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

[Shua]

people have been ranting against region codes on DVDs for years. that's one of the reasons why HD DVDs lack of provisions for region coding is so attractive.

This didn't stop DVD from becoming a standard and the defacto source for Movies over the last 8+ years? Nope. So now you can import from North and South America, Hong Kong, and Japan. So Thats better then nothing. Its better then DVDs. Personally I would have loved to import movies from the UK as its most of my TV watching. But I can wait for BBC to get off the fence and start releasing on Blu-Ray.

first of all, i hate the fact that blu-ray functionality (and DRM) is a moving target.

As codes get cracked they want to keep new movies from being copied. I don't frankly care as most people would rip movies will lose Lossless Audio and 7.1 surround sound. The companies are out to make money. You go to a job to make money. You would be pissed off if somebody took your work and you didn't get a paycheck.

Does the "Moving DRM Target" impact your viewing of the Movie? Nope.

I decided a long time ago that i wasn't going to base hardware decisions based on features that weren't available when make a purchase. too often these "upcoming features" aren't implemented.

You are so right. I can say that most of the people viewing movies won't give a rats about watching the directors talk about movies with PiP. Maybe Kevin Smith, as we are normally getting drunk, but still. But even then the common man won't care. A Profile 1.0 (Which is every BluRay player sold so far) will cover 90% of all movie watches. These are additional features not core moving watching. I'm happy watching my 1080p in 110" and it looks fantastic! I bought a PS3 for movie watching and don't care if I ever get any games for it, it is hands down the best sub $500.00 Blu-Ray player out right now.

Oh and has all the Hard Drive and an Ethernet Port to make it Profile 2.0 Upgradable as they did with 1.1. So I'm future proof already.

 

[MikeTheC]

I'm happy watching my 1080p in 110" and it looks fantastic!

I'd say "Well, I'm happy with my 27" RCA ProScan," (it is a true statement that I'm not unhappy with it) but I hardly ever use a TV. I actually get more TV viewing done (and I'm laughing as I type this) during lunch hour on days I work (that is, if I actually look up and pay attention to the TV set) than I do at any other time in my life.

In other news, it's weird to see the various TV anchors I used to watch as a kid look so old now. When did they get all that gray hair, put on weight, get wrinkles, etc.?

 

[thederby]

Redeemed themselves??? BETA-MAX did not go out as fast as HD-DVD will. BETA-MAX was used for a while mainly in the professional field. I think they lost the consumers market because it was more expensive then VHS. Also don't forget that SONY invented CDs and DVDs in conjunction with Phillips of course

I think it's because Sony made BetaMax proprietary and they wanted to license it to everyone else. It was actually better quality (I had a HiFi BetaMax machine).

the 60 minute of BETA vs the 120-240 minute capacity of VHS didn't help their case.

 

[thederby]

This didn't stop DVD from becoming a standard and the defacto source for Movies over the last 8+ years? Nope. So now you can import from North and South America, Hong Kong, and Japan. So Thats better then nothing. Its better then DVDs. Personally I would have loved to import movies from the UK as its most of my TV watching. But I can wait for BBC to get off the fence and start releasing on Blu-Ray.

no, but what was the competition at the time? lower quality VHS and overly-restricted DIVX.

 

[gkarris]

the 60 minute of BETA vs the 120-240 minute capacity of VHS didn't help their case.

Correction for you...

L-750's were 90 (BI), 180 (BII), and 270 (BII) minutes...

T-120's were 120 (SP), 240 (LP), and 360 (EP or SLP) minutes...

The middle of the road L-500 were the 60 minutes in BI...

 

[Shua]

no, but what was the competition at the time? lower quality VHS and overly-restricted DIVX.

Wikipedia - DVD

In 1993, two high-density optical storage standards were being developed; one was the MultiMedia Compact Disc, backed by Philips and Sony, and the other was the Super Density disc, supported by Toshiba, Time Warner, Matsushita Electric, Hitachi, Mitsubishi Electric, Pioneer, Thomson, and JVC. IBM's president, Lou Gerstner, acting as a matchmaker, led an effort to unite the two camps behind a single standard, anticipating a repeat of the costly videotape format war between VHS and Betamax in the 1980s.

