HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray Battle Over? Warner Switches to Blu-Ray

[jaw04005]

HD DVD is dead.

On the heals of the cancellation of the HD DVD CES keynote presentation, Toshiba spent exactly five minutes talking about the format during their CES press conference.

http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/06/live-from-the-toshiba-ces-press-conference/

The main purpose of CES is to give retailers, distributors and partners a look at what's ahead for the next year. For a company not to even TRY to boost morale following Warner's announcement is a very bad sign.

HD DVD may have been declared dead before, but it's truly dead now.

Transcript:

10:13 - "Very surprised by Warner announcement about HD DVD...etc", basically the same as the press release issued earlier.

10:15 - Jodi Sally is on stage "It's been a tough day for me (laughs).

10:16 - "Only HD DVD has deliver on its commitments to the market, bringing advanced functionality and affordability. We've been declared dead before...unit sales in Q4 were the best to date. Nearly 1 million dedicated HD DVD players are in the market. HD DVD has always put the interests of consumers ahead of companies."

10:18 - "Thanks for your continued support", a slide of all the awards HD DVD has gotten in the past year -- and that's it.

 

[Counter]

The war will end on January 15th, 2008 - when Apple includes Blu-ray in their Macs.

The war is already over man.

Apple is far, far, far from a nail in the coffin of a dvd format war.

 

[janstett]

^ Yeah Apple will step onto the battlefield litterred with corpses, dip its hand in a pool of blood to smear it on its face, and say "See, look, we won the war! Yay us!"

 

[RaceTripper]

The war is already over man.

Apple is far, far, far from a nail in the coffin of a dvd format war.

Yes, with some 7% or so of the PC market Apple will have negligible impact if they introduce HD drives (regardless of format), even if they replace the superdrive across the whole line of desktops and laptops, which seems very unlikely.

 

[Pigumon]

Nonsense. Same picture quality output from both formats. Stop kidding yourself.

If these formats have the same picture quality then someone needs to tell the people who prepare the sample videos and set up the systems in the store.

I went to Best Buy to see for myself which looked better, since that's really all that matters when it comes down to video.

Blu-Ray. As simple as that, I was really surprised there was a NOTICEABLE difference. From such a noticeable difference I didn't understand how HD-DVD could even be accepted by anyone.

Now you're saying NONSENSE. Well my eyes say differently. So somewhere between the specs that you say are the same, and the tv screens that show one quite superior to the other.. something changes or is just wrong. It could very well be Best Buy is trying to push Blu-Ray. Maybe the guy who set up the systems is pro Blu-Ray and wanted to make HD DVD look worse.

But as far as my first encounter with the two formats, Blu-Ray wins.

Now if Blu-Ray is more prone to defects or more easily scratched, well that affects picture quality, so it's a top concern.

But I don't see how a disc that is lower capacity can claim to have the same video output as one that is higher capacity.

Explain how that is nonsense.

 

[LethalWolfe]

If these formats have the same picture quality then someone needs to tell the people who prepare the sample videos and set up the systems in the store.

I care equally less about both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, but I wouldn't trust a min wage earning teenager working at Best Buy to properly set-up/calibrate a video display any farther than I could throw them.


Lethal

 

[Cleverboy]

I went to Best Buy to see for myself which looked better, since that's really all that matters when it comes down to video.

Blu-Ray. As simple as that, I was really surprised there was a NOTICEABLE difference. From such a noticeable difference I didn't understand how HD-DVD could even be accepted by anyone.

Without a chance of rebuttal, the ONLY way your story would have had any credibility is if you at least commented on the model of HD DVD and Blu-Ray and MOST importantly, the model of televisions used on each (with extra points for the name of the content being viewed). Because you simply confined your testimony to "which looked better @ Best Buy" it is pretty clear that your opinion is entirely subjective, anecdotal, and ultimately irrelevant for the purpose of giving any degree of objective perspective on the issue. Sorry.

~ CB

 

[letsGoOn2]

I don't support either, I don't care either way. I would rather both coexist. We need lower prices, they both would keep prices low. Having only 1 means prices will go up. I want backwards compatibility, Let me play my DVD's on whatever new system comes out. Im not going to replace my whole library when there is nothing wrong with the disks now. Up-conversion is the way to go IMO.

The "two formats foster competition" argument falls apart once you scratch the surface of the issue. At this point, the best way to bring the prices down is to create a larger market (demand) for HD video. Many people, myself included, have been holding off on choosing which format to adopt until a clear winner emerges. Even worse, I've been avoiding any standard def DVD purchases because I don't want to buy something that I may want to replace with a high-def version once one is established. An ongoing format war is a one-way ticket to high-def video achieving niche status.

