Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Media Movies Sony Entertainment Games Technology

Kutaragi Confirms End to Blue-Ray Talks 79

Posted by Zonk from the they-can't-get-along dept.
Ken Kutaragi, SCE President, confirmed that after a long period of talks Toshiba and Sony cannot see eye to eye on the next generation of DVD format. Blu-ray discs, then, will be the only supported format on the upcoming Playstation 3 console. From the article: "Negotiations began back in February, but the two companies failed to reach an agreement on storage capacities. Blu-Ray discs can hold 50GB of data while HD-DVD discs only hold 30GB, but the HD-DVD camp argues that lower manufacturing costs make for a cheaper, more consumer-friendly product."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Kutaragi Confirms End to Blue-Ray Talks More

Kutaragi Confirms End to Blue-Ray Talks

Comments Filter:

  • What i never understood... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by YellowCyclone ( 856676 ) on Monday June 20, 2005 @04:32PM (#12866995)
    is why is there a debate on this to begin with...

    blu-ray holds more, shouldn't that be the final blow? even though hd-dvd is cheaper and will save the companies money, if blue-ray is introduce,d costs will eventually go down.....i'm sure this is what sony is betting on (as it did with dvd for the ps2), but will somebody explain it to me why hd-dvd has lots of rich backers?
    • Holds more, costs more.

      Lower costs make way for quicker acceptance by the public.
      • Holds more, costs more.

        Lower costs make way for quicker acceptance by the public.

        Oh no! If movie studios used Blu-Ray they'd no longer be able to sell a $20 movie on a 50 cent disc with 50 cents of packaging, instead they'll have to sell it on a 2 dollar disc with 50 cents of packaging! How will they ever protect their 2000% per-item margin?!

        You can't see me, but I'm sitting here playing My Heart Bleeds for You on the world's smallest violin.
        • Real simple. They sell the discs for $25-$35 'cause there's juuust a bit more than a DVD's worth of features. Expect *lots* of hi-res scans of prodcution art. For every film. Every version of the script. Hi-res scans of the scripts.

          The business plan almost writes itself.

    • Re:What i never understood... (Score:4, Informative)

      by crow ( 16139 ) on Monday June 20, 2005 @04:42PM (#12867067) Homepage Journal
      It's a matter of what's good enough.

      At 30GB, you have enough for over three hours of HDTV, which means most movies, even with special features, won't need any more than that. Why use a more expensive format when you'll hardly ever need the extra space?

      Of course, 50GB means each of the extended Lord of the Rings movies will fit on one disc, but the studios consider beaking movies of that length onto two discs to be reasonable.

      Personally, I want the higher capacity, but I understand the support for HD-DVD.
      • It's a matter of what's good enough.

        At 30GB, you have enough for over three hours of HDTV, which means most movies, even with special features, won't need any more than that. Why use a more expensive format when you'll hardly ever need the extra space?

        I agree, and that's why not all blu-ray disks will be 50GB. A 25GB single-layer blu-ray disk holds almost as much as a 30GB dual-layer HD-DVD disk. Fitting the entire movie on a single layer both eliminates layer transition pauses and reduces the cost of
      • Of course, 50GB means each of the extended Lord of the Rings movies will fit on one disc...

        It could, and in a dream world where companies respect consumers' intelligence, it would even happen. In this world, however, even if a disc could hold 1000GB, the marketing types are gonna say "Better make it a 3 disc set so stupid people will think it's worth more".

        Anyway, I can't stand how we're getting a new video format already. Heck, two formats even. Competing with each other. Which means DVD will be phase
      • It also depends on the level of video quality you want. Network HDTV feeds run at 45 Mbps. That's about 20 GB an hour.
    • blu-ray holds more, shouldn't that be the final blow?

      Tape holds more... why bother with bluray?

      Blue-ray is more prone to damage due to where the data is stored. It's also more expensive for both the players and the media.

      • Re:What i never understood... (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Bluray is the only one that has come out with a method for making scratch-resistant discs... very scratch-resistant (as in, a steelo can't make marks in the coating).

        That puts it way above HD-DVD - it has higher density, but it is much more protected. You won't have the problems of scratching your favourite movie like you do with DVDs currently.