Philips and Sony abandoned their MultiMedia Compact Disc and fully agreed upon Toshiba's SuperDensity Disc with only one modification, namely changing to EFMPlus modulation. EFMPlus was chosen as it has a great resilience against disc damage such as scratches and fingerprints. EFMPlus, created by Kees Immink, who also designed EFM, is 6% less efficient than the modulation technique originally used by Toshiba, which resulted in a capacity of 4.7 GB as opposed to the original 5 GB. The result was the DVD specification, finalized for the DVD movie player and DVD-ROM computer applications in December 1995.[1] In May 1997, the DVD Consortium was replaced by the DVD Forum, which is open to all other companies.

MMCD was the other disc that was competing for the title of VHS killer. We had the same format war 15 years earlier but over time people forget. In five years people will tilt their head and look at you funny when you say HD-DVD. One format means less issues with acceptance, now if George wouldn't keep pissing off people that remembered that Hon Shot First! We could help restore our childhood memories. I just pray he doesn't try and put the "fixed" version on the Blu-Ray when its released in 2014!

 

[maxvamp]

Correction for you...

L-750's were 90 (BI), 180 (BII), and 270 (BII) minutes...

T-120's were 120 (SP), 240 (LP), and 360 (EP or SLP) minutes...

The middle of the road L-500 were the 60 minutes in BI...

Don't forget the L-830, which gave 5 hours at BIII!! They were easier to find than the T-160 that gave VHS 8 hours recording.

I feel old.

Max.

 

[TMay]

W/the PS3 only a year old I'd be very surprised if it was close to the break-even point let alone turning profitable.


Lethal

Thought that I would add this as a general reference:

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jan2008/gb2008018_681920.htm

From the article:

"Nikko Citigroup's Kota Ezawa estimates the games division will lose $1.4 billion this fiscal year, following last year's $2.1 billion loss. And while he doesn't expect the business to be prosperous until late 2009, Ezawa applauds Sony's efforts to shrink the PS3's chips and tweak its design. Already such changes have cut the cost per machine to around $400 now, from above $800 just before it went on sale in November, 2006, he says. (The PS3 with an 80-gigabyte hard-disk drive retails in the U.S."

 

[DakotaGuy]

I think it's because Sony made BetaMax proprietary and they wanted to license it to everyone else. It was actually better quality (I had a HiFi BetaMax machine).

At the beginning it was better quality, however in 1985 JVC upgraded the specs to VHS HQ and HQ matched Betamax for picture quality.

 

[Flynnstone]

Beta and VHS are physically incompatible.

CD, DVD, HD-DVD, Bluray are physically compatible.
So hopefully in a year or two we can have a Super Super drive that can read & write all those formats for $100.

 

[Shua]

CD, DVD, Bluray are physically compatible.
So hopefully in a year or two we can have a Super Super drive that can read & write all those formats for $100.

I agree.

 

[mrgreen4242]

If the HDDVD folks would embrace 3xDVD and start selling cheap ($12-15) 720p movies on plain old DVD9 and released a $79 player, and got MS to release a patch for the 360 to support 3x from the main 360 DVD drive, they would overtake BR in 6 months.

Most HD TVs being sold are still 720p, most of the ones out there already are 720p or 1080i. That's going to continue to be the trend for some time to come. MOST people want <$500 32" 720p LCD TVs, <$100 HD movie players, and <$20 HD movies. Most people aren't buying 7.1 surround systems, they're lucky to be putting in <$200 5.1 speakers.

We, the consumer, DON'T need HD DVD or Blu Ray. What we want is an affordable upgrade to DVD.

 

[Nugget]

We, the consumer, DON'T need HD DVD or Blu Ray. What we want is an affordable upgrade to DVD.

Speak for yourself. I don't want some half-assed 720p solution and, frankly, HD-DVD is (was?) affordable and Blu-Ray is almost there.

