Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Television Media Entertainment Games Hardware

Warner Backs Blu-Ray. End Times For HD-DVD? 705

An anonymous reader writes "The NY Times reports: In addition to Apple, Warner Brothers is now going to throw its weight behind the Blu-ray format for high-definition disks. Warner has been the only major studio to publish its movies in both Blu-ray and HD DVD formats. Today, the studio announced that from now on, it would only issue movies in Blu-ray. Richard Greenfield, the media analyst with Pali Research, wrote that this marks the end of the format wars: "We expect HD DVD to 'die' a quick death.""
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Warner Backs Blu-Ray. End Times For HD-DVD?

Comments Filter:
  • Next up... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:29AM (#21922378)
    Now it just has to take on the DVD. Good luck. I look forward to dragging my feet.
  • Dear Hollywood (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Landak ( 798221 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:30AM (#21922390)
    Do you perhaps think that the "Slow HD uptake" referred to in the article might be as a consequence of the overwhelming cost of, and over-restrictive DRM associated with HD video? Have you thought perhaps that for the vast majority of spice-girl-loving, Shrek-3 adoring consumers, DVD is more than "Good enough"?

  • Re:Dear Hollywood (Score:4, Insightful)

    by schnikies79 ( 788746 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:35AM (#21922438)
    I think it has very little (closer to nothing) to do with the DRM and more to do with DVD being "good enough"

    DVD is good enough for me. I've yet to impressed enough with HD to replace my tv or media and I have no intention of sitting at my PC and watching movies.
  • by Adambomb ( 118938 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:36AM (#21922464) Journal
    Now that would be a fun situation.

    Warner throws behind Blu-Ray, Retailers put HD-DVD stock on sale in response, manufacturers continue supplying to demand, suddenly HD-DVD has the significant market base, studios make play of "providing for the needs of all their customers", more expensive blu-ray dies over a long agonizing period.

    Conjecture without caffeine is wacky.
  • by vodevil ( 856500 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:40AM (#21922498)
    Microsoft shouldn't care too much if blu-ray succeeds. The VC-1 codec that most blu-ray movies uses needs to be licensed from Microsoft. Money in their pocket either way.
  • Re:Dear Hollywood (Score:3, Insightful)

    by gEvil (beta) ( 945888 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:46AM (#21922560)
    Keep in mind that a lot of stores still aren't actually feeding their HD displays HD sources. Take a look at the back of the TVs and you'll find that quite a few Best Buys are still feeding a good portion of their HD displays via RF feeds. Sure, the nice showcase displays are being fed from HD sources, and many of the larger screens, too. But not all of them are getting HD sources--a lot are getting bottom of the barrel SD feeds.
  • Re:Dear Hollywood (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Dogtanian ( 588974 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:49AM (#21922582) Homepage

    Have you thought perhaps that for the vast majority of spice-girl-loving, Shrek-3 adoring consumers
    Spice Girls were at their commercial peak 10 years ago- all the little girls who were into their music back then are now grown up and halfway through university.

    I've also noticed that "Backstreet Boys" and the like seem to crop up as examples of bad manufactured modern music, despite being phenomena of the late-1990s/early-2000s. Perhaps a sign that the Slashdot demographic is getting older (including myself, admittedly) and more out-of-touch? Not that I'm saying that a lot of current manufactured music is worth being "in touch" with- let alone listening to ;-), but that's beside the point.

    Anyway, Slashdot's archetypal "bad manufactured modern pop" princess, Britney Spears, originally dates from the same period (despite having an ongoing career). And she (or her producers) have released at least two bona fide pop classics (Baby One More Time and Toxic)- manufactured or not- as well as some other decent pop stuff. Granted, she's also released an awful lot of worthless pap, but enough with the "everything Britney Spears does is crap" schtick.
  • by Marcion ( 876801 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:52AM (#21922612) Homepage Journal
    I am ignoring both of this broken format.

