Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Toshiba Making Funeral Plans for HD DVD

Posted by Zonk on Fri Feb 15, 2008 01:14 PM
from the cue-taps dept.
Movies Media Entertainment Games
Blue Light Special writes "With HD DVD on life support, Toshiba is reportedly preparing to bow to the inevitable and allow HD DVD to expire quietly. 'While denying that a decision on the fate of HD DVD has been made, a Toshiba marketing exec left the door wide open. "Given the market developments in the past month, Toshiba will continue to study the market impact and the value proposition for consumers, particularly in light of our recent price reductions on all HD DVD players," Jodi Sally, VP of marketing for Toshiba America Consumer Products, said.'" A few folks have also noted that Wal-mart is joining the Blu-ray train, further lowering the stock of HD DVD.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] HD DVD Player Sales Grind To a Halt 507 comments
Lucas123 writes "While the news may fall under the 'Duh' category, it's still relatively shocking how quickly the death knell for HD DVD player sales came on after Warner Bros. announced they were dropping dual hi-def DVD format support in order to back only Blu-ray. According to a Computerworld story, the week after Warner's announcement, sales of HD DVD players dropped to 1,758, down from 14,558 players the week before. In contrast, consumers bought 21,770 Blu-ray Disc players, up from 15,257 the previous week."
Submission: Toshiba making funeral plans for HD DVD by Anonymous Coward
[+] Hardware: Toshiba To Halt HD-DVD Production 494 comments
Multiple users have written to tell us that Toshiba is planning to halt production of devices related to HD-DVD. According to Japanese broadcasting network NHK, Toshiba will lose "hundreds of millions of dollars" as the format war finally draws to a close. Regardless, investors are pleased that Toshiba has made the decision to cut its losses. This comes after a last-ditch price cut was unable to prevent Wal-mart from throwing their lot in with Blu-ray, although some sources suggest that Wal-mart was already aware of Toshiba's plans to withdraw from fight.
[+] Sony Paid Warner Bros. $400 Million to Go Blu-Ray? 487 comments
eldavojohn writes "How much would you pay to be the leading video media technology right now? Is $400 million too much? Sony didn't think so and this article speculates that's how they won the Hi-Def format war. 'With billions of dollars in global sales at stake, experts had predicted the Toshiba-Sony battle would go on for years - not unlike the 1980s battle of videotape formats between VHS (Matsushita) and Betamax (Sony). That war lasted a decade, leaving Sony battered and humiliated. So how did this epic battle come to such an abrupt end? The answer lies in part with the bruising Sony experienced with Betamax, which, like Blu-ray, was also the better product on paper.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Toshiba Making Funeral Plans for HD DVD 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • That's a Shame (Score:5, Interesting)

    by thesaint05 (850634) on Friday February 15 2008, @01:18PM (#22436934)
    HD-DVD was cheaper for both players and movies, but I'm glad the format war is officially over. Especially with wal-mart throwing their (considerable) weight behind BD. I just can't stand the fact that Sony won. Oh well. I'm still not buying a BD player until they get sub-$200.
    • Unfortunately the lower cost never really materialized. All of the "combo discs" were more expensive than their Blu Ray counterparts. I never understood the point of those discs anyways. And Blu Ray was on "sale" for a long time. I have to wonder if Sony lost a bunch of money subsidizing costs just to get a foothold. That said, Sony and the rest of the BD consortium can go die in a fire. I'm not buying their crippled, DRM laden discs. I'm sick of being treated like a theif, when all I want is reasona
        • Hey, this is Slashdot.
          When you boast of a Zenith DVD player that upscales nicely, please indicate the model number.

        • Re:That's a Shame (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Dogtanian (588974) on Friday February 15 2008, @02:29PM (#22437948) Homepage

          If I was already out buying the movie on DVD, then I figured I may as well plunk down the extra $5 and get it in a combo format [..] Hell I might still get an HD DVD player anyways. I still haven't bought "The 300", and Wal-mart has a player with a bundled copy for $148 right now.
          Yes, but if- as appears almost inevitable now- HD-DVD really has lost the war and is killed off, you're still paying quite a lot of money to watch the few HD-DVD-compatible discs that you already have.