 

[RaceTripper]

Most HD TVs being sold are still 720p, most of the ones out there already are 720p or 1080i. That's going to continue to be the trend for some time to come. MOST people want <$500 32" 720p LCD TVs, <$100 HD movie players, and <$20 HD movies. Most people aren't buying 7.1 surround systems, they're lucky to be putting in <$200 5.1 speakers.

We, the consumer, DON'T need HD DVD or Blu Ray. What we want is an affordable upgrade to DVD.

I think within a couple years 720p TVs will become more rare and 1080p will be more mainstream.

I'm not one of the consumers you say you speak for. I'd rather we just get on with BD and not muddy the waters again.

 

[mrgreen4242]

Speak for yourself. I don't want some half-assed 720p solution and, frankly, HD-DVD is (was?) affordable and Blu-Ray is almost there.

I think within a couple years 720p TVs will become more rare and 1080p will be more mainstream.

I'm not one of the consumers you say you speak for. I'd rather we just get on with BD and not muddy the waters again.

First, people here on this board are a poor sample of average consumers. We're the types willing to drop $1500+ on a new computer, as opposed to $500 for a Dell.

There's nothing half-assed about about 720p. Fox, ABC, and ESPN all broadcast in 720p and it looks fine.

1080p might become more common in a couple years, but 720p isn't going anywhere. Walmart will still sell them and people will still buy them because they are cheap and look GOOD. Even if there were more 1080p sets being sold than 720p in a couple years, there's still going to be years and years worth of sales of 720p sets out there, making up the majority of TVs.

You know what brand sells the most HDTV? Vizio. They make low prices, decent quality sets, and they move a lot of product through Walmart.

Now, the argument of BD or HDDVD looking better than a 720p 3xDVD would is non-existent. There's no doubt that with the right set you would see the difference. However most people simply don't nor will anytime soon have a 1080p TV. On that set, you're not going to see much, if any, difference.

What you will see is much cheaper discs, which is in the end the biggest deciding factor for most people (if it wasn't we would have all bought 1080p TVs and BD players and a bunch of $30 movies already).

Finally, the reason I'm not keen on seeing BD succeed is that I can see where this is going and why the studios wanted it to win form the start. The discs are expensive to produce at the moment, which accounts for a lot of the current very high price. Once people get used to paying that rate, and the manufacturing costs drop THEY WILL NOT DISCOUNT THE DISCS and profits will be higher.

We know this is true because it happened with the VHS to DVD switch and the tape to CD switch as well. They promised that once the technology got cheaper we, as consumers, would see lower prices. That never happened. This is simply a push to make sure we're paying $30 for a $2 package in 3 or 4 years (as opposed to the $15-20 we're paying now for a $1 package).

 

[tbobmccoy]

First, people here on this board are a poor sample of average consumers. We're the types willing to drop $1500+ on a new computer, as opposed to $500 for a Dell.

There's nothing half-assed about about 720p. Fox, ABC, and ESPN all broadcast in 720p and it looks fine.

1080p might become more common in a couple years, but 720p isn't going anywhere. Walmart will still sell them and people will still buy them because they are cheap and look GOOD. Even if there were more 1080p sets being sold than 720p in a couple years, there's still going to be years and years worth of sales of 720p sets out there, making up the majority of TVs.

You know what brand sells the most HDTV? Vizio. They make low prices, decent quality sets, and they move a lot of product through Walmart.

Now, the argument of BD or HDDVD looking better than a 720p 3xDVD would is non-existent. There's no doubt that with the right set you would see the difference. However most people simply don't nor will anytime soon have a 1080p TV. On that set, you're not going to see much, if any, difference.

What you will see is much cheaper discs, which is in the end the biggest deciding factor for most people (if it wasn't we would have all bought 1080p TVs and BD players and a bunch of $30 movies already).