Furthermore, HD-DVD only has one lone manufacturer that makes players - Toshiba. Blu-ray has Pioneer, Samsung, Panasonic, Sony, and there are probably more that I'm forgetting. If only one format were to exist, which format do you think would offer a more competitive market?

Why can't both formats just coexist in peace and harmony? The most obvious reason is retailers. They have to use twice the floor space and deal with returned discs when people buy the wrong one. For consumers, dual-format players are more expensive and they always will be.

I really don't care which one "wins", but the easiest and perhaps the only way to make high-def video in the home a mass-market reality is to have ONE format.

 

[RaceTripper]

...I've been avoiding any standard def DVD purchases because I don't want to buy something that I may want to replace with a high-def version once one is established. An ongoing format war is a one-way ticket to high-def video achieving niche status....

...For consumers, dual-format players are more expensive and they always will be.

I really don't care which one "wins", but the easiest and perhaps the only way to make high-def video in the home a mass-market reality is to have ONE format.

I'm with you. I went from buying 1-2 DVDs a week, to buying less than a dozen in 2007. As of yesterday I have a PS3, and now feel better about buying movies. I didn't really care which one came out ahead as long as one of them did.

The problem I had with the dual format players is I worry how much they'll be "jack of all trades, master of none." As it is I've heard the new Samsung dual format player has problems, and it costs more than two separate BD and HD-DVD players combined, but I believe any multi-format player (where the formats are incompatible with each other) has to make some compromises in quality and/or feature support.

 

[Hunts121]

Yes, but the drive in the PS2 was a piece of crap.

The BD drive in the PS3 on the other hand is actually of some quality.

I hope so, I plan on buying a PS3 for a blu ray player, still the cheapest one for the most part (well the cheapest full featured one). I have a 360 for games (just my personal preference) and should some game that looks appealing that is PS3 only come out, I'll be able to play that as well.

I bought the cheap 98 dollar HD-DVD player from Toshiba (HD-A2) for the TV in my bedroom (1080i tv) and figured if it loses at least I'm only out 100 bucks. Though the one thing I like about HD-DVD is that its a set standard (theres things every player must have), granted only Toshiba really made them, but still. I like Toshiba products (both my LCDs are Toshiba) but I think they missed the boat with HD-DVD. If Microsoft included it with the 360 things might be different because its easy to see that the PS3 is the reason so many blu ray players are out there. I've seen both, watched both, and I didn't really care who won, so long as someone did.

 

[DakotaGuy]

Well I bought a Toshiba HD-A3 HD DVD player at Sears for $169 on Black Friday. I guess at the time I just wanted to get into HD movies and I thought at the price I could do it. I watched a few movies and was blown away by how good they looked and sounded. I also got 5 free movies with my purchase and did buy a few more. I would not say I am heavily invested in the format so today's announcement is only a minor setback to me. I know I was blasted on these boards by monkeytap for being a poor decision maker, etc. Well when I am wrong I'll admit it and I was wrong. The fact still remains however that I do not want a PS3. I want a standalone player that I can control with my Harmony 890 RF remote. I want a player that is affordable and fully featured. Basically I want a Blu-ray version of the HD DVD player I bought.

HD DVD did one good thing and that was to bring down the prices on Blu-ray. All those buy one get one sales were because of HD DVD. Player prices falling overnight were because of HD DVD. If there had been no format war Blu-ray customers would be paying a lot more today. I would assume that the big sales will be off at this point. Blu-ray will have to perform at retail price because the CE companies will demand it. Sony can only afford to offer subsidies for so long before they need to start making profits on the format.

I have decided that trying to sell my HD DVD's for $5 and my player for $25 at this point isn't really worth it. It works great and does exactly what it was designed to do. I use Netflix and I can still rent from them and enjoy plenty of movies as long as they are available. I will watch as many movies as I can and try to wear the thing out over the next year or so. Hopefully by Christmas there are decent full spec. Blu-ray players for under $200. At that point I will get into the game. If that does not happen, then I will wait a little longer. I figure the real battle for Blu-ray will end up being against DVD so hopefully that will effect player and movies prices down the line. I don't think it is going to have any effect in the near future, but soon Blu-ray is going to have to move beyond the PS3 crowd if it is going to survive and thrive before downloads get perfected.

