Toshiba Unveils DVD-Enhancing Technology

[orsetto]

I know that the major player in the death of BetaMax was $ony's greedy business practices regarding the licensing of their technology.

Not entirely. What killed Betamax in its cradle was Sonys refusal to accomodate RCAs request to add a crummy long-play recording speed before RCA would agree to market Betamaxes. Sony turned its nose up at this demand and walked away, Matsushita jumped on the opportunity and the rest is history. Back in the late 1970s RCA was *the* pivotal television brand, had Sony worked things out with RCA, VHS would be a footnote. Ironic that Sony was forced soon after this to add the 3-hr and 5-hr speeds anyway. There were a good number of Betamax licensors, it wasn't license cost but the popularity of VHS that lost Sony more partners. Many of the Betamax marketers also had VHS licenses, after awhile they saw double digit gains in their VHS sales and double-digit declines in their Betamax sales and that settled things. But for a good while there you had Zenith, Sanyo, NEC, Toshiba, etc marketing Betamaxes in the USA. The Toshibas were completely independent Toshiba-engineered designs from the ground up, with absolutely stunning picture quality unequaled by the Sony models. The Toshiba Betamax remained an image quality benchmark well into the SuperBeta/SVHS era.

While its true Sony has been equally pigheaded with some subsequent formats (MiniDisc, anyone?), they have WAY too much invested in BluRay to bully any potential partners or demand insane license fees. I'm sure Sony is only too willing at this point to take on any partner that wants to market BluRay players: I wouldn't be surprised to find Ron Popeil hawking them soon on late-night infomercials. I think the fact we don't see too many non-Sony BluRay players just yet is more due to the economy: other smaller brands know they can't push a $300 DVD player in the USA right now and are holding back until more significant demand builds. Assuming it ever does- the members who say HD cable has hijacked consumer HD mindshare may have hit the nail on the head. I really doubt it has anything to do with sales of HD television sets: its not as if consumers have a choice NOT to buy an HDTV anymore: thats all thats available in stores now. Anyone who needs a new television will buy an HDTV by default. It appears consumers will spend big for a big screen HDTV but don't really care about about adding HD accessories, as long as they can get the SuperBowl via HD cable/satellite.

[Xylob the Destroyer]

HDTV sales are doing just fine. The masses are already embracing the technology. HDTV is awesome. You don't need Blu-ray to be blown away at how much better HDTV is than SDTV, and you don't have to buy anything but an antenna to take advantage of what HDTV has to offer.

When I got mine I immediately saw just how horrible antenna (not everybody gets good reception!) and my local cable service were.
Sure, my PC, DVDs, and video games looked incredible.
But an HDTV also shows off just how bad a source is as well as it shows off how good a source is.
We watch television on our SDTV because cable looks like shit on our HDTV.
No, I'm not gonna fork out the extra $$ for HDTV service from Comcast, it took the old lady almost a year to convince me to switch from "basic" to digital service. Television, for the most part, is shit. I only bought the HDTV for DVDs and games anyway...

[Xylob the Destroyer]

orsetto, I can't wait to buy a BluRay rotisserie cooker!
Set it and forget it!!!!

let's not forget also that porn went with VHS, for whatever reason(s), and that didn't help BetaMax one bit.

[samijubal]

I don't know how you could say using an antenna is crap, unless you live where there are no HD channels. OTA HD is nothing short of amazing. Cable is crap on anything HD or SD.

[yoda313]

I am confused. Aren't there are already 1080p upconverting dvd players???? What the hell is different about this toshiba upconverting players?

I believe that a vast majority of dvd upconverting players are 1080i only but I do remember seeing some claiming 1080p upconverting.

I'm happy with bluray. I'm even pleasantly suprised by the upconverting my ps3 does. However my xbox 360 gets the edge for letterboxed dvds. The stretching is better than the ps3 - at least the auto stretching performs better.

[nick101181]

I'm not really sure why people are bitching about the high price of blu-rays. I buy mine from a used dvd store that sells new blu-rays still sealed for 15 bucks. I've gotten several blu-rays that were price at 35-42.00 retail at 15 bucks. All you gotta do is look around these used dvd stores, although most charge 20 for blu-rays,even brand new releases.

[harrisonford]

ok I am a dumbass,

I did find the document that includes sdi including a spec for SDI output being 720P but did not include DVD sdi above 480p

so thats all I have to say, the SDI I was looking at was a upscaler included to 720P

[jagabo]

I am confused. Aren't there are already 1080p upconverting dvd players???? What the hell is different about this toshiba upconverting players?

I believe that a vast majority of dvd upconverting players are 1080i only but I do remember seeing some claiming 1080p upconverting.