    I won't buy any except perhaps some Chinese DRM free HD extended EVD. Or even just huge hard-drives. In five years time we will have 10 terabyte hard-drives as standard. Blueray disks are 25 Gb single layer and 50GB dual layer. A ten terabyte hard-drive can hold 200 to 400 of these films.
  • Re:Dear Hollywood (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FatherOfONe ( 515801 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:53AM (#21922628)
    Yes and VHS was "good enough" for most people as well. Remember that a 25" TV was HUGE back then...

    Most people that have a good HDTV can tell a large difference in good HD content. Please note that I am not saying many of the movies that have come out on either format, but "some" of the movies there is a HUGE difference in quality.

    The fact is that Microsoft isn't a content provider and because of that they can't leverage any monopoly this time to win this format dispute. The real issue is all about Java on these players. I bet you can guess which player has Java and which one doesn't :-)

    The HD-DVD camp just pulled their talk tonight at CES and that comes as no surprise, also it now has come out that Universal has an "escape clause", so this could be over sooner than most thought. The only real question is "if" Microsoft wants to dump a LOT more money at Universal to try and continue this dispute. I would imagine that now it would take a lot more than 150 million.

    Again, don't get confused about any company caring about the consumer, Sony used the PS3 to cement Blu-Ray and Microsoft HATES Java and will do a lot to make sure it doesn't gain a significant foothold in the living room. At the end of the day I would much rather deal with Sony, because I can easily use someone else's player but if Microsoft controls the software in the living room then history shows we will be in for decades of crap.
  • Not likely (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:54AM (#21922634)
    Studios forget their history rather quickly. Back when DVDs where first coming out Circuit City came up with a competing format called DIVX (no, not the video codec, they just stole the name). The idea was that DIVX players could play DVDs, but also DIVX discs which were "enhanced" DVDs which you'd buy for cheap but then have to rent to play. Studios just loved the idea and a number like Fox, Paramount, and Dreamworks decided to release only on DIVX. Well as it turned out, that didn't matter. Consumers didn't like it, so they didn't buy it. DIVX died and it cost Circuit City a couple hundred million for their trouble.

    So just because some studios are initially backing Blu Ray doesn't mean anything in the long run. They'll release their movies for whatever format consumers decide to buy, or they'll go out of business.

    Also please remember we are a long, long way from any sort of critical point in the HD format move. It is going to be much slower than DVD, which wasn't all that fast. See with DVD, there was a reason for everyone to upgrade. Even if you had a small, crappy, TV, DVD was still better. The picture was generally better even on poor sets, but picture quality aside the other features were more important. No degradation, no rewinding, instant seeking, special features, smaller size, all these things added up to something that was worthwhile for everyone to purchase, regardless of what they watched on.

    Not so for HD formats. The only benefit is image quality (and possibly sound quality for the few titles mastered with the new formats). Well, this means that the only people who are going to notice a difference are those who own HD TVs, which aren't all that many people at this point. Even if you do own an HD TV, the gain is marginal. No new features or anything, just a better picture. That's nice, but not a big deal especially since upconverting DVD players give an amazingly nice picture and since not all discs come from a high enough quality transfer to really look nice.

    So it is a good while yet before there starts to be a critical mass of HD formats and there's any sort of victory in the HD war.

    Finally, it is entirely possible neither format will win. It may be that dual format players become the norm and both formats continue to survive. This is rather feasible since both formats are on the same size disc, both use AACS encryption, both use the same video and audio codecs and so on. Indeed, there's a couple of companies working on dual format players right now. So it very well could work out that both formats continue to be released by different studios.

    But to say that this is the end of the format wars is just wishful thinking.
  • Re:Dear Hollywood (Score:5, Insightful)

    by vidarh ( 309115 ) <vidar@hokstad.com> on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:54AM (#21922636) Homepage Journal
    Partly alienated? I own 400+ DVDs. I've never pirated a movie in my life. I have an HD capable TV, but I won't buy a single HD product until I'm 100% sure I can continue to easily copy it to my media server. I'll happily admit I haven't kept up to date with whether or not BluRay DRM is definitively broken in a way the mafiaa can't stop again or not. DVD is good enough for me to not invest a lot of time in figuring it out.