  • Higher capacity != better (Score:3, Insightful)

    by yotto ( 590067 ) on Monday June 20, 2005 @04:40PM (#12867048) Homepage
    I don't know much about blue-ray but just because they hold more data doesn't make them instantly better. A 4-point font can display more text on the screen, but that doesn't make it better than a 10-point font.
    • Higher capacity tends to mean longer load times. Also, Sony's support of Blue-Ray and not HD-DVD in the PS3 won't add up to anything as far as swinging the market since nobody watches DVD's on a PlayStation.
      • One of the reasons the PS2 did so well in its initial launch in Japan was because it was comparable in price to stand-alone DVD players.

        It'll probably be the same with the PS3.
      • Wouldn't higher capacity mean shorter load times? At least when comparing the same game on DVD vs Blu-Ray. Usually when data density goes up so does throughput, at least that generally holds true for HDs.
        • With Blueray, games will cost $49.99. System will cost $299-$350 on launch.

          With HD-DVD, games will cost $49.99. System will cost $299-$350 on launch.

          People please, the video game market charge you the same no matter what technology is used. So just hope for the more expensive one, Blueray. As a consumer you pay the same regardless.

          • No one is going to use the HD-DVD format in a game console; the PS3 is using Bluray and the Revolution and 360 are sticking with standard DVDs.

            Your point is still valid although I don't see how it relates to the parent.
    • I hate to be nitpicky but that analogy doesn't work. The font size comparison is about legibility - irrelevant in the 30GB or 50GB debate. We are talking about a container which isn't the same thing. A better analogy would be comparing a 50 inch tv with a 30 inch tv... Who doesn't want a bigger screen?

      More space, more content, it's as simple as that. They may cost a little more in the short term, but in the long run I think we'll benefit from having 20GB of extra content.
    • A 4-point font can display more text on the screen, but that doesn't make it better than a 10-point font.

      It's better by quite a bit if the ten-point font means that the document can't have as much text. For example, if you need to print a legal document on one page, and 4pt font is the only way it fits, then 10pt just won't do.

      In other words, your analogy is broken because it assumes that the data will be the same for both cases.

  • What is the real motivation behind this failure to work together?

    Is it competition for licensing revenue?

    Is it purposeful hindering of format adoption to slow media copying (like with dvds)?

    Are there really technological advantages to the formats that the other wouldn't benefit from more than a unified format?

    • Their sizes are so different, it's as if we can consider HD-DVD a missing link between DVD and Blu-Ray.

      I wouldn't mind seeing both of them. Besides, big game makers would probably use the extra Blu-Ray space by keeping their video uncompressed or something. Someone's gonna find a way and excuse to fill any media. (My own installation of World Wind [nasa.gov], combined with its cache, already takes up 1.35GB, and I've only used it two days. I've been looking around a lot of the world though, and the Tsunami pictu

  • Sony probably wasn't willing to budge (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Drakino ( 10965 ) on Monday June 20, 2005 @04:43PM (#12867074) Journal
    I'm betting with as late in development the Playstation 3 was, Sony wasn't willing to budge.

    For me, while I like that Blu-Ray holds more, I think HD-DVD is the way to go. DVD is still in the name because it is an evolution of existing DVDs, and many components on both the manufacturing and player side just need to be retooled slightly to support the new format. Kinda like jumping from 720k to 1.44 MB 3.5 inch floppies.

    Since the switchover to the next format won't be instant, it makes sense to go with the format that allows the manufacturers continue to crank out DVDs and newer HD discs on the same line.

    I'm just dreading a format war after the products hit the market here in the US. Odds are, I'll end up plopping down cash on a multi laser product to play either, and one will wither and die a year or two later.

    • You wouldn't need a multi. Or am I missing something? It seems like you'll play PS3 games and/or watch BlueRay on your PS3 and you'll watch movies on your new HD-DVD player. Since more people watch movies than play games, HD-DVD will become the movie standard, and media balance will return. Games on Blue-Ray, movies on HD-DVD.