There are lots of 1080p upscaling players now. Toshiba wants you to think their upscaling is superior. For the most part the i/p is only a matter of how the upscaled image is transferred from the DVD player to the HDTV. Results will be similar with a decent HDTV.

I wonder if they're using some superresolution techniques?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superresolution

In any case, upscaling is nothing like having real resolution.

[DereX888]

HDTV sales are doing just fine. The masses are already embracing the technology. HDTV is awesome. You don't need Blu-ray to be blown away at how much better HDTV is than SDTV, and you don't have to buy anything but an antenna to take advantage of what HDTV has to offer.

Quick poll at my office workplace (everybody here have at least above average salaries, including the floor cleaner):
all answers out of 22, except for last one where only 20ppl answered

I have...
...a HDTV (real HD TV set): 16 (72%)
...a large-screen (60''+) SD TV: 13 (59%)
...a BluRay player other than PS3: 1 (4%)
...a PS3: 4 (18%)
...a HD-DVD player: 5 (22%)
...a DVD players: 22 (100%)

I don't think HDTV sales are doing that great as the media and ads want all us to believe it.
I made this simple poll just to make sure that what I see in "real life" among friends and family (where most of people I know they really don't care about HDTV much), and what is being said on various websites and medias - that they are completely different things, and I was right.
I know, 22 ppl is not enough a sample base, but the fact that no one here is making less than at least $50k/yr and NOT ALL of them still don't have HDTV is somewhat very representative, isn't it?



Just for curiosity, few other Q&As:

How many DVDs you have:
less than 100: 0
100-200: 4
200-500: 11
500-1000: 5
more than 1000: 2

How many BR-DVDs you have:
less than 100: 6 [size=small]edit/ added +1 because I forgot I myself have few BD discs, and I don't have a player![/size]
100-200: 0
200-500: 0
500-1000: 0
more than 1000: 0

How many HD-DVDs you have:
less than 100: 5
100-200: 0
200-500: 0
500-1000: 0
more than 1000: 0

Apparently none High-Def disc format was/is doing so great either... based on this limited poll, I would say that there are many years of SD DVD reign ahead of us :/

[samijubal]

I don't know how you could think 72% isn't doing that great. There won't be a time when everyone has an HDTV for a long time, that doesn't mean sales are slacking. I own 2 HDTVs and there are surely other people who own more than that.

SD-DVD will be around for a long time and that's where this player comes in. We're on the same page here. If people can get a significantly better picture with SD-DVDs, that's a lot more enticing to most people than going Blu-ray.

[DereX888]

I don't know how you could think 72% isn't doing that great. There won't be a time when everyone has an HDTV for a long time, that doesn't mean sales are slacking. I own 2 HDTVs and there are surely other people who own more than that.

SD-DVD will be around for a long time and that's where this player comes in. We're on the same page here. If people can get a significantly better picture with SD-DVDs, that's a lot more enticing to most people than going Blu-ray.

Yes, I agree. I too have few HDTVs, and I am excited about this new upconverting technology (I have *many* SD DVDs ) so don't get me wrong. I was just surprised that not everyone in my workplace have HDTV at home, because as I stated - nobody here is poor, thus they all should have had HDTV sets already, or at least 95% of them just excluding old grampa (unlike most of average-income people, they all have more income than is needed for "living", they are not left without "disposable income" after they pay their bills; thus obviously the only reason some still don't have HDTV is probably complete lack of interest in High Def, because what else may be the reason)

[Xylob the Destroyer]

I'm not really sure why people are bitching about the high price of blu-rays. I buy mine from a used dvd store that sells new blu-rays still sealed for 15 bucks. I've gotten several blu-rays that were price at 35-42.00 retail at 15 bucks. All you gotta do is look around these used dvd stores, although most charge 20 for blu-rays,even brand new releases.

Apparently Canada is the place for Blu-Ray.
There aren't shit for used DVD stores where I live. You want used Blu-Ray, go to GameStop. There you will find 5 copies of Spider-Man 3 and 1 copy of 1 other random title. $30, take your pick.
I live in a fairly large metropolitan area with over 2 million people. 2 million people who obviously don't give a flying **** about Blu-Ray.

[ejai]

The Toshiba XDE DVD-Enhancing Technology works as advertised, and IMO surpasses my expectations. It's the best upconverter I own.

[usually_quiet]

Some people might choose to buy another SD TV, if quality sets were available to them, but they aren't. If one wants a new TV, HD is about all there is (except for a few off-brand CRT TV's at Walmart, Kmart, and Target). Part of this is demand, but I'm sure another part of what is driving retailers to carry only HD TV's is the higher profit margins on these more expensive TV's.