    If they stop releasing stuff on DVD before I'm sure, then I'll resort to torrents rather than jump onto a format thats too encumbered.

  • by TheGratefulNet ( 143330 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @10:54AM (#21922644)
    The DRM in blu-ray is less consumer friendly then HD-DVD

    the drm in BOTH is totally unacceptable to me.

    runnable code?? in a VIDEO disc?

    oh please!

    come back (vendors) when you have learned your lesson. we don't want no stinkin' "revoke lists" and all that java crap going on.

    a/v players should JUST relay a/v bits to the display/speakers. and that's ALL.

    in that respect, they both got it horribly wrong. so I boycott and will never buy bd/hd discs. buying only tells them that you approve and I will never approve of this. vote with your dollars.

  • Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @11:08AM (#21922768)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Ralph Spoilsport ( 673134 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @11:08AM (#21922772) Journal
    BlueRay, HD-DVD, whatever. The genie is out of the bag. Torrents pouring video all over the planet, used DVD sales, online video, youtube, etc. BluRay is not going to dominate anything. IT's just goign to be another niche in the panoply of video standards. The point is that with ubiquity, things get consumed in different ways by people at different times and places.

    The BR/HD devices may well take over where obese supine consumers mindlessly suck the tit of the Culture Industry in their overstuffed barcaloungers in the family "Enertainment Center". There, picture quality in a darkened and directed room makes sense. But that is only one particular consumption ritual practice. There are many others. My typical practice is watching video in tiny stuttering windows online, because I can watch one thing, check my email, and work on a project at the same time, or in short sequences. A friend of mine is the same, yet he uses a video projector as his screen. Parties at his place are great - watch online video? Sure. DVD? Sure. Dance Dance Revolution? WTF? Oooh, OK - why not... Wii? OK - but only after we watch that online video of the guy's head exploding. And freak out your sister with the goatse guy.

    Betamax and VHS were such a pitched battle because there were no other options. Now, I can't get a cup of coffee without some giant flat panel telling me how white my shirts should be, and then I go to work, and some knucklehead sends me a link to a youtube video of the longest fart EVER, or I visit my brother and his 5 jillion channels of TV pumped all over every screen in the house, etc. etc.

    In the early 1980s, there were fewer options, so there was more at stake in a format. Now, it's just another fish in the sea. And with bandwidth increases and everybody and his ugly cousin getting in on the online video action thanks to Flash video, I think it may well be that BR or HD will be the LAST disk format...

    RS

  • by ergo98 ( 9391 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @11:14AM (#21922818) Homepage Journal

    I suspect they know the format was doomed and didn't want any of their IP to get dragged down with it.

    Microsoft has significant IP in HD-DVD, and there was no way they "knew" the format was doomed (indeed, trends for the last twelve months, with HD-DVD showing much more momentum than Blu-ray, showed quite the opposite).

    Indeed, the market hasn't spoken at all, and the likely explanation for Warner's decision was some back office hand greasing.

    Microsoft left HD-DVD out of the Xbox 360 purely for cost/profit reasons: Unlike Sony, they couldn't take a loss on a speculative next generation player simply to build a base for their home electronics division (which is exactly how Blu-ray won this war. Without the PS3, Blu-ray would have been stillborn).

    Warner's decision, and the inevitable outcome of it, is effectively a multi-billion dollar tax on the entire home electronics industry. [yafla.com]

    But Warner got their greasing, and every consumer is going to pay for it.
  • Re:I knew it... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Justus ( 18814 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @11:23AM (#21922914)
    That's a wonderful point, except that the article and the grandparent poster are complaining about HD-DVD. You know, the non-Sony format.

