dainthomas
Lifer
- Dec 7, 2004
- 14,913
- 3,892
- 136
One thing I've wondered is if every studio released both formats, which one would most people adopt? I wish the exclusive studio deals weren't dragging this out.
HD-DVD versus Blu-Ray: The Format War (old)
- Thread starter Schadenfroh
- Start date
- Mar 8, 2003
- 38,416
- 4
- 0
I am, quite frankly, shocked to see HD DVD with a 42/58 split this week. That is quite good considering HD DVD really hasn't had that many big releases as of late(ultimatum being about the only one...but that was released at the END of this reporting week). We'll see what happens in the coming weeks once Bourne is included.
Born2bwire
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2005
- 9,840
- 6
- 71
Whatever is the cheapest I would think beyond any superficial first impressions of Toshiba vs. Sony. With HD DVD now having a triple layer 51 GB disc, there is no difference between the two media from the consumer's perspective. They can hold the same amount of data, they use the same compression and support the same audio formats barring minor differences that I doubt most consumers are aware of let alone care about.
Blu-Ray 50gb discs are $30+ a peice, and even the 25gb discs are $15+, so I really doubt there are a whole lot of people even considering this as an option at this point. Nor is it even a relevant point in the format discussion (until the price on media drops to a point where people will use them in any real quantity)
The triple layer 51gb HD DVD does not exist in the consumer market, and is questionable at best if it ever will be used for movies. Just like the quad-layer 100gb Blu-ray disc exists in labs but not in the consumer market.
dvd-r's were $30 each ~7 years ago.
But the main point is that they exist now. This is the bigger difference between HD DVD and Blu-ray, Blu-ray is already an infrastructure, covering movies, games, data storage, camcorders, cable/satellite/broadcast dvrs. These products exist today. HD DVD is targetting movies alone.
That's my point. Dual-layer DVD-rs never caught on either because they were expensive so they don't factor into any equation either. If blank BD or HD-DVD discs ever hit a reasonable pricepoint then you could certainly make an argument that they could help sway one's decision on which format to use, but right now, they're just not a factor at all because of the extreme niche market for them.
Makes you wonder what will happen once either side runs out of blockbuster releases to keep their sales ratio's up. Then we go back to the norm and well it is getting interesting. Obviously stand alone players are making a dent on Blu's lead. Though I believe the ratio was actually 58-42 in Blu's favor.
Like I said in ~Sept. All HD-DVD has to do is move about 7 points up which is a 14 point swing and they would be within a stones throw of Blu Ray. 58-42 in an uneventual week is 2 points from accomplishing this. And this is only 3 months after I said it. Should be interesting to see how many HD-DVD players are opened for Christmas and the what effect that will have on movie sales in Jan\Feb.
Most people when they buy movies dont weigh the options of writing to a 30 dollar 50GB disc. The computer enthusiasts who will use BluRay or HD-DVD for data backup is a very very very small nich market. You also wont see them used in the corp envviornment as tape is so much cheaper and easier to use.
Eug
Lifer
- Mar 11, 2000
- 24,052
- 1,685
- 126
It's not size, but what you do with it.
It should be noted that one of the main original reasons for 50 GB was that 50 GB was needed for MPEG2. However, that became a moot point once VC-1 and H.264 became mandatory codecs (for both HD formats).
A format is not defined only by its storage space, but how well it is implemented. HD DVD mandates a second video decoder, for features such has true picture-in-picture commentaries. Early standalone Blu-ray players (some of which are still on sale) do not support this basic feature, which mean that such special features simply wouldn't work. I think that's just lame. Can you imagine getting a shiny new Blu-ray player on Xmas day, only to find out that the extras on the disc you buy in January just don't work and never will?
This is not an issue on the HD DVD side: ALL HD DVD players must have a second video decoder. ALL HD DVD players must have extra memory. ALL HD DVD players must have a network jack. ALL HD DVD players must be able to decode Dolby TrueHD.
