also with decent prices, then I'll be all excited about it and into it.

Wake me up when that happens.

[lordsmurf]

New consumers are not born every day. Rather, they come in mass waves, typically by generation (age) or other large demographic (color, background, etc). You do get early-adopters and latecomers, but it largely happens in waves. And you can actually control some of that too, if you are effective at marketing.

There is not a large demographic salivating for HD discs. CD took a while to catch on, but DVD was the "VHS CD" that was long in demand before it even existed (Laserdisc being the flopped first try).

Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are more in line with being a flopped first try. The matter is complicated by PVRs and on-demand. The marginal increase in image quality is only noticed on large screens, by the overwhelming majority of folks out there.

A happy medium is not yet available (HD content that can be downloaded at the same quality as appears on a bought disc, and you can do-it-yourself if desired, and quite easily). Sites like this exist solely because of how damned hard it is to work with digital video.

And remember: it's just a stupid tv set.

[SCDVD]

New consumers are not born every day. Rather, they come in mass waves, typically by generation (age) or other large demographic (color, background, etc). You do get early-adopters and latecomers, but it largely happens in waves. And you can actually control some of that too, if you are effective at marketing.

So true. One of the best examples of this is Apple's marketing approach in their earlier days. Their efforts at targeting schools with their marketing (missionary) approach was masterful. IBM targeted business users and largely neglected schools. Schools were outside their "business model". What Apple apparently realized was that if you get them while they are young, they will develop user habits and attitudes that will stick and assure long-term loyalty. While I am not an Apple fan, I give them credit for a marketing strategy that was well executed.

[gotnotime]

So true. One of the best examples of this is Apple's marketing approach in their earlier days. Their efforts at targeting schools with their marketing (missionary) approach was masterful. IBM targeted business users and largely neglected schools. Schools were outside their "business model". What Apple apparently realized was that if you get them while they are young, they will develop user habits and attitudes that will stick and assure long-term loyalty. While I am not an Apple fan, I give them credit for a marketing strategy that was well executed.

I disagree, Apple missed the boat in the early years by ignoring the business world. I'm old enough to remember these years. Apple's first Windows environment was far superior to the early 3.xx Windows and could have dominated the entire industry if they realized this at the time. While concentrating on education kept apple alive, and one may even argue produced a generation that spawned the resurgence of Apple with IPODS, etc, they never regained the PC market in the business world. Even, the education system has swung back to Microsoft PCs.

Many still believe Apple PC "windows" still remains superior to Microsoft today, although I'm not so sure myself. One thing is for sure, if we would have adopted Apple windows in the early years we would have avoided years of crappy Microsoft products like Windows 95 and 98, and the all time lemon Windows ME

[videopoo]

Quote:
There is more than enough evidence on Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (Blu-ray) to prove it's worth its weight in Aztec gold, be it cursed or not. If you're on the fence about investing in a Blu-ray player or a Sony Playstation 3, the syren song of this release should easily pull you in. And if you've decided to wait out the format war for a clear winner, you're missing out on something special.

Source: http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/piratesblackpearlbluray.php

I agree that winning a format war and market acceptance are two different things, but with the way studios are leaning and with reviews like this, I would be surprised if HD-DVD discs were being pressed at all in another 30 months.

You mean the one that didn't work...thousands of discs had to be re-called for that mistake. Again this proves a point that both HD DVD and BR are in the beta stages.

Simple games like this can easliy be done in HDi & Script:

http://blogs.gotdotnet.com/amyd/archive/2007/07/31/blackjack.aspx

So BR has no clear tech advantage over HD...yet. Way down the road I could see where BR's Java engine will provide more powerful features...whatever that may be...its just a movie for God's sakes! BR technology is great on paper but no one as yet to prove to the world what it could do. I don't dislike Sony but for them to bring out a completely new format then say they have the right to dictate what gets pressed or not is enough for me to not support them....sorry Sony..wag of the finger!

[rhegedus]

So BR has no clear tech advantage over HD...yet.

Did you miss the 20Gb difference?

I don't dislike Sony but for them to bring out a completely new format then say they have the right to dictate what gets pressed or not is enough for me to not support them....sorry Sony..wag of the finger!

When did Sony say what gets pressed and what doesn't?