    Personally, I don't really care who or what wins this stupid high-def format war, so long as it goes away. I suppose I'm technically in the Blu-Ray camp (I unexpectedly received a PS3 over the holidays), but mostly I just want to purchase high-definition movies without worrying about which studios are supporting which type of disc.
  • by Blkdeath ( 530393 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @11:24AM (#21922928) Homepage

    As an aside, I find the fact the studios are trying to decide on the format war somewhat depressing. It's hard to see how supporting both formats and allowing consumers to make the final choice is going to cause any serious level of expense.

    By my reckoning it'll cause them to double their expenses. Not only in film editing (different audio and video standards/capabilities, different media capacity), physical production, but in storage, shipping, handling and marketing costs for two formats while at the same time maintaining 'legacy' support in the form of DVDs.

    The other problem with the above is the "customers" and "decision" part. The common trend amongst the proletariat these days is "Just make up your damn minds and I'll buy whatever wins!" hence the necessity for the producers to have the final say.

    Personally I don't care which format wins, but I won't make any purchase, no matter how small or meaningless, until I know which format I'll be able to rely on for the next decade.

  • by SerpentMage ( 13390 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @11:32AM (#21923006)
    The movie I was looking at was Spiderman 3...

    So tell me... You are prepared to pay almost double for Pirates of the Caribbean 3? This is a scam that the big movie theater companies are running to get you to pony up more money for the same darn content...

    Think of it as follows. You are buying a digital camera. Regular DVD is your phone camera, and BlueRay is your 10 Megapixel camera. The cost of generating the picture is higher with the 10 Megapixel. The cost of displaying the higher content is also higher, but that is not a function of the movie theater since they are not carrying the costs. So you could argue that highdef DVD would cost more, but to the tune of what you have illustrated?

    Yet here is the kicker, all of this would make sense if the movie theaters actually needed to invest in new equipment. They don't they already generate high def and thus whether they move the DIGITAL content to DVD or BlueRay is a question of using the proper encoder. In other words content should cost only a small fraction more.

    Yet your examples illustrate a minimum price hike of 80% for more content? Sorry but you are getting duped here on a major scale.

    This is a scam that the movie theaters are doing so that you will pay more for movies so that actors can get paid more...

    Sorry not with my money!
  • Re:I knew it... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Sponge Bath ( 413667 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @11:39AM (#21923074)

    This simply is not worth worrying about. I picked up the exact same deal as you and am happy. Just remember:

    * The format war is *not* over because a couple of 'experts' say so
    * Until the war is over, don't build a large library (rent)
    * The cost of the player for a few years use is modest
    * Amazon started selling discounted Bluray players with the same 10 disc offer a couple of weeks after the HD-DVD offer, so it is not part of a dumping scheme by either format.

    In the short term you get to enjoy 1080P video and TrueHD audio now for a low price. I see a lot of postings here about there not being a significant difference between SD and HD discs, but I see a huge difference. I was sceptical before I got the player, but now I am a believer and have no buyers remorse even *if* HD-DVD goes away after a few years.

    In short: Don't worry, be happy.

  • Age-old question (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rydia ( 556444 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @11:42AM (#21923108)
    If a company wins a format war and nobody cares about it, have they really won anything?
  • Comment removed (Score:2, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @11:44AM (#21923124)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Re:Dear Hollywood (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TheBracket ( 307388 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @11:46AM (#21923138) Homepage
    I have a 27" CRT that can do 1080i (picked it up for $200 in a sale). For normal viewing, I really can't tell the difference between 480p and 1080i - both look pretty good. Occasionally, HD content does look much better - mostly when watching televised sports (not something I do often!), but mostly I really have to look to see the difference. The only time 1080i really makes a difference is on my xbox 360, particularly for text rendering and small texture details on characters.