The other issue I worry about is the fact that all Blu-ray players are 1080p. My 42" Vizio is only a 1080i HDTV and I just bought it. I do not want to replace my TV, but I don't know how Blu-ray players work. Because they are 1080p do you have to have a 1080p TV? The other issue is with audio and my Harman/Kardon AVR 247 has HDMI but does not offer Dolby Digital Plus decoding or Dolby True HD decoding. My Toshiba decodes those for me and sends them via HDMI to the receiver as a multi-channel PCM feed. Do all current Blu-ray players do this decoding and send it to the receiver in full multi-channel feed or do I need to drop more money on a new receiver? I guess when I look at Blu-ray players my mind goes numb. You have profile 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, you have some that appear to decode and some that don't. I guess I am looking for a simple solution in Blu-ray just like HD DVD offered.

I have no doubt that some of these issues will get resolved in the next year and hopefully prices will begin to come down. I'll admit when I make a mistake and live with it. I am sure I will be ridiculed from a few for supporting HD DVD and Toshiba. Even though I still think that Toshiba makes good consumer electronics and I still don't like Sony consumer electronics. I will buy a Blu-ray player, but it won't be a Sony!

 

[cmvsm]

Personally, I could care less who 'wins' the format battle. I have a Toshiba A35 HD-DVD Player AND a Sony PS3. I got 10 free movies with my HD-DVD player and also have some of the exclusives like Transformers and Black Hawk Down, both of which are stunning. With free movies factored in, I bought my HD-DVD player for $100, and will continue to buy exclusive movies for it.

If one format does win anytime soon, it will be quite a while before HD-DVD or Blu-Ray discs are filtered through online or at brick and mortar retailers. Why not simply have both? If the format war is ended by one or the other, do you really think that the previously released exclusive movies on one format or the other are immediately going to hit the market? I highly doubt it. So, if you have a Blu-Ray player, it will still be quite some time before you'll see a copy of Transformers or Black Hawk Down. If it happens to be HD-DVD as the winner, then I have movies AND a great video game system.

Paramount and Universal are the big boys on the block in terms of great NEW movie releases, and they are all HD-DVD. The porn industry is also in HD-DVD's corner. Its gonna take a lot of the smaller studios to make up for at least one of those heavies, given that Paramount and WB are a wash. So I wouldn't count them out just yet.

But again, who cares? ;-)

 

[ocifersven]

But I don't see how a disc that is lower capacity can claim to have the same video output as one that is higher capacity.

Explain how that is nonsense.

Both formats use the same codecs as well as the same resolution. Quality could be slightly greater or lesser from there. But not enough to justify 10 extra gigs (per layer). So the file sizes are going to be roughly the same in the end. The only thing one would be able to gain from there is more bonus features from the extra space. But I'm not one to watch many of those.

As "bigbossbmb" stated earlier in this forum, 12-bit color will be able to take up that extra Blu-Ray space. But as it stands right now, both formats utilize practically the same file size.

And as I've said earlier, the biggest issue between the two formats is cross-compatibility with Sun's BD-J found in Blu-Ray players & Microsoft's HDi found in HD-DVD players, as the hardware technology isn't terribly different. That's why there's a fistful of problems found in dual-format players. So, fingers crossed, both Sun & Microsoft can come to an agreement to let the two co-exist in the same units to allow for both discs to be read, so no consumer loses. Blu-HD would be the ideal way to go, so no consumer has to worry much.

Toshiba would be wise at this point to start making this kind of leap towards a Blu-HD solution, and rallying others to do the same. That way, Paramount and Universal don't have to suffer in their decisions, further tarnishing Toshiba's credibility. I love HD-DVD, as most of you have probably gathered. But there is such an easy solution to all of this. A truce needs to be made and an agreement for player manufacturers to support both formats fully. It's just that time. Of course, I use the word "easy" loosely.

Hopefully, Microsoft won't be huge pricks about letting Blu-Ray players use HDi.

 

[AidenShaw]

Both formats use the same codecs as well as the same resolution. Quality could be slightly greater or lesser from there. But not enough to justify 10 extra gigs (per layer). So the file sizes are going to be roughly the same in the end.

I'm sorry, but this is complete BS.

Just like an MP3 can be encoded from 64Kbps (complete crap) to 320 Kbps (pretty close to the original CD) - a movie in any given encoding can have its bitrate and quality adjusted.

Since BD has much higher bitrate (and capacity), it's possible for a video of the same resolution to have much better quality on a BD - if the engineers decide to do that. On an HD-DVD, it's much more likely that the bitrate (which means quality) will have to be lowered to allow for a given set of extras.

Your post is based on a fundamentally flawed assumption - that resolution and bitrate (and indirectly quality) are the same thing. They are not. Two movies of the same resolution can be very different in quality.