          If you buy more discs, you're investing in a dead-end system, and when your original machine breaks down, you'll likely have to buy a secondhand player in a few years time if you want to keep watching your collection. Which might not have the benefits of newly-built (and Blu-Ray only) hi-def players- and what if you want to use them in your computer(s)?

          And if you end up wanting to watch Blu Ray stuff, you'll end up forking out for that anyway, have two players cluttering up the place and (as above) effectively just be using the HD-DVD player for watching a few discs.

          I'm not saying that you're necessarily wrong though- *if* they sold HD-DVD discs off cheaply enough, this may not matter if you get your money's worth of enjoyment from the system anyway. Particularly if you hadn't planned on buying Blu-Ray at present.

          Oh, and remember that the "worth" of a movie is the minimum of either (a) the most you'd be willing to pay for it and (b) the lowest price you can get it for without too many drawbacks. So perhaps it's "worth" $30 based on the RRP, but what's its real worth? Then again, $30 doesn't sound too bad to me, so forget this last paragraph :-)
        • HD DVD had pretty ineffective advertising for the format.

          While Blu-ray has ads that put the format up front and show you multiple movies you can get for the format, HD DVD ads are mostly ads for a single movie, available on DVD and HD DVD. The only ad you could say was an ad for the HD DVD format itself focused far too much on characters of Shrek, and the characters were actually complaining about the superior quality of the picture, either for Donkey's dragon girlfriend looking too big and scaly or Gingie

    • Blu-Ray != Sony (Score:5, Informative)

      by TheAngryIntern (785323) on Friday February 15 2008, @02:53PM (#22438318)
      I'm so sick of people assuming Blu-Ray = Sony. Look it up people, Sony is one of 9 founding companies, one of 18 companies on the Board of Directors and one of over 250 companies total in the Blu-Ray Association. Sony was just the most visible member of Blu-Ray since they have the most to gain or lose, so they have been pushing it the hardest. If you don't like Sony, then get a Samsung, or LG or Pioneer or some other Blu-Ray player. I'm not a big fan of Sony either, but I'm tired of people saying "I hate Blu-Ray cuz I hate Sony" or "I'm pissed that Sony won" Yes, Sony won, but so did 250 other companies and us consumers in general now that we'll have one format. sheesh, you anti-Sony guys are almost as bad as Apple fanboys!

      • Re:Blu-Ray != Sony (Score:5, Insightful)

        by elrous0 (869638) * on Friday February 15 2008, @04:02PM (#22439338)
        Sony is rumored to be the one bankrolling most of the big money expenditures (including the recent advertising campaign and some of the studio payoffs). They also get a significantly larger chunk of the blu-ray licensing fees than the other BDA members, since they developed much of the actual technology behind the spec.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by DrXym (126579)
      HD DVD was only cheaper for players because Toshiba massively subsidized players. So yeah they were "cheaper" but in reality Toshiba was taking the hit. I think Toshiba's plan was to subsidize the early adopters and hope that technology and economies of scale caught up by the time they had already won. The BDA's plan was to sell stuff at the price it cost with prices dropping as technology and sales increased. In the end Toshiba's strategy failed - Blu Ray players were still outselling HD DVD players 2 to 1

        • Re:That's a Shame (Score:5, Interesting)

          by gEvil (beta) (945888) on Friday February 15 2008, @01:45PM (#22437386)
          That's the "nice" thing about the different BD profiles--the manufacturers get to keep "updating" their player lines while keeping the price the same. This year at CES, they updated the players to profile 1.1, but kept the list prices the same. Next year, they'll update the players to profile 2.0, and the prices will stay the same (they might come down 50 bucks or so). I'm waiting for a sub-$200 profile 2.0 BD player, too, but I'm not holding my breath.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Dogtanian (588974)

          Now there isn't a reason to lower the cost of bluray players.