      One console maker's game media preference won't have a profound impact on the movie-buying public's preferences. Look at the BetaMax and the MiniDisc. Their new format will not be met

      • That being said, Sony has been on the losing end of the format wars when trying to extend their formats. One must only visit the Sony Home for Abandoned Formats to see Betamax, MiniDisc and soon to come MemoryStick, UMD, and sadly BluRay. These technologies ensure that Sony prices itself out of the market and hampers future sales.
        • Within a couple of months of the PS3 release there will be millions of Blu-Ray players (the PS3) out there with only a handfull of HD-DVD players. But there may be more HD-DVD movie discs released then Blu-Rays movies discs.(By the end of the Year, that is)
    • > I'll end up plopping down cash on a multi laser product to play either,
      > and one will wither and die a year or two later.

      Both will wither and die, because neither of them holds *enough* more than a regular DVD. Even DVD would never have "made it" if it weren't for Hollywood pusing it so hard, because it's not *that* much better than CDs (or VHS, if you're more interested in the video side).

      Remember how long the 1.44MB floppy held on, and on, and on, until *finally* the CD burners got cheap enough
  • This won't be the first time Sony lost a format war [wikipedia.org].
  • Technically using either of these in a console would've given a huge boost the amount of content that you could put into a game. I think that the largest games right now sit at around 8GB on a DVD. Using either format would effectively quadruple the content in the next generation games.

    However, I don't think that the Revolution or the Xbox 360 make use of either of these formats. I'm not sure what the Revolution will be using, but it is rumored to have DVD support now. The Xbox 360 will be using regular

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • The only thing that really interests me is how reliable and durable are they?

    Can I really trust them as a data storage medium or are they as lousy as CD-R and DVD+/-R?

    Will they destroy my precious data randomly like most CD-R and DVD+-R brands?

    Will there ever be a reliable mass data storage solution that is affordable for Joe Athlon?
  • "but the HD-DVD camp argues that lower manufacturing costs make for a cheaper, more consumer-friendly product."

    I think they mean more "profit margin friendly" product. From my understanding regardless of the media costs, it's the content that costs 99% of the money the consumer pays. Otherwise CD's would cost $1.00 since they only cost a few pennies to make when you are producing hundreds of thousands of them (Trust me I know... However on my scale it costs me about $1.50 per cd since I make batches of ab

  • Blu Ray Lasers (Score:3, Funny)

    by Seraphim_72 ( 622457 ) on Monday June 20, 2005 @05:14PM (#12867327)
    Toshiba and Sony cannot see eye to eye on the next generation of DVD format
    Said a Sony spokes person, "We decided that we have had enough, and will heed the warning to not look into the laser with our remaining eye."

    Sera


  • Are we going to be expected to read the bits ourselves?

    Sounds like Sony is pulling an Apple - "screw you, get the fudge out!"
  • http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/20/news_61278 15.html [gamespot.com]

    Despite Kutaragi's comments last week that it was "game over," Sony shake-up prompts chipmakers to sit again at the negotiating table.

    originally spotted on driverheaven.net [driverheaven.net]

  • They're talking again... and Blu-Ray shall win. (Score:3, Informative)

    by iamghetto ( 450099 ) on Monday June 20, 2005 @06:59PM (#12868001) Homepage
    Ken Kutaragi, SCE President, confirmed that after a long period of talks Toshiba and Sony cannot see eye to eye on the next generation of DVD format. Blu-ray discs, then, will be the only supported format on the upcoming Playstation 3 console.

    That was news on Thursday the 16th, not Monday the 20th. The news as of today on Gamespot [gamespot.com] however is that the talks are back on [gamespot.com]. In the coming weeks both Sony & Toshiba top management are going to be reshuffled, the new blood may well find a new solution.

    Either way, I'm sure Blu-Ray is going to win, and here's why. Installed user base & storage capacity.

    The day HD-DVD players go on sale, do you think that there are going to be a million people drooling, cash-in-hand, ready to buy one? Because there will be a million people DYING to buy a PS3 this spring. And as we all know, the PS3 plays Blu-Ray discs, and that is why Blu-Ray will win out in the end. When I look at myself and my friends, 90% of us use our PS2's as our DVD players. And 99/100 a PS2 was the first DVD player we ever owned. When PS2's were $450 (CDN) DVD players were still $250 (CDN). It was like getting a DVD player for free, and that is exactly what's going to be happening with the PS3. Would we like a PS3 for $500 or a stand-alone HD-DVD/Blu-Ray player for $300?

