Interest in HDTV is declining in the US.

[rotten apple]

Microsoft Vista is a robust platform that extends the consumer's multimedia experience

OH! So there were 2 COMPLETELY different versions of Vista produced Why on earth did they release the sh!t one to the public that even despite all the endless spin makes people still want to buy/use XP instead after the notorious "Vista experience"??

Perhaps their aim is to make sure the XP market is fully saturated/exhausted before releasing the Vista version people will actually want to buy and use?

[josetjr]

One thing I'd like to add is that there is not enough HD content available yet. There's plenty of cable channels that have not made a HD version of their channels. And of course there is plenty of shows and programs that will remain in SD forever in repeats.

I for one cant wait till such channels go HD: USA, SciFi, MTV (showing real HD content, not just SD content on HD), Disney, Nick, Toon, History, etc. That's a big reason why I haven't even contemplated getting an HD package. I just use my 32" LCD for OTA HD, PS3, and upconverted DVDs.

[Nilfennasion]

I agree except for one huge issue and that is progressive display.

Hmmm yes, progressive is a bit like UHF at the moment. The problem stems from the fact that most "progressive" you see at present is actually an interlaced signal converted into progressive, which is the root of most problems. All conversion entails artefacts is one law Michael D explained to me when I was writing under him that I will never forget for as long as I am alive.

Your lingo is too mild, get Lord Smurf to help you Juice it up.

I was trying to make the comparison as easily-understood as is possible, so that I do not have to repeat myself. I would rather be punched in the **** by a 20'-tall Mountain Troll than have to repeat myself.

A lot of the oldies who claim there is no improvement from VHS to DVD to Blu-Ray or whatever should take a good hard look at the equipment they use. I got my money's worth in improvement terms just by going from Composite to S-Video. (And the same again from S-Video to Component, but that's another story.)

[TBoneit]

Microsoft Vista is a robust platform that extends the consumer's multimedia experience

OH! So there were 2 COMPLETELY different versions of Vista produced Why on earth did they release the sh!t one to the public that even despite all the endless spin makes people still want to buy/use XP instead after the notorious "Vista experience"??

Perhaps their aim is to make sure the XP market is fully saturated/exhausted before releasing the Vista version people will actually want to buy and use?

There are 5 (6) in some areas) versions of Vista actually.

Home Premium and Ultimate both have Media Center in them. The Home basic and Business versions do not.

Why is there a Vista Home Basic? So sellers like Dell can make cheap systems.

[DereX888]

Microsoft Vista is a robust platform that extends the consumer's multimedia experience

OH! So there were 2 COMPLETELY different versions of Vista produced Why on earth did they release the sh!t one to the public that even despite all the endless spin makes people still want to buy/use XP instead after the notorious "Vista experience"??

Perhaps their aim is to make sure the XP market is fully saturated/exhausted before releasing the Vista version people will actually want to buy and use?

Joke aside, you are actually right.

The Vista version thats been released is nothing else but expanded-polluted rewrite of XP, a continuation of Windows NT line (New Technology version 6, aka NT6) that has the same roots in IBM's OS/2 and dates back to 1984, exactly same as Windows NT3, NT4, 2000, XP, and Windows 2003.
The Vista version that supposed to be released was a completely new operating system, which 20,000 Microsoft's coders couldn't finish on time so it was killed and decision was made to start over again with existing NT5 code (they used Windows 2000 Gold as starting point instead).
However it was released until 2005 under codename "Longhorn" in few beta stages.

[TBoneit]

One thing I'd like to add is that there is not enough HD content available yet. There's plenty of cable channels that have not made a HD version of their channels. And of course there is plenty of shows and programs that will remain in SD forever in repeats.

I for one cant wait till such channels go HD: USA, SciFi, MTV (showing real HD content, not just SD content on HD), Disney, Nick, Toon, History, etc. That's a big reason why I haven't even contemplated getting an HD package. I just use my 32" LCD for OTA HD, PS3, and upconverted DVDs.

Won't be a much longer wait. Many of those channels are supposed to be coming the near future, 1 year time frame.

MHD is in HD now. That is a channel from MTV that blends MTV, VH1 and CMT content. Rave HD is on now showing mostly rock concerts in HD. I don't remember what channel it was but I've seen opera in HD too. History Channel HD is supposed to be coming to Dishnetwork, My provider, Sept. 5. And more unannounced HD channels later in Sept. I already have TLC, 2 Discovery, and so on available.

[SmokieStover]

Prices are dropping hard on HD sets and it's a rare bird that hasn't noticed. Yet, interest in same is dropping even faster. What gives?