          Yes there is. Though many (but not all) overlooked it in favour of the more interesting Blu-Ray/HD-DVD rivalry, both players were fighting a bigger rival- existing DVD players and public apathy.

          DVD became a runaway success because (a) it was cheap, and (b) it gave noticable picture-quality improvements and other advantages that could be enjoyed with existing setups.

          Blu-Ray is not only relatively expensive, but it requires an HD set to make it worthwhile. Even those with HD sets could stick with upscali

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by cens0r (655208)
            Apparently you didn't buy DVD when it was new. I paid over $500 for my first DVD player, and I didn't even get a 1st gen player (more like 1.5 gen). And that was in 1997 dollars. If adjusted fro inflation, I would almost guarantee that Blu-Ray is following a similar path to DVD in price. DVD really didn't take off until 3-4 years after it came out, when the players got really cheap.

            • Re:That's a Shame (Score:5, Interesting)

              by barzok (26681) on Friday February 15 2008, @03:02PM (#22438460)

              Apparently you didn't buy DVD when it was new. I paid over $500 for my first DVD player, and I didn't even get a 1st gen player (more like 1.5 gen). And that was in 1997 dollars. ... DVD really didn't take off until 3-4 years after it came out, when the players got really cheap.
              1997 + 3-4 years = 2000. PS2 came out in October 2000, mass availability in early 2001.

              Quick show of hands...how many bought a PS2 not because it was a game console, but because it let them get a console and DVD player in one, for not a lot more than a high-quality DVD player?

              PS3/Blu-Ray is going to follow a very similar track, I think.

            • Re:That's a Shame (Score:4, Interesting)

              by Dogtanian (588974) on Friday February 15 2008, @04:10PM (#22439434) Homepage

              DVD really didn't take off until 3-4 years after it came out, when the players got really cheap.
              Which was my exact point! Even though the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD battle that everyone was excited about is supposedly all but over, the less interesting, but ultimately much bigger war- to get people to buy hi-def players at all- isn't. As I said, the quickest way to overcome that *is* to reduce the price.

              Although I don't think it'll happen here, it'd be quite possible to end up with one side technically winning, but still doing badly. Who won out of DVD-A and SACD? Who cares, because neither grabbed a notable share of the market, and hi-def audio as a whole flopped commercially.

              Personally, I don't think interest in HD as a whole will flop the way that hi-def audio flopped. That doesn't mean Blu Ray should rest on its laurels, however. The most obvious problem with keeping the price high would be that it slowed adoption (as you imply).

              Even if the Blu Ray camp could live with that (it'd probably make them more profit in the short term), it'd be a bad idea, simply because of the other understated factor- downloadable HD content. The market is moving that way anyway, and at this stage I reckon it's ultimately a much bigger- but less tangible- threat to Blu-Ray than the moribund HD-DVD.

              In short, the battle's not over. Blu Ray faces threats from current-generation DVD and apathy on one side and the should-have-seen-it-coming threat of downloadable content bypassing their petty squabbles on the other.

              The GGP was so wrong- Blu Ray players need to come down in price as much as ever.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by zmollusc (763634)
            If it weren't for the evils of DRM, you could do your image-processing on commodity hardware for bugger all cost over however long it took to process the honking great output file.

            • Re:That's a Shame (Score:4, Interesting)

              by Dogtanian (588974) on Friday February 15 2008, @04:24PM (#22439648) Homepage
              I don't want to go too far into the details, but the processing I had in mind would be a combination of several ideas I'd been mulling over, many of which would require tracking a given object over several frames to average out noise, artifacting errors, and so on. And also to use simultaneous-equation-style processing on the multiple frames of the same object to increase the static resolution (or maybe this could be done more simply by aligning, overlaying and resharpening the multiple copies). Also ideas like more intelligently spotting the difference between genuine detail and pseudo-detail which comes from encoding/compression artifacts, and removing or repairing the latter. (Repair- or guessing what the most likely hi-res detail was that caused or was damaged by the artifact- might be one of those "easier said than done" computationally intensive tasks). Again, easier if you are looking at multiple frames.