    Originally the XBOX 360 was going to support HD-DVD, but since its being rushed to market ahead of schedule they can't afford to include the technology... Which is working out great for Sony.

    Additionally, we have the storage capacity issue:

    Blu-Ray Single-Layer:
    Storage: 25 gigs
    MPEG-4's H.264/AVC codec: 4 hours Hi-Def video
    MPEG2 codec: 2 hours Hi-Def video

    HD-DVD Single-Layer:
    Storage: 15 gigs
    MPEG-4's H.264/AVC codec: 2 hours 24 minutes Hi-Def video
    MPEG2 codec: 1.2 hours Hi-Def video

    You can just look at the HD-DVD storage numbers, so the math in your head, and see how paltry its real-world storage capacity is. Of course using a dual-layered disc somewhat alleviates that problem for HD-DVD, but when Blu-Ray is dual-layered it doesn't just become "good enough" as HD-DVD does, it becomes exceptional. All of a sudden you can store 8 hours of HD content on one disc. Not only is that great for us from a convience standpoint, but shouldn't the storage capacity of the Blu-Ray disc compensate for its higher price point? Things could fit on a 1 or 2 Blu-Ray discs where it would take 3 or 4 HD-DVD discs.

    I hope I've somewhat made my point. :)
  • Wait, you're telling me Sony has turned its head from the rest of the industry, and is preparing its own (superior) format to counteract everyone else's? Wow, I wonder how it will turn out...

    Oh wait...
  • I've said it before, every time this topic comes up:

    Unless they have diamond coated surfaces or put the discs in caddies, scratches are going to be a major B#$%@: The amount of data obscured by a scratch scales linearly with the density of the disc, so while a CD scratch causes a blip in the music, a DVD scratch can cause a disc-ruining jump or scene deletion. This is compounded by the fact that movies are a singular while albums are broken up into songs.

    I can barely stand dvd scratches as it is; if it ge
    • TDK are one step ahead of you - they've got a scratch-proof coating, and it's part of the disc spec to use it. So that's a relief. There was talk, before they got the coating from TDK, that BluRay was going to go down the caddy route, as it was substantially more delicate than DVD even.
  • why fight over the capacity for PS3?
    UMD format found on PSP hold 3 GB but all UMD games hardly use 1 GB of it.
    They won't probably fill 50 GB either for PS3.

    • UMB = 1.8 GB
      miniDVD dual-layer = 1.5 GB/layer = 3 GB

      Sony's press release regarding the PSP and UMD format [playstation.com]

      "PSP adopts a small but high-capacity optical medium UMD(TM) (Universal Media Disc), enabling game software, rich with full-motion video and other forms of digital entertainment content, to be stored. The newly developed UMD, the next-generation compact storage media, is only 60mm in diameter but can store up to 1.8GB of digital data. A broad range of digital entertainment content such as music vid

  • So now the next gen console war shapes up like this:

    Xbox 360: expensive, expensive to develop for, long timetables to develop for, limited developer support, limited backward compatibility.

    PS3: expensive, slightly less expensive to develop for, costs for media will ensure high priced games, limited usefulness beyond Blu-Ray (if they don't make it, remember beta vs. vhs, even though beta was better vhs won)

    Revolution: cheap, cheap/easy development, full backward compatibility, thousands of games at launch
  • Obviously, it matters to the consoles which disc format they'll use. But beyond that?

    How long will it be before people with a bit of cash to spare can get all their media streamed over the internet right to their devices? By way of a simple subscription-based service, a person could pay for X movie or song consumptions per month. I'd guess that if you can afford digital cable or movie channels right now, you'd be able to afford such a service no problem.

    I personally believe it's inevitable, as it so

  • but the HD-DVD camp argues that lower manufacturing costs make for a cheaper, more consumer-friendly product.

    And then DRM encumbrance makes "consumer-friendliness" irrelevant.

  • welcome our Betamax overlords.

    Snoogins.

Slashdot Top Deals

Programmers do it bit by bit.

Close