BD's higher bitrate (as well as higher capacity) means that it is less likely that quality comprimises will need to be made to fit a certain number of minutes of movies and extras on a disc.

Blu-HD would be the ideal way to go, so no consumer has to worry much.

Interesting idea - but as others have said "Blu-ray" is far, far better a marketing name than some random set of letters that need to be spelled out.

The converged product should be called "Blu-ray 2" if it happens....

 

[ocifersven]

I'm sorry, but this is complete BS.

Just like an MP3 can be encoded from 64Kbps (complete crap) to 320 Kbps (pretty close to the original CD) - a movie in any given encoding can have its bitrate and quality adjusted.

Since BD has much higher bitrate (and capacity), it's possible for a video of the same resolution to have much better quality on a BD - if the engineers decide to do that. On an HD-DVD, it's much more likely that the bitrate (which means quality) will have to be lowered to allow for a given set of extras.

Your post is based on a fundamentally flawed assumption - that resolution and bitrate (and indirectly quality) are the same thing. They are not. Two movies of the same resolution can be very different in quality.

BD's higher bitrate (as well as higher capacity) means that it is less likely that quality comprimises will need to be made to fit a certain number of minutes of movies and extras on a disc.

Prove it. Because I work in the field. HD-DVD fully utilizes it's 30GB. Blu-Ray traditionally has only been using a practical 25GB, although this has recently been changing. The compression is roughly the same.

Your assumption is just that, an assumption. Your statement is based purely on "possibilities," "probabilities," & "likelihoods." Your statement has merit, as VBR's can be a factor. But your skepticism is not accurate either, big guy.

To most of the unbiased video watchers I show this stuff to, HD-DVD just seems to look better to everyone. Not by a lot. But just better, on my Vizio 47" 1080P LCD. This will change, as Blu-Ray has yet to reach its maximum potential. But right now, in video land, my klan of video editors just think that HD-DVD looks better, from a side by side comparison (I'm a video dork, I know - to have HD parties and all... ugh). And I know from my fellow DVD authors, that the compression between the two formats don't differ much.

 

[ocifersven]

I'm sorry, but this is complete BS.

Just like an MP3 can be encoded from 64Kbps (complete crap) to 320 Kbps (pretty close to the original CD) - a movie in any given encoding can have its bitrate and quality adjusted.

Since BD has much higher bitrate (and capacity), it's possible for a video of the same resolution to have much better quality on a BD - if the engineers decide to do that. On an HD-DVD, it's much more likely that the bitrate (which means quality) will have to be lowered to allow for a given set of extras.

Your post is based on a fundamentally flawed assumption - that resolution and bitrate (and indirectly quality) are the same thing. They are not. Two movies of the same resolution can be very different in quality.

BD's higher bitrate (as well as higher capacity) means that it is less likely that quality comprimises will need to be made to fit a certain number of minutes of movies and extras on a disc.




Interesting idea - but as others have said "Blu-ray" is far, far better a marketing name than some random set of letters that need to be spelled out.

The converged product should be called "Blu-ray 2" if it happens....

Oh SNAP!!! Check this new Samsung player out (www.soundandvisionmag.com). Hopefully, this will carry out a new standard for some time now.

And finally, I just wanted to state that I'm done on this topic, never looking at this particular forum post again. Me included, this topic is filled too much with "nuh-uh's" and "yuh-huh's." Fact of the matter is, no one here is an expert on the subject. It's all opinions made from people who've invested thousands of dollars on a certain format, so far, and get a little butt-hurt when the subject is discussed as it were a religion or political party. And then there's people that haven't made the HD leap as of yet who made neutral statements, such as atheists. This arguement will never settle, and I'm done making my points.

So have fun carrying on. I'm out. I think I'll go out and buy that new Samsung Hybrid.

 

[Cleverboy]

Interesting idea - but as others have said "Blu-ray" is far, far better a marketing name than some random set of letters that need to be spelled out.

HD DVD started out with a somewhat serious name problem that became exacerbated by their "hybrid" disc feature. I know I for one wasn't looking forward to the constant questions around format. Ask for "Blu-Ray disc" and you know what you're getting right away. Ask for "HD DVD" and you run into 3 possible outcomes: 1.) The salesperson didn't hear you say "HD" and you wait for the misunderstanding to surface before you get relevant information. 2.) They think you're talking about Blu-Ray discs. 3.) They actually get it right, and describe the messy situation when you make it clear you're looking for Lost Season 3... and they can't help you.