              I'm not an expert in this area, but I suspect those that are have probably come up with similar ideas. Whether they're doable in reasonable time, and in hardware is more open to question.

        • Re:That's a Shame (Score:5, Informative)

          by badasscat (563442) <basscadet75@nOspAM.yahoo.com> on Friday February 15 2008, @03:30PM (#22438894) Homepage
          Just like how those economies of scale kicked in and made all those high-def LCD screens so cheap? Sorry to rant on a tangent but I'm still waiting for LCD prices to drop like they're supposed to before I think about high-def disc formats.

          I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. Because, you know, 4-5 years ago, a 1080p 42" LCD would have cost $4,000. Today, if you pay more than $1,000 for a major brand, you've paid too much.

          A 75% reduction in cost over a few year period is not enough for you? I think it's time to admit that you're probably just a cheapskate.

        • Anything above 200 bucks is insane to me. The ps3 is an awesome machine, I drool every time I see that commercial, you know the one, the one with kick ass music. But, hell, I still have games for my PS2 that I haven't even opened yet.

          One day I will get a ps3 but I don't see it happening soon.

  • At least it's over... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by framauro13 (1148721) on Friday February 15 2008, @01:23PM (#22437010)
    Had I not received a PS3 as a gift, I probably would have went HD DVD. But given the circumstances, I'm glad (and suprised) that the choice will eventually only be one single format.

    Hopefully I'll soon be able to get all of my favorite movies in high definition, not just the particular ones owned by production companies who signed specific format deals.

    A lot of people won't be happy about it, but I've gotta admit I'm impressed with how Sony marketing pulled this off. I definitely didn't see it ending this way.

  • Funeral Plans? (Score:3, Funny)

    by pavon (30274) on Friday February 15 2008, @01:25PM (#22437030)
    So does that involve excess stock being quietly disposed of in an Alamagordo, NM landfill?

  • They never had a chance (Score:3, Funny)

    by Amorymeltzer (1213818) on Friday February 15 2008, @01:26PM (#22437052)
    Their competition is called Blu-Ray. It's shorter to say, it has the word "Ray" in it (which is awesome), sounds new and different from DVDs, and even has a "cool" misspelling of a word. It's the same reason Yahoo! will never succeed - people simply like saying "Google" too much.
    • As silly as what the you said may sound, its would actually make a lot of sense for something as simple as an outrageous/uncommon name might be a key factor of success. However, I also have a slight notion that the tables might possibly have been turned if only the xbox360 had come standard with HD-DVD as the PS3 did with blu ray. In this stage its all a guessing game, whats done is done. Honestly until we $100 blu ray players at walmart, and blu-ray movies that don't cost 50-75% more than their DVD coun

  • Ew... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by morari (1080535) on Friday February 15 2008, @01:26PM (#22437054) Journal
    Does that mean Sony now rules what will probably become the next main data format? The world just began sucking a lot more.

    Oh well, I'm not all that interested until the players (and the televisions) drop to a reasonable price. Oh, and easy-to-do piracy is another must on my list! ;)

    • Re:Ew... (Score:5, Informative)

      by samkass (174571) on Friday February 15 2008, @01:38PM (#22437248) Homepage Journal
      Does that mean Sony now rules what will probably become the next main data format?

      Not really. Sony isn't even the majority patent holder in Blu-ray, they're just the most visible proponent of the format and have sold a few million of the players.

        • Re:Ew... (Score:5, Interesting)

          by samkass (174571) on Friday February 15 2008, @02:58PM (#22438400) Homepage Journal
          I can't see them satisfied with the market share of 20% in next-gen consoles

          The Wii is doing great, but the PS3 has been picking up quite a bit of steam. The XBox360 is also doing great in the US, but not so much elsewhere. Sony got broadsided early on, but has been surprisingly competitive as of late.