The cost is still higher than almost anyone is accustomed to paying for a TV. My best and most expensive set is a 4 year old 32" CRT that cost $450 at the time. The one I watch the most (a 9 year old 25" CRT cost less than $250). Our newest and cheapest CRT, a 2 year old 21" Sanyo, cost less than $150. I'm perfectly happy watching a VHS recording, VHS movie tape, Movie DVD or a DVD recording (made via PC PVR Cards), or live analog cable on either one of these sets.

The cost of HDTV doesn't end with the purchase of the the new set. You must purchase HD programming too. So for me that means add basic digital cable ($15) plus the basic HD package plus the HDDVR plus the premium HD package or packages of your choice. I'm at a $100 a month and still don't much like the content..........and so much of it is the same old crap........programming slipped in between all the advertizing.

But the cost aren't over. Need an HD Movie player too, or maybe two! The surround sound system on the 32" CRT doesnt have HDMI or on optical audio port. Oh well, spend some more money.

And now the fact that is denied no where except in cyberspace: No HDTV (except the older CRT's) play analog cable, digital cable, or SD Sat as good as a good CRT.

Never underestimate the importance of analog cable ready TV's and devices. It's the one thing that prevents many, many people from switching from cable to Sat ......they don't want a box at every dam TV and they DO USE those cable ready VCR's and PVR's.

The last figures I saw put US HDTV subscribers at about 13% of the total. In the largest US TV markets perhaps cable providers can sh@t on the $45/month analog subscriber. But here in most of Central Illinois, It's a sure way to send more of their business to DirectTV or Dish.

Thats the whole point of not-so-enthusiastic HD welcome by the public:
The old SD is still "good enough" for many.
And that won't change anytime soon.

"Good enough" is an over simplification. HDTV is not worth the cost to most people. Sure it's better picture and sound, but from my perspective, you gotta like TV and Movies a hell of a lot more than most people to layout the money for a HDTV and all the ancillary things that go with it.

What I see with cable and sat HDTV (and the whole digital TV revolution) is programming the consumer pays for that is all locked-up on a box which he/she must rent FOR EACH TV, but the utility of which is subject to unlimited restrictions of others. This isn't a future in which I care to invest thousands of dollars for play back equipment.

Sure there's free OTA HDTV for some, but not for me....48 miles to the nearest broadcast station and a 75 foot tower required to clear the trees. But hey, I do not watch ABC, NBC, CBS or FOX on cable anyway. Crap in HD is no better than crap in SD.

For now, I'll use what I have and enjoy the ease of use, recording utility and portability that I value more than the big trade-off I see for a high quality digital future.

If we all liked the same thing, we would all want to marry the same person.

[handyguy]

'Prices are dropping hard on HD sets and it's a rare bird that hasn't noticed. Yet, interest in same is dropping even faster. What gives? '

Also, consider that unlike CRT sets, they are not repairable (According to some who tried) once they are out of warrentee.

[yoda313]

My lone fear in the hddvd-bluray war is that one of these days EXCLUSIVITY will start bigtime.

I don't mean bluray or hddvd only for high def media. I mean TOTALLY EXCLUSIVE no DVD release at all. That will be when the format war takes on a whole new level.

All we need is for something like the next Harry Potter or BOURNE movie to be available only on HDDVD or BLURAY ONLY and no dvd release. That's the day the whole format war kicks into a new level.

As soon as the studios start trying that trick we are in serious trouble. I would be more likely to go to hddvd just because the players are cheaper. If I movie I wanted was to have a HDDVD only release with no dvd edition than I would do hddvd. Even though I don't have a HDTV!! But I would have to think long and hard about bluray. I'd have to really love the movie to get it for just exclusivity.

[Dv8ted2]

Microsoft Vista is a robust platform that extends the consumer's multimedia experience

OH! So there were 2 COMPLETELY different versions of Vista produced Why on earth did they release the sh!t one to the public that even despite all the endless spin makes people still want to buy/use XP instead after the notorious "Vista experience"??

Perhaps their aim is to make sure the XP market is fully saturated/exhausted before releasing the Vista version people will actually want to buy and use?

Joke aside, you are actually right.

The Vista version thats been released is nothing else but expanded-polluted rewrite of XP, a continuation of Windows NT line (New Technology version 6, aka NT6) that has the same roots in IBM's OS/2 and dates back to 1984, exactly same as Windows NT3, NT4, 2000, XP, and Windows 2003.
The Vista version that supposed to be released was a completely new operating system, which 20,000 Microsoft's coders couldn't finish on time so it was killed and decision was made to start over again with existing NT5 code (they used Windows 2000 Gold as starting point instead).
However it was released until 2005 under codename "Longhorn" in few beta stages.

That is inaccurate. Vista was based off of Server 2003 code, not 2000.

Q: I heard that Windows Vista was based on Windows Server 2003, not XP. Does that mean that Windows Vista is more stable/less consumer-friendly than XP?