Sure HD is great, but a lot of people are going to wait to buy if they can. Given the current economy and fuel prices, they don't feel they can afford fork out several times what they are used to paying for a TV just to get HD. That's why people are hanging onto their old TV sets. Their old TV still works and it's paid for. No use getting a Blu-Ray player if I own a a SD TV, not to mention the price difference between one of these and a cheap or even good DVD player, that is also already paid for.

[samijubal]

HDTVs aren't that expensive compared to TVs the same size before HD. I paid just shy of $2000 for a 50" back in late '98, that was '98 dollars, that would be considerably higher adjusted for inflation. I just saw a Panasonic 50" plasma at Fry's for $1000+about $50 shipping. Barely over half what the same size SDTV cost in '98.

[ejai]

HDTVs aren't that expensive compared to TVs the same size before HD. I paid just shy of $2000 for a 50" back in late '98, that was '98 dollars, that would be considerably higher adjusted for inflation. I just saw a Panasonic 50" plasma at Fry's for $1000+about $50 shipping. Barely over half what the same size SDTV cost in '98.

And the prices continue to drop.

[samijubal]

HDTVs aren't that expensive compared to TVs the same size before HD. I paid just shy of $2000 for a 50" back in late '98, that was '98 dollars, that would be considerably higher adjusted for inflation. I just saw a Panasonic 50" plasma at Fry's for $1000+about $50 shipping. Barely over half what the same size SDTV cost in '98.

And the prices continue to drop.

Yep, I paid $100 more than that for that Panasonic TV less than two months ago. One thing's for sure, the people that have gone HD won't be going back to SD, unless their sources are just too poor for an HDTV.

[usually_quiet]

I have recent experience shopping for more modest TV's, not 50". I'd say there is a huge difference in price.

In October of last year, I helped my folks find a digital 20" CRT TV to replace an analog 20" CRT TV that died. The new TV was a flat tube Toshiba with an integrated DVD player and cost $230, regularly $270. When they got their $600 income tax rebate in May, Dad decided he's like to have a HD TV to watch football, so I helped them find a 720p 26" Samsung LCD TV for $600, regularly $700. Athough of course the LCD TV is wider, most of what is available for them to watch is in 4:3 format, and the 2 TV's are therefore essentially equivalent in screen size. (I measured the vertical dimensions to be sure, and the LCD TV screen is only 1/4" taller than the CRT TV screen.)

$370 seems like a big difference to me.

[samijubal]

You bought an expensive TV, thus the big price difference. Yes, small HDTVs are considerably more than SDTVs. That's not necessarily true when going to large TVs. I don't think most people buy a 26" HDTV. I bought a 34" CRT HDTV a little over a year ago for $600, for a little more than that now I could get a 42" plasma. Manufacterers quit making SD CRT TVs because there just wasn't enough demand for them. That $600 Sony CRT HDTV was the last CRT they ever made, they had already stopped making SDTVs before that. Sony had plans to release 2 more CRT TVs the next year but the bottom just fell out of the CRT market and they closed the plants.

[usually_quiet]

You bought an expensive TV, thus the big price difference. Yes, small HDTVs are considerably more than SDTVs. That's not necessarily true when going to large TVs. I don't think most people buy a 26" HDTV. I bought a 34" CRT HDTV a little over a year ago for $600, for a little more than that now I could get a 42" plasma.

Not everybody has space for a big TV. My folks don't, nor do I. We live in older housing with smaller rooms. So do plenty of other people. If we had come home with a 42" plasma, my Mom would insisted we return it, even if the price was the same.

Yes, we could have found a cheaper LCD TV, but the one I found was not the most expensive of that size on sale in the store that day. The most similar Sony, Sharp, and LG models were all more expensive on sale or not. the CRT TV I found for them was not the cheapest one available of that size either.

[samijubal]

I don't deny that there are people out there that would rather buy a cheaper SDTV, but they are the exception. Manufacterers stopped making SDTVs because there just wasn't enough demand for them. Most people want a large screen HDTV.

[mpack]

HDTVs aren't that expensive compared to TVs the same size before HD.

I did a browse on amazon.co.uk yesterday. "HD Ready" big LCD panels are about the same price as similar sized SD LCD panels from a couple of years ago. Of course they are significantly cheaper than a CRT of that size would have been. Full HD LCD panels cost upwards of twice the price.

My misfortune is that I bought a high end 36" widescreen CRT (costing UK£1600 == US$3200) about a year before CRTs suddenly disappeared from the shops. Lovely picture, but the damn thing is a monster and I'd love to be rid of it... except that I don't think I've had my moneys worth yet!