    I wouldn't pay thousands more just to get better xbox text - but for $200, I can't really complain! I don't think a bigger TV would fit in my apartment anyway!
  • by Enahs ( 1606 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @12:00PM (#21923270) Journal
    Well, I "wasted" more than that on a 3rd-gen player. With it I got Bourne Identity and 300, and have the chance to get at least 5 more titles (they pretty much suck, but they're free, eh?) I didn't take advantage of the 1st-gen and 2nd-gen firesales, so I don't get AS MANY movies, but I guess I have a point here:

    For the price of a DECENT upscaling DVD player, I got a DECENT upscaling DVD player which also plays a HD format that may be going out. Do I care? Not really...I have no plans to buy Blu-Ray for a while, and the reason I bought an HD set and DVD player was largely because about a month ago my TV and DVD player got fried by lightning.

    Warner Brothers hit it on the head, at least for me, but they forgot another issue: With all the FUD surrounding the current BD players, coupled with the price, many of us have no plans whatsoever to buy one, at least for now. Waiting until after people snatched up the 1st- and 2nd-gen players, then (like me) lower-priced 3rd-gen players, and not just that but wait until CES was about to start was just mean-spirited. Their stance toward the whole thing, up until yesterday, left a bad taste in some consumers' mouths. Is it enough to hurt them? Probably not, but I think they may have just extended the format war rather than killing it as intended. I certainly hope I'm wrong about that.



    I don't get some people's attitude about HD-DVD being the underdog, though. In one corner you have Sony and Pioneer, along with Sun and a number of companies that're pushing a proprietary format built on a mix of open and closed standards. In the other corner, you have Microsoft and Toshiba, along with a number of other companies, pusing a proprietary format based on a mix of open and closed standards. Both camps have technologies that are similar to each other. Both had their advantages and disadvantages, and they were never as hugely different as many fanboys of both formats made them out to be.

    So yeah, I guess you can say that we "wasted" our money, but thus far, most people buying HD stuff have the money to burn, so unless you're living in your parents' basement and blowing your McDonalds wages on HD equipment, this isn't as huge as people seem to be making it out to be. At least we've decided who's going to win the SACD vs DVD-A...excuse me, HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray war.

    Yeah, seriously, I don't think Blu-Ray will have a long shelf-life, either. DVD had 10 years. Whoopty doo. My prediction is that in 5 years you'll be tivo-ing all the movies you want to watch, and by "tivo" I mean your PVR will be pulling down your HD content either straight through dish or cable or through your cable/phone/internet combo deal. Blu-Ray will be the format that you'll get when you absolutely, positively don't want to commit your movies to your PVR's hard drive, and for videophiles who'll recognize that the streaming options are inferior to the more popular streaming options.

  • Re:Dear Hollywood (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Puff Daddy ( 678869 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @12:23PM (#21923486)
    Gotta jump in here and say I don't think anyone is saying that there is no difference between DVD quality and Blu-Ray/HD-DVD quality. What I, at least one GP, and the seeming majority of Americans are saying is that we just don't care. Once an HD screen and an HD media player become cheap enough that I'll consider them next time I have to replace my aging equipment, I might consider buying an HDTV. I, and many, if not most, others, will probably never seriously consider buying a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player. Why? It would be a stupid waste of money to tie myself to discs when the technology is already in place to do away with them. Let me put it this way, DVD is, and will continue to be, good enough. Until a widespread, practical, and legal HD media center comes along, most consumers will continue to roll their eyes at the ridiculous amount HD anything costs. Quick, someone mod an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player to do something useful, I'll pick one up cheap when people realize playing HD content on scratchable, breakable, losable, inconvenient little discs is about as useful being able to translate hieroglyphics into Sanskrit.
  • Re:Next up... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Fanboys_Suck_Dick ( 1128411 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @12:32PM (#21923598)
    DVDs look great on my HDTV (40" LCD). I have seen HD content on the same TV and though it looks better it doesn't look better enough for me to care. Sometimes HD can even be distracting. I don't want to see every wrinkle and pore on the 90 year old grandma in the movie Titanic. I hope to skip HDDVD and Bluray completely.
  • by badasscat ( 563442 ) <basscadet75@@@yahoo...com> on Saturday January 05, 2008 @12:50PM (#21923832)
    It's not really over. There are still a number of studios, most notably Paramount, committed exclusively to HD-DVD.