Oh SNAP!!! Check this new Samsung player out (www.soundandvisionmag.com). Hopefully, this will carry out a new standard for some time now.

No. Hopefully it will just be a transitional measure until contracts expire and Blu-Ray discs are issued for all movies. Sorry to say (if you think for some reason 2 formats are heaven, "just because").

~ CB

 

[stompy]

Without a chance of rebuttal, the ONLY way your story would have had any credibility is if you at least commented on the model of HD DVD and Blu-Ray and MOST importantly, the model of televisions used on each (with extra points for the name of the content being viewed). Because you simply confined your testimony to "which looked better @ Best Buy" it is pretty clear that your opinion is entirely subjective, anecdotal, and ultimately irrelevant for the purpose of giving any degree of objective perspective on the issue. Sorry.

~ CB

A little harsh. For anyone seriously reading up on the two formats, if you don't follow the Dan Ramer at dvdfile, you're missing out. For example...

 

[Cleverboy]

A little harsh. For anyone seriously reading up on the two formats, if you don't follow the Dan Ramer at dvdfile, you're missing out. For example...

Don't read it harsh. If I said, "I just went to check out the latest VCRs at Best Buy and just by looking at the picture, I can tell that Panasonic is better than Toshiba. The picture is so much better!" I would call my own assessment irrelevant, and list the same reasons. It was kind of a long self-assured post to be so wrong-headed, don't you think? Meh.

~ CB

 

[wiseguy]

Pleasure for the eyes...

With my PS3 and my projector, it's giving me a 100'' widescreen picture. Of course I can't watch regular SD picture so I also have an HD cable converter for HDTV football and hockey games. Concerning my regular DVD's, the up-conversion of the PS3 to 1080P is great if you have recent movies (I was watching Blade Runner (1982) lately and I will have to buy the new BluRay version). If you go HDMI all the way, the sound is great and the HD Picture is just amazing. Just looking forward to buy a BluRay burner. I'm having a Super Bowl Party this year... hoooo yeahhhhhh

 

[ipodG8TR]

They do

I'm not buying any kind of hi-def DVD player until everyone is either using the same format or dual-standard players come out for $500 or less.

Do all blu-ray disks have subtitles that work over HDMI? Someone out there must know.

Sony was selling their Blu-ray player for $299 over the holidays. It came with Spiderman3 and you got another 5 titles free.

It won't be long before the prices drop to $199!

 

[Blogger]

No BD/ HD DVD battle material here, but as an aside, just before Christmas I bought a Sony Blu-Ray machine and a 1080p Sony TV to match, and I really don't see what all the fuss is about.

Is it nicer than SD TV (which was always complete crap), well yes, but that's hardly difficult. Is it completely stunning and a window onto the world? No, not by a long shot. I'd like to see at least twice the resolution and a hell of a lot less compression.

I don't think I'll really be happy until they have infinite resolution holographic 3D displays using the new twelve foot wide Blu-Ray 7 disks.

I'm clearing space in my spare room in anticipation....

 

[SheriffParker]

With my PS3 and my projector, it's giving me a 100'' widescreen picture. Of course I can't watch regular SD picture so I also have an HD cable converter for HDTV football and hockey games. Concerning my regular DVD's, the up-conversion of the PS3 to 1080P is great if you have recent movies (I was watching Blade Runner (1982) lately and I will have to buy the new BluRay version). If you go HDMI all the way, the sound is great and the HD Picture is just amazing. Just looking forward to buy a BluRay burner. I'm having a Super Bowl Party this year... hoooo yeahhhhhh

Sweet.

 

[seashellz2]

Im seeing all these "10 BR titles for a Dollar" ads....and the prices of players are being prematurely slashed-that cant be a good sign.
I know Xmas sales in general were poor. Tons of overstock and unmoved inventory.
I think they are both going down the toilet-along with the economy-2008 is NOT the right time to be launching a new chi-chi media. A place to live, food on the table and gas in the car is now or soon will be a far higher priority to MANY-When the next 800,000 ARMS reset this Spring-at 14% and people mail house keys back to Mortgage Companies by the truckload (grimly called "Jingle Mail")and walk away-as hundreds of thousands have already-and CITI bank finally admits that its $1 trillion in "assets" are actually $1 trillion in "non-performing loans" and fraudulent financial "instruments" TSWHTF-and SONY, who are already hemmoraging money badly-will wish they had stuck with S DVD.

Physical Digital media is at a saturation point-S-DVD is slowly dropping in % for a reason-and HD is not taking up the slack...

take a look around you

 

[angrynrdrckr]

score... i own a ps3 anyway