[thecoalman]

I am confused. Aren't there are already 1080p upconverting dvd players????

Yes but the key is performance, if this player is superior to other players that do up-scaling then they have a winner. There is some amazing things you can do with digital images. I posted some samples in the other thread when this player was first made public. The problem there is that it requires a tremendous amount of processing power, if they can transfer even a little bit of that technology to real time video conversion they are going to have decent product.

Guess we'll see when its released.

[jagabo]

Guess we'll see when its released.

It's been out for a while now:

https://forum.videohelp.com/topic355600.html

The poster is viewing on 720p televisions so his comparison with HD-DVD doesn't mean much.

[Wile_E]

Aside from better quality (in some cases) and - slowly - a wider range of extras, you also get a return to a restricted catalogue filled with big selling crap films, bodgy transfers that are no better than their DVD counter-parts (note : Bullitt, or worse, Fifth Element, which is worse than the last DVD release), and of course, who could forget the joys of region restrictions. So many selling points. How could anyone resist ?

I've seen bad transfers too. Water World. The opening credits look bad, filled with dust or scratches on the film. If they want to impress people, they need to restore and clean up the films, before transfer to a HD format. If they won't spend the money to clean the films up to preserve them, I won't spend the money on their discs! I would like to see the Toshiba player next to one of the OPPO players.

http://www.oppodigital.com/

[DereX888]

You bought an expensive TV, thus the big price difference. Yes, small HDTVs are considerably more than SDTVs. That's not necessarily true when going to large TVs. I don't think most people buy a 26" HDTV. I bought a 34" CRT HDTV a little over a year ago for $600, for a little more than that now I could get a 42" plasma.

Not everybody has space for a big TV. My folks don't, nor do I. We live in older housing with smaller rooms. So do plenty of other people. If we had come home with a 42" plasma, my Mom would insisted we return it, even if the price was the same.

Yes, we could have found a cheaper LCD TV, but the one I found was not the most expensive of that size on sale in the store that day. The most similar Sony, Sharp, and LG models were all more expensive on sale or not. the CRT TV I found for them was not the cheapest one available of that size either.

I think that's what many americans (except for those living in condos or apartments) don't understand at all, the obvious answers to ever-coming-back "why not a big screen" question
I've been to most civilized parts of the world (and few of the backwards too) and one thing remained the same in all of them: basically everywhere most of people live in the rooms often smaller than the closet in a typical american house.
I'm pretty sure if someone would count how many sub-30'' TVs are sold all over the world, I'm pretty sure the numbers would many times exceed the numbers of 50+'' TVs sold in America.

[jagabo]

Bigger is always better in the USA. TVs, cars, canyons, asses, Texas, federal deficits...

[Xylob the Destroyer]

I prefer smaller asses, thank you.
Now boobs on the other hand(s)...

[usually_quiet]

I think that's what many americans (except for those living in condos or apartments) don't understand at all, the obvious answers to ever-coming-back "why not a big screen" question ;)
I've been to most civilized parts of the world (and few of the backwards too) and one thing remained the same in all of them: basically everywhere most of people live in the rooms often smaller than the closet in a typical american house.
I'm pretty sure if someone would count how many sub-30'' TVs are sold all over the world, I'm pretty sure the numbers would many times exceed the numbers of 50+'' TVs sold in America.

A lot of people in the US with a 50" screen in the game room also buy a couple of smaller ones (for the kitchen, the bedroom, the workshop, etc.) The sub-30" screens have the greatest difference in price between SD CRT's (now or in the recent past) and HD TV's today. In sub-30" sizes, the HD sets run between two and three times the price of a SD CRT set of close to the same screen height. Not that there are many SD sets (CRT or otherwise) left for comparison.

I looked at the Sunday ads, some websites, and at Sam's Club today. The cheapest HD TV I saw was a 15" 720p LCD for $220 (at Best Buy), which isn't bad, but isn't an average price for one that size. By comparison a 14" flat tube SD CRT (from Walmart), which would have a greater screen height, can be had for $115. A 13" SD CRT would be closer in screen height, and in the recent past I have seen them for under $100.

Yes, the prices have dropped over the past two or three years, but I'm still finding the changeover from SD/analog to HD/digital to be a rather costly exercise. ...and with the weak dollar, prices for TV's in the US might not go down very much at all for a while, even it's true for the rest of the world.

[samijubal]

HDTV prices are dropping pretty fast and have been for a long time. The Black Friday TV I bought with a 10% off coupon could be bought for less than what I paid without a coupon about 6 months later. The plasma I bought 2 months ago for the best price I'd seen in awhile just sold for $100 less a few days ago. Maybe small TV prices aren't dropping but big screen prices are dropping fast.