    70% of the industry (in market share terms) is now exclusively supporting Blu-Ray. BD software is outselling HD-DVD 3:1, standalone BD players are now outselling standalone HD-DVD players even at a higher price, and of course when you factor in the game consoles (which do count, because those people are a big part of the software advantage), it's no contest and never has been.

    Moreover, Paramount is now reportedly looking for ways [thedigitalbits.com] to get out of its deal with HD-DVD. (Scroll down, it's there.) No studio wants to be the last one holding the bag on a dying format while their competitors all jump ship.

    The format war is over. It's funny to see people talking about "good sales" on HD-DVD players - how good does a sale need to be to make buying a piece of dead tech worth it? There are only a couple hundred movies on HD-DVD, and there aren't ever going to be many more than that.

    It's fun to root for the "underdog", but come on, people - this is your own money. Why waste it?
  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @12:55PM (#21923870)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by fredricodagreat ( 1005203 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @12:57PM (#21923912) Homepage
    Along similar lines, my DVD player just crapped out on me. After scouring the consumer reports for about a month or so, it turns out if you want a good Upscaling DVD player, it will cost you between $120 and $160 (Yes I am aware that you can get an upscaling DVD player for $50, but I'm talking good quality ones) So why wouldn't I want to put out an extra $30 for something that will play HD discs plus get 7 free DVDs, at least 4 of which I had been wanting to pick up in regular DVD format. I'm very happy with my purchase and I think this format war is far from over. Likely it will come to a stale mate and everything will be running off of solid state drives.
  • by Terje Mathisen ( 128806 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @01:15PM (#21924096)
    I have spent a couple of months optimizing code for HD decoding, and mostly the format doesn't really matter:

    Both use the same codecs, they support the same resolutions, and the maximum bitrate is more or less the same (30 vs 40 Mbit/s for HD vs BR).

    The one important difference is that a "full HD" 1080x1920 BR frame will always be encoded as four quadrants, each at 540x960.

    This does lead to marginally lower compression rates, since you get more borders, but the great benefit is that you can have multiple CPU cores (up to 4) work in parallel on each of the parts!

    You can of course do the same with a multi-core decoder for HD-DVD, but only by starting each cpu/thread at a different key frame, and since each 1080p picture requires 2 Mpixels, it is far too easy to trash both the TLB tables and the L2 caches when doing the motion compensation step which normally requires multiple source frames to be available to generate each target frame.

    Terje
  • Re:Not likely (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Snowmit ( 704081 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @01:41PM (#21924332) Homepage
    There is a significant difference between DVD and HD when you have the right equipment.

    Err you just supported his argument, which is that HD might be nicer for people who have HD TVs most people don't have HD TVs and that beyond the HD nicer picture there is no compelling reason to upgrade. Sure, with the right equipment you don't ever want to go back. But most people don't have that yet.
  • Re:Not there yet. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ChaoticLimbs ( 597275 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @02:22PM (#21924730) Journal
    The consuming public has no need for what is essentially a studio master uncompressed copy. What is suitable for public exhibition is not the same as what's suitable for buying at Wal-Mart. Those 2k exhibition copies cost thousands of dollars, don't they? I would think that 1080p DV with MP4 compression or equivalent would be plenty for movies. For sports and other things, even true 60fps is better than nothing. Perhaps a standard with 75 fps at 720p resolutions would be better for sports broadcasts and highlights.
  • Re:I knew it... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by xigxag ( 167441 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @02:22PM (#21924742)

    This experience has left me utterly disgusted.
    If you can get so emotionally worked up over a $200 purchase, why did you spend so much in the first place?

    Look at it this way. You got ten movies that will play forever, you got a very good upscaling DVD player, and you got an opportunity to buy a bunch of films in the very near future at fire sale prices.