Finally, the reason I'm not keen on seeing BD succeed is that I can see where this is going and why the studios wanted it to win form the start. The discs are expensive to produce at the moment, which accounts for a lot of the current very high price. Once people get used to paying that rate, and the manufacturing costs drop THEY WILL NOT DISCOUNT THE DISCS and profits will be higher.

We know this is true because it happened with the VHS to DVD switch and the tape to CD switch as well. They promised that once the technology got cheaper we, as consumers, would see lower prices. That never happened. This is simply a push to make sure we're paying $30 for a $2 package in 3 or 4 years (as opposed to the $15-20 we're paying now for a $1 package).

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner.

This is exactly the same idea studios have with digital downloads. There's no reason in the world it should cost more than $10 for a digital download of a movie, hell, it should be CHEAPER, since there's no need to have pressing production, and right now, they aren't cutting the writers in at all on it. Studios are all greedy corporate entities... and they wonder why piracy prevails the industry

 

[RaceTripper]

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner.

This is exactly the same idea studios have with digital downloads. There's no reason in the world it should cost more than $10 for a digital download of a movie, hell, it should be CHEAPER, since there's no need to have pressing production, and right now, they aren't cutting the writers in at all on it. Studios are all greedy corporate entities... and they wonder why piracy prevails the industry

I am with idea of downloading movies for purchase, but if it's crippled by DRM I won't buy it. I'll rent if it's cheap enough, but otherwise I don't trust that I'll always be able to play it, even in the near future (didn't MLB screw people out of previously purchased video when it changed DRM authentication). At least with a hardware device and physical media I can always play it as long as my hardware isn't in disrepair. For the same reason I have never bought from iTunes and never will as long as any part of it has DRM.

 

[Shua]

If you are happy with 720p and Digital downloads feel free to continue to support your studios in the proper fashion.

I personally enjoy 1080p and have no problems with the Blu-Ray group. I think too many have there noses bent out of shape because everybody relates Sony = Blu-Ray

The consortium is 18 companies, not one.

Apple Inc.
Dell
Hewlett Packard
Hitachi
LG Electronics
Mitsubishi Electric
Panasonic (Matsushita Electric)
Pioneer Corporation
Royal Philips Electronics
Samsung Electronics
Sharp Corporation
Sony Corporation
Sun Microsystems
TDK Corporation
Thomson
Twentieth Century Fox
Walt Disney Motion Pictures Group / Buena Vista Home Entertainment
Warner Home Video Inc.

Sony and Pioneer created the standard media that is Blu-Ray but no one company, no matter who, controls it.

DRM was created to try and protect the movies & studios (and music) but in the end they only protect honest people who purchase them. No matter what people will work to break the DRM. It’s a cat & mouse game as far as the people wanting to bypass purchasing the media. For the people who decide to purchase media what does DRM do for them? Nothing. What does it hurt? Nothing. In the end it should not be an issue.

Pirating movies hurts the studios but sadly it doesn't hurt the artist nearly as much as the studios would have you believe as Radiohead has proven with "In Rainbows". They made more money off of the digital downloads of the album in MP3 then ALL the albums they released through the Studio systems. I believe they are leading the revolution and we shall see other people start doing the same. The average of the people who paid only paid about $10.00 USD for the album. Many more paid nothing, but the people who did pay, it went to the artist and not the studios as they decide to cut up way too much of our favorite artists music that we purchase. Movies sadly are a whole different problem unless you want to do almost everything yourself for $27,575.00.

 

[DMann]

Cheaper

Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner.

This is exactly the same idea studios have with digital downloads. There's no reason in the world it should cost more than $10 for a digital download of a movie, hell, it should be CHEAPER, since there's no need to have pressing production, and right now, they aren't cutting the writers in at all on it. Studios are all greedy corporate entities... and they wonder why piracy prevails the industry

In addition, the studios will also claim that the $10 charge is compensation for the loss due to torrent downloads. They'll justify inflated prices anyway they can.

 

[aristotle]

@Shua: Actually it was Sony and Panasonic (Matsushita Electric) but close enough.

As for region codes, you all need to start using that little google search field in your safari browser.