          I think the interesting thing is that the Wii is selling to a lot of people who would probably never, no matter how Sony would have priced, packaged or marketed it, bought a PS3. Thus, the Wii is increasing the size of the total market, which isn't all bad for Sony. Also, the Wii is cheap enough that for those would WOULD buy one of the other consoles, it's not necessarily an either/or decision-- many can buy a Wii AND a PS3.

    • Re:Ew... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Charcharodon (611187) on Friday February 15 2008, @03:13PM (#22438610)
      1 button easy pirating (fair use or Yarrrrrr!) has been available since practically the beginning for both HD DVD and Blu-Ray, it's called AnyDVD HD by Slysoft.

      You can use it to rip or just simply to disable HDCP so that the disc will play on your non-DRM ready hardware at full resolution.

      The downside to ripping is HD movies are 25gb vs 5gb for a DVD, and you'll need to find a software player that can handle HD content since most media players wont.

  • Am I the only one? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) on Friday February 15 2008, @01:33PM (#22437160)
    Am I the only one who doesn't give a damn one way or the other?

    At least Blu-Ray rolls off the tounge easier. And yes, I'm convinced that's at least part of the reason it won.

  • Just as well HD-DVD DRM was cracked (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MrSteveSD (801820) on Friday February 15 2008, @02:00PM (#22437568)
    Otherwise all those HD-DVD movies people have bought would be useless and a waste of money. As it is, they can just rip those high def movies to their hard drives.

  • Silver lining (Score:3, Interesting)

    by The-Bus (138060) on Friday February 15 2008, @02:19PM (#22437826) Homepage
    I supported the HD DVD format while it was viable (until WB pulled out). The silver lining is that the competition between the formats made hardware very, very cheap. Less than 18 months into the launch of both formats, we had HD DVD players go for ridiculously low sums. Blu-Ray backers didn't counter with matching prices, but they did drop the prices of their players (to sub-$500 levels). Software, too, became a bit cheaper. In-store, non-web pricing of high-def media was usually $29-$39, a good two- or three-fold increase over the regular DVD price. In 2007, especially in the summer and fall, there were numerous great deals on Blu-Ray discs. For every sale on HD DVD media, there were 4 or 5 on Blu-Ray: buy one, get one frees, etc. This was a smart move, as it lowered the cost of entry for people who had PS3s and honestly weren't too excited about the new formats. Now instead of paying $10 or $15 more at the store, the price difference would be $5 or less.

    Of course, the counter-part to this was the whole confusion between the rival formats and a lot of people who cashed into a new format weeks before its demise. But, even if HD DVD is dead, the discs and players still work.

  • It's Over, But Blu-Ray Isn't Ready (Score:5, Informative)

    by CritterNYC (190163) on Friday February 15 2008, @03:41PM (#22439048) Homepage
    The format war is over, unfortunately, Blu-Ray is far from ready for general consumer adoption. Profile 2.0 players, the players that actually do everything they are supposed to (and everything that even low-end HD DVD players did), are few and far between... not to mention very expensive when they are found. The standalone Blu-Ray players pretty much universally suck. They're woefully underpowered to do things like load the Java VM which is required for viewing many newer Blu-Ray discs (Disney's newer discs like Pirates of the Caribbean and Ratatouille take a full 2 minutes just to load on most standalone players). And the machines by some companies are so buggy that there's already been a class action lawsuit.

    The only Blu-Ray player even worth considering for consumers is the PS3. But then you're stuck with a big game console instead of just a standalone movie player, which is what many people really want.

    I had bought a Toshiba HD-A3 HD DVD player for $159. Feature complete. Booted to drawer open in under 30 seconds. Loaded all movies in under 30 seconds. Did everything I needed (my TV has fine 3:2 pulldown so 1080i out is all I needed). And it came with 10 movies. Even now, there's really no equivalent on the Blu-Ray side. No standalone 2.0 player that isn't dog-slow.