    Also, don't expect HD-DVD to entirely die out so quickly. Toshiba will still be making players and recorders for a good while longer -- the standard may even manage to live on as a drop-in replacement for DVD+Rs. Furthermore, HD-DVD is supposedly compatible with China's new CH-DVD [ch-dvds.com] standard. After cheap upscaling DVD players start to flood the market with HD-DVD compatibility mode, you won't have to worry about your collection being unplayable in the future. Don't minimize China's influence here, after all, old Chinese (S)VCD's are still playable on every new $30 player, some 10 years after they were obsoleted by DVDs.

     
  • by 2ms ( 232331 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @02:34PM (#21924882)
    You people act like Warner is some kind of independent expert and accurate fortune teller. Of course they are going to say "We expect HD DVD to 'die' a quick death." That's what they want to happen because they are a Blu-ray only studio and they're obviously going to say it is going to happen because the more people say that then the more likely it is for it to actually happen.
  • by gmack ( 197796 ) <gmack@noSpAM.innerfire.net> on Saturday January 05, 2008 @02:44PM (#21924970) Homepage Journal
    Ok so the early adopters have decided.

    Everyone else is waiting for two things:
    1: The format war to be over since no one wants to shell out for a player and movies only to end up on the losing side and end up with movies they can't play or a player they can't get movies for.

    2: The players to get cheaper.

    You make it seem like the non early adopters even matter on which way the war will end. They quite frankly don't. The war will be over before they ever bother to buy one themselves.

    With today's news announcing that one of the larger studios is dropping HD DVD will only tilt the war further in Blu-Ray's favour since there is no point in buying HD DVD players if you can't get content for them no matter how cheap they get.
  • by Basehart ( 633304 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @02:54PM (#21925078)
    If you want to see new releases in HD on your HD-DVD player six months from now, the only way you'll be able to do it is to somehow copy it from a Blu-ray disc onto a HD-DVD disc or download a HD file from somewhere and do the same (although that's a waste of time for obvious reasons). HD-DVD as a format is dead in month if not weeks, however amazing it may be.
  • by hedwards ( 940851 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @03:07PM (#21925200)

    YOU wasted 99 bucks. Sucker.
    Haha, I'm sure $100 seems like a lot of money when you are living on frozen pizzas in your mom's basement, but it really is a pittance to someone with a decent job. I usually spend that about once a week at a nice restaurant.
    I'm sure it sounds that way, but if you were to replace HD-DVD with magic beans, the point becomes more obvious. While it is possible that HD-DVD will take off anyways, the format that will ultimately win will be the format which has the content that people want. Realistically, I knew people as late as the '89 who were still using their betamax recorders on a regular basis, but they hadn't been able to purchase any original content in a number of years. That's largely what HD-DVD is going to be like if the studios start to put emphasis on blu-ray without providing content to HD-DVD.

    So, in the long run, if there's no content, and you have to purchase a blu-ray player anyways, you've bought the metaphorical magic beans. $100 dollars is a relatively large amount of money, especially when one combines it with the most powerful force known to man, compounding interest.

    Just because something is really cheap, doesn't make it a good deal, even if the product does work as advertised, nobody in their right mind would buy a 1950s TV set for everyday use. They might buy one as a collectors item, or for a museum, but they aren't going to buy one for use. Yet, with repair the set might function well. Yes, that's a bit of an over dramatization, but a dvd player with no content is less useful, at least the TV could be hooked up via a converter to new broadcasts, even if the picture is about 4 inches diagonally.
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @03:38PM (#21925510)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Blkdeath ( 530393 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @03:53PM (#21925666) Homepage

    Not in practice. Both formats have similar capacities in their most common forms (dual layer HD-DVD vs single layer Blu-ray),

    Are you in marketing? "similar capacities"? "most common forms"? I said different. They are not the same, therefore they are different.

    Nope. The only way you're going to save in physical production, storage, shipping, and handling is if you reduce the number of units you sell, which of course results in a predictable reduction in revenues, so what are you gaining by doing this? You're treating this as if 100,000 Blu-ray discs take half as much storage as 50,000 Blu-ray discs and 50,000 HD-DVD discs. That's clearly not the case.