A: Future Windows versions are always be based on the most up-to-date Windows version at the time, and at the time that Microsoft reset Longhorn development and began work on what we now know as Windows Vista, that version was Windows Server 2003 with Service Pack 1 (SP1). When Windows Vista development originally started in 2001, however, it was then based on Windows XP. In mid-2004, Microsoft had to restart the core development of Windows Vista because it was too hard to go back and componentize the existing Windows Vista core code. So when it restarted Windows Vista development, Microsoft naturally used the Windows Server 2003 with SP1 code base instead of that of XP.

Don't be confused by this: Windows Vista still includes all of the great features and compatibility from XP with Service Pack 2 (SP2). As Microsoft writes in its internal documentation, the company is simply taking the best features of both XP with Service Pack 2 (SP2) and Windows Server 2003 with SP1 to create Windows Vista.
source

[DereX888]

My lone fear in the hddvd-bluray war is that one of these days EXCLUSIVITY will start bigtime.

I don't mean bluray or hddvd only for high def media. I mean TOTALLY EXCLUSIVE no DVD release at all. That will be when the format war takes on a whole new level.

All we need is for something like the next Harry Potter or BOURNE movie to be available only on HDDVD or BLURAY ONLY and no dvd release. That's the day the whole format war kicks into a new level.

As soon as the studios start trying that trick we are in serious trouble. I would be more likely to go to hddvd just because the players are cheaper. If I movie I wanted was to have a HDDVD only release with no dvd edition than I would do hddvd. Even though I don't have a HDTV!! But I would have to think long and hard about bluray. I'd have to really love the movie to get it for just exclusivity.

There is more $ to gain from releasing it on DVD than there is to gain from few potential adopters of high-def forced to buy their favorite movie on a high-def disc + player. Very few people would do it and studios know it.
Hence no studio will dare to do it until high-def is well entrenched in movie buyer's homes.
Do you remember when there was first DVD-only movie released (no VHS version)?
I dont remember, but Im sure it didnt happen until well past year 2000.

[edDV]

My lone fear in the hddvd-bluray war is that one of these days EXCLUSIVITY will start bigtime.

I don't mean bluray or hddvd only for high def media. I mean TOTALLY EXCLUSIVE no DVD release at all. That will be when the format war takes on a whole new level.

All we need is for something like the next Harry Potter or BOURNE movie to be available only on HDDVD or BLURAY ONLY and no dvd release. That's the day the whole format war kicks into a new level.

As soon as the studios start trying that trick we are in serious trouble. I would be more likely to go to hddvd just because the players are cheaper. If I movie I wanted was to have a HDDVD only release with no dvd edition than I would do hddvd. Even though I don't have a HDTV!! But I would have to think long and hard about bluray. I'd have to really love the movie to get it for just exclusivity.

There is more $ to gain from releasing it on DVD than there is to gain from few potential adopters of high-def forced to buy their favorite movie on a high-def disc + player. Very few people would do it and studios know it.
Hence no studio will dare to do it until high-def is well entrenched in movie buyer's homes.
Do you remember when there was first DVD-only movie released (no VHS version)?
I dont remember, but Im sure it didnt happen until well past year 2000.

"Even though I don't have a HDTV!!"

Obvious or you would have noticed the Blu-Ray ads on the HD channels promising unique experience. There is a long tradition through S-VHS and premium DVD (Criterion, etc.) offering unique content. The people who buy these things have a unique demographic further filtered by the program they are watching. Sure unique movies may be offered to a Yacht, Jazz or the premium ski bum segment. Wouldn't it be great to see a movie without the dumbed down newbie education? Movie production costs are dropping like a rock. Smart people will be producing targeted fictional movies.

[DereX888]

My lone fear in the hddvd-bluray war is that one of these days EXCLUSIVITY will start bigtime.

I don't mean bluray or hddvd only for high def media. I mean TOTALLY EXCLUSIVE no DVD release at all. That will be when the format war takes on a whole new level.

All we need is for something like the next Harry Potter or BOURNE movie to be available only on HDDVD or BLURAY ONLY and no dvd release. That's the day the whole format war kicks into a new level.

As soon as the studios start trying that trick we are in serious trouble. I would be more likely to go to hddvd just because the players are cheaper. If I movie I wanted was to have a HDDVD only release with no dvd edition than I would do hddvd. Even though I don't have a HDTV!! But I would have to think long and hard about bluray. I'd have to really love the movie to get it for just exclusivity.

There is more $ to gain from releasing it on DVD than there is to gain from few potential adopters of high-def forced to buy their favorite movie on a high-def disc + player. Very few people would do it and studios know it.
Hence no studio will dare to do it until high-def is well entrenched in movie buyer's homes.
Do you remember when there was first DVD-only movie released (no VHS version)?
I dont remember, but Im sure it didnt happen until well past year 2000.

"Even though I don't have a HDTV!!"