List of Region A and B titles and whether they are region locked.
http://bluray.liesinc.net/

I bought Scary Movie 4, Bruce Almighty and Starship Troopers from sendit.com (Region B) and they all playback on my Region A PS3.

List of recent titles that are region free:
Rock, the [US] (Region A) (Region Free)
Con Air [US] (Region A) (Region Free)
King of California [US] (Region A) (Region Free)
Good Luck Chuck (Unrated) [US] (Region A) (Region Free)
Queen: Rock Montreal & Live Aid [US] (Region A) (Region Free)
John Legend - Live at the House of Blues [US] (Region A) (Region Free)
Pan's Labyrinth [US] (Region A) (Region Free)
Pixar Short Films Collection [NO] (Region B) (Region Free)
3:10 To Yuma [US] (Region A) (Region Free)
War [US] (Region A) (Region Free)
Invasion, the [US] (Region A) (Region Free)
Resident Evil: Extinction [US] Sony (Region Free)
Resident Evil: the Trilogy [US] Sony (Region Free)

 

[MRU]

^ The general stance Sony are taking is that they are allowing the studios to decide whether or not to implement region coding.

Sony themselves and many others are following this basic principal

If the film has finished it's theatrical release (worldwide) then they will proceed to release the film region free

Should a film still be on theatrical release in another territory whilst it's gearing for release on BD in another, then they will incorporate region coding.



That link is the best site to check before purchasing your disc if you are unsure. I imagine in time however we will eventually see first modded, then hacked, then remote hacked blu-ray players - just as we did with dvd to allow multi-region playback.

 

[megfilmworks]

At the beginning it was better quality, however in 1985 JVC upgraded the specs to VHS HQ and HQ matched Betamax for picture quality.

Betamax was not about picture quality.
Betamax comes in many flavors and is still widely used in the pro field today; Digi betamax.
It was about the tape configuration and cartridge design.
It lost out to consumers because it was too high quality and slightly more expensive.
Proprietary issues had little to do with it. Phillips who developed the audio cassette (one of the most successful formats ever) received a royalty on every cassette sold and that didn't stop its runaway success.

 

[Cleverboy]

Yes HD has none. DVDs have 9 (YES NINE) So are you also willing to rant about DVDs? Okay..

Go back and read my posts. I wasn't ranting. Someone asked me a question, you silly goose. You have to be careful you don't become a Blu-Ray apologist. I like Blu-Ray. Even your manic rebuttals acknowledged I wasn't inaccurate. My basic statement that someone asked me to be more specific on... was that HD DVD was simply made to be more consumer friendly while Blu-Ray was designed to be more studio-friendly. Big whoop. It's not an indictment. I'm hopeful that Blu-Ray will adapt more, as I've NEVER planned to EVER get HD DVD, but have tentative plans to pick up a PS3 in the future. They seem to be working towards being so, to the degree that they still can.

~ CB

 

[Macaroni Joe]

Adult filmmakers going with HDDVD..so far

I've read in several places before that what pushed VHS over the top in the tape format war was the fact that adult filmmakers had to go with VHS. Sony didn't want to be connected with them via the huge copying houses. Well, unless Sony changes it's tune, it might well happen again in this format war. Check out this video taped by G4TV at the Adult Entertainment Expo (which was right next door to this years CES in Vegas).
http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/672773/AdultFilm_Director_Talks_BluRay.html

 

[gkarris]

^ The general stance Sony are taking is that they are allowing the studios to decide whether or not to implement region coding.

Sony themselves and many others are following this basic principal

If the film has finished it's theatrical release (worldwide) then they will proceed to release the film region free

Should a film still be on theatrical release in another territory whilst it's gearing for release on BD in another, then they will incorporate region coding.



That link is the best site to check before purchasing your disc if you are unsure. I imagine in time however we will eventually see first modded, then hacked, then remote hacked blu-ray players - just as we did with dvd to allow multi-region playback.

and the minute the format war is over (which it is about to be), then Blu-ray will be turning "on" the region encoding as well as the constraint token for ALL releases...