    Are you saying that the market is split evenly at 50/50 and they will produce and sell an identical number of each units? There won't be any overhead, overruns, surplus production of either format? Or, to be less pedantic, are you saying that a given production house can nearly accurately forecast the number of sales of either given format for any given title over a period of time? Further, the fact that the production equipment is physically different and that there are licensing fees involved, etc. doesn't factor into your equation. Business 101.

    Up to a point. I don't think this would have been an issue if studios had all supported both formats and had shown no signs of deciding that one was going to get better treatment than the other in future unless one did spectacularly badly.

    Time to take the naive cap off my friend. There's billions of dollars at stake here and everybody's got their hand out with golden eggs in it. The content providers, hardware and console makers have had to decide which egg looks the most appealing. Money talks. Welcome to capitalism.

    Here's something worth bearing in mind: I'm not doing Blu-ray. I looked at the three formats a month or two ago, DVD, HD-DVD, and Blu-ray, and decided that I felt HD-DVD was a clear step up from DVD, whereas Blu-ray was a step down. (For my logic, see here.) The studios "making the choice for me" doesn't mean I'm breathing a sigh of relief and rushing out to buy a Blu-ray drive, it means they'll be seeing less of my money, especially if they decide to drop DVD as well.

    Sorry, but your arguments are a tad misguided. DRM is a component of media conglomerates, not media storage formats. It will exist as long as the "War On Piracy" continues to rage on.

    As for the studios seeing more or less of your money, well, if BluRay does become the clear victor and HD-DVD goes the way of BetaMax that's your choice. Do you participate in purchasing new entertainment media, do you pirate, or do you opt out of current entertainment media all together?

    But in the long run, I don't think you get it. You are not a typical consumer. You are nothing remotely resembling a typical consumer and the people responsible for producing these formats, I'm sorry to say, don't shive a git what your opinion is or where your wallet goes one way or another. Your arguments mean as much to a movie studio as the subtle nuances of rocket science mean to me. But this is Slashdot, so please don't hesitate to respond and tell me how one DRM format/requirement is subtly different than another or some other pedantry.

  • by Basehart ( 633304 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @04:15PM (#21925856)
    OK already. Enjoy your crappy HD-DVD discs. See if I care :-)
  • by gmack ( 197796 ) <gmack@noSpAM.innerfire.net> on Saturday January 05, 2008 @04:29PM (#21925962) Homepage Journal
    What overwhelming evidence is that? The 60% drop in player prices in the last year? The fact that both HD format players are finally starting to show up in stores? The fact that DVD used to be just as rare? If I recall correctly both Blu-ray and HD DVD seem to be taking off faster than DVD did. How can you possibly argue that one of these won't be the next standard?

    A lot of the non technical people I've talked to are very worried about choosing the losing side and won't buy in until there is a clear winner.

    Your also forgetting why Laserdisc failed. Laserdisc failed because the media was a lot more of a pain to carry around than VHS tapes. VHS tapes were a lot smaller and a LOT less fragile so it wasn't until they came up with a smaller format (DVD) that it even begun to catch on. Both Blu-Ray and HD DVD.

    And yes I hate region coding as much as you do but as much as we all try and argue around reality we still won't make the result any less true: At this moment HD DVD is losing the content battle from both a production(movie studios) perspective and a distribution (blockbuster) perspective.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 05, 2008 @07:58PM (#21927894)
    Same place you could get cheap multi-region format players 3 years into DVD's lifetime.
  • Re:Not there yet. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Doppler00 ( 534739 ) on Saturday January 05, 2008 @08:19PM (#21928092) Homepage Journal
    I know most of my friends still don't care about the difference between DVD and HD quality, how on earth are you going to convince people that they need 2160p and 48 fps? I think trying to standardize long term on 1080p for everything is going to be hard enough.

Understanding is always the understanding of a smaller problem in relation to a bigger problem. -- P.D. Ouspensky

Working...