    When Warner switched, I simply stopped buying HD content. Most of my friends that were buying HD DVDs did the same thing. Sure, I may buy into Blu-Ray eventually. But it looks like it's gonna be a while before it's capable of doing what it should.

  • Don't throw it away... Recycle it... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FellowConspirator (882908) on Friday February 15 2008, @03:51PM (#22439172)
    If it's a commercial failure, then why bury it. Just make the spec, tools, etc. free without license. There's a huge market for a low-cost high-capacity storage and video medium. Toshiba could make HD-DVD free to everyone. Blu-Ray can't beat that. Sure, the MPAA members will only ship Blu-Ray, but if it costs nothings to add to your drive, why wouldn't a vendor throw it on top just because. Home video and amateur cinematographers will have a reasonable format for producing, sharing, and storing footage, there'll be an HD replacement for VHS, and the cost for the blank media will plummet.

    Then let's see who wins in the long run. Toshiba can still ship HD-DVD recorders, media, etc. Being fully open, the platform will reach every corner that Blu-Ray doesn't, by design. Blu-Ray is a very consumer-hostile format as-is; it's designed to limit the medium. Toshiba should give up not by burying it, but by becoming the antithesis of its competitor.

    • Re:Myself? (Score:5, Informative)

      by samkass (174571) on Friday February 15 2008, @01:42PM (#22437314) Homepage Journal
      HD DVD typically had a better picture, better contrast, better compression, better sound quality, and a cheaper method of production.

      Actually, the truth is pretty much the opposite of this statement. Because Blu-ray had 50% more bandwidth, it could be compressed less, and since it supported exactly the same video codecs as HD DVD that's all that really matters. Although some of the audio codecs are optional on Blu-ray that are mandatory on HD DVD, when present Blu-ray requires greater bandwidth for those, too, leading to better fidelity.

      Yes, HD DVD were cheaper to produce, but the discs cost the same to the consumer. (And much less $ per megabyte, which matters for the geeks out there who will use it in their computers.)

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by samkass (174571)
          You're misinformed, the GP is correct.

          I don't think so. I think you haven't kept up with the latest information over the last year or so.

          Blu-tay has a larger capacity, but the 1st several releases suffered from bad transfers and use of old MP2 compression.

          Yes, but that was years ago.

          Since Blu-ray seems to be prevailing I hope that this is old news and no longer the case.

          It is indeed no longer the case, and hasn't been for some time. The Blu-ray discs are now generally regarded as higher quality than HD DV

    • Re:Looks like Sony's gamble paid off. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Kjella (173770) on Friday February 15 2008, @01:43PM (#22437360) Homepage

      Then again, I also believe that Sony will only have a few years of profiting from being the next-gen DVD standard - downloadable content should slowly take over within the next few years.
      In the market space Blu-Ray is in? I doubt it, those 50GB discs are a broadband killer and I think they just bought themselves more time on top of the DVD, which hasn't been significantly threatened either....

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Buran (150348)
      Because people who just want to watch hi-def movies (and I can definitely tell the difference on my TV between upscaled SD and true HD) don't care which is "better". I sure didn't. If HD-DVD had won I would have bought an HD-DVD player. But once it became apparent that Blu-Ray had won, I went out and bought a Blu-Ray player and I have Blu-Ray movies on their way from amazon right now.

      Why is Blu-Ray inferior? If "inferior" means "where all the movies are going", then I guess inferior it'll have to be. But th

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Divebus (860563)
      That's one down. Now we just need to decommission the VC-1 codec that snuck in the back door of Blu-ray. Don't need it.

      • Re:BD+ (Score:4, Informative)

        by droopycom (470921) on Friday February 15 2008, @02:54PM (#22438332)
        That was AACS.
        BD+ is another layer on top of it.
        I dont think commercial titles with BD+ where available a year ago (or they just came out)
        As far as I know, they didnt "crack" BD+ yet, but I havent followed doom9 in a while....

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.