Obvious or you would have noticed the Blu-Ray ads on the HD channels promising unique experience. There is a long tradition through S-VHS and premium DVD (Criterion, etc.) offering unique content. The people who buy these things have a unique demographic further filtered by the program they are watching. Sure unique movies may be offered to a Yacht, Jazz or the premium ski bum segment. Wouldn't it be great to see a movie without the dumbed down newbie education? Movie production costs are dropping like a rock. Smart people will be producing targeted fictional movies.

edDV, such 'specialized movies' always existed.
We talk about some theoretical major 'blockbuster' to be currently released on say bluray only (no dvd-video, no hd-dvd releases), i.e. "Pirates of Caribbean III" (although Im not sure thats good example since I dont know how well it fared in video sales, but you get the point I think).

[gll99]

yoda313 wrote

All we need is for something like the next Harry Potter or BOURNE movie to be available only on HDDVD or BLURAY ONLY and no dvd release.

The market would have to be more saturated with hd players by then otherwise the pirates would love that. They would swoop in and make a top notch dvd from pirated HD discs and flood the market.

I can see hd-dvd vs blu-ray only titles continuing but the first one to drop standard dvd for it's hd only brand will just let some illegal fill the void and make the $$$$

When VHS production stopped, they probably made some pirated vhs but going back to analog tape from DVD wasn't too attractive for the masses and the market for dvd opened up at the same time so the damage was less for the industry by then. Stopping DVD production while it's still highly popular would not make good business sense. I think we're still many years away from that.

[Nilfennasion]

Considering that an overwhelming majority of television shows shot between 1960 and 2000 used source materials with a maximum resolution of 500-600 vertical pixels, the complete cessation of SD disc production will likely never happen. There are just some materials where there is nothing to be gained from the conversion. That is why I laugh whenever someone tries to tell me I should just buy a DVD player that upconverts to 720P. Downconversions will always look passable if done with care and good-quality equipment, but upconversions will just have all their flaws magnified. Shows like Mork And Mindy will always look horrible at 1080P because they were shot at 480I, so there is no point in trying to market them at anything other than 480I.

As I sit and watch Tomb Of The Cybermen, a Doctor Who serial of the mid-1960s from which tens of thousands of video faults had to be cleaned, I figure two kinds of people would want to attempt to convert such material to HD. Retards and madmen.

Now, films, on the other hand (or television shows that were shot on film like The Addams Family), are a whole other story...

[edDV]

yoda313 wrote

All we need is for something like the next Harry Potter or BOURNE movie to be available only on HDDVD or BLURAY ONLY and no dvd release.

The market would have to be more saturated with hd players by then otherwise the pirates would love that. They would swoop in and make a top notch dvd from pirated HD discs and flood the market.

I can see hd-dvd vs blu-ray only titles continuing but the first one to drop standard dvd for it's hd only brand will just let some illegal fill the void and make the $$$$

When VHS production stopped, they probably made some pirated vhs but going back to analog tape from DVD wasn't too attractive for the masses and the market for dvd opened up at the same time so the damage was less for the industry by then. Stopping DVD production while it's still highly popular would not make good business sense. I think we're still many years away from that.

I agree. DVD manufacturing is much cheaper than VHS tape. SD DVD releases will continue well into the future.

[edDV]

Considering that an overwhelming majority of television shows shot between 1960 and 2000 used source materials with a maximum resolution of 500-600 vertical pixels, the complete cessation of SD disc production will likely never happen. There are just some materials where there is nothing to be gained from the conversion. That is why I laugh whenever someone tries to tell me I should just buy a DVD player that upconverts to 720P. Downconversions will always look passable if done with care and good-quality equipment, but upconversions will just have all their flaws magnified. Shows like Mork And Mindy will always look horrible at 1080P because they were shot at 480I, so there is no point in trying to market them at anything other than 480I.

As I sit and watch Tomb Of The Cybermen, a Doctor Who serial of the mid-1960s from which tens of thousands of video faults had to be cleaned, I figure two kinds of people would want to attempt to convert such material to HD. Retards and madmen.

Now, films, on the other hand (or television shows that were shot on film like The Addams Family), are a whole other story...

Most TV series were shot on 35mm film but you are right that most series masters up to Y2K were on 1" Type C, D1 or Digital Betacam at standard definition. 1080i HDCAM was introduced in 1997.

These series can be remastered from the original film to HD but this is expensive. All special effects need to be re-created in post. Still, this will be done for the more popular series like Seinfeld and Cosby. Another technique allows "enhanced for HD" series discs that use expensive upscalers at 24p.

With VC-1 or H.264 a full series could be squeezed onto a 4 layer HD/BD disc at say 720p. People forget that 1280x720p/23.976 fps is a supported ATSC/HDDVD standard and only needs 44% the bitrate vs 1080p.