Furthermore, on the manufacturing side, HD DVD replication is much easier. HD DVD replication is just an extension of DVD replication, but with tighter tolerances. The cost to upgrade an existing DVD line to HD DVD replication usually is not large. You can also purpose a line to do both HD DVD and DVD replication if you wish. OTOH, Blu-ray replication requires brand new equipment, and getting it up and running well is not always that easy, especially if you're talking about BD50. This is evidenced by the fact that HD DVD had HD30 out running at full tilt since day one, whereas even today, getting BD50s replicated is a major problem. BD50 is done only at a very few replication plants in the world.
Personally, I think HD DVD has the better implementation for movies. Blu-ray has the storage advantage, but I think that advantage is mainly on the burner side. 25 GB single-layer discs would be good for data backups. However, in terms of a viable commercial movie optical disc format, I think HD DVD is better designed overall.
I do think it's rather unfortunate that it took so long to get all that worked out, but the market is still very small and in the long run none of that will matter. And, really, I don't even know anyone that gives a damn about the extras anyway. I haven't bothered looking at them since the first couple of DVDs I purchased years ago. And I keep hearing how prices for producing HD-DVDs is cheaper, but that's certainly not evident at retail. Even ignoring the higher priced combo HD-DVDs, the prices are basically the same. And, again, in the long run the cost difference to produce either will close. So, IMO, I'd rather have BR win out. In the long run the extra space will be the last remaining meaningful difference and more space is better.
Eug
Lifer
- Mar 11, 2000
- 24,052
- 1,685
- 126
Well, I guess part of the reason it's important for me is cuz I actually often watch the extras. Not all of them of course, but many of them.
And it would appear I am not alone. We were told directly by executives from both Warner Canada and Universal Canada that they view extras as a strong weapon against piracy (because people buy discs for the extras), and a strong instrument for extracting even more money from its customers (because people buy special editions instead of basic versions). (Well, they didn't exactly use that terminology, but you get the idea.
)They said that for movies that they release with a basic version and a special edition at the same time, often they sell almost as many of the special edition version, even if the special edition just has the exact same movie but more extras. For some movies the SE versions don't sell as well but like I said, for some they sell extremely well. Obviously, somebody is buying these discs.
Furthermore, Universal Canada told us that the average Canadian watches about 45 minutes of extras for a movie... even when they just rent the disc... according to their surveys. I'm not sure how applicable Canadian surveys are to US customers, but I suspect the result would be similar in the US... which is why we see the studios in the US continue to release tons of special edition versions of discs.
To put it bluntly, this oft-used "Nobody-watches-extras-anyways" argument by some is simply wrong. It's quite true that many people don't watch extras, and it's also true that most people don't watch every single extra on every disc they buy, but nonetheless, extras are a real selling point for many people.
destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
Originally posted by: Eug
Well, I guess part of the reason it's important for me is cuz I actually often watch the extras. Not all of them of course, but many of them.
And it would appear I am not alone. We were told directly by executives from both Warner Canada and Universal Canada that they view extras as a strong weapon against piracy (because people buy discs for the extras), and a strong instrument for extracting even more money from its customers (because people buy special editions instead of basic versions). (Well, they didn't exactly use that terminology, but you get the idea.
They said that for movies that they release with a basic version and a special edition at the same time, often they sell A LOT of the special edition version, even if the special edition just has the exact same movie but more extras. For some movies the SE versions don't sell well, but for many they sell extremely well, and almost as many as the much cheaper basic version. Obviously, somebody is buying these discs.
Furthermore, Universal told us that the average Canadian watches about 45 minutes of extras for a movie... even when they just rent the disc... according to their surveys.
To put it bluntly, this oft-used "Nobody-watches-extras-anyways" argument is simply wrong. It's quite true that many people don't watch extras, and it's also true that most people don't watch every single extra on every disc they buy, but nonetheless, extras are a real selling point as some people do indeed like to watch them.
now, think of how more extras, and how much better those extras would fare, if they stuck to BD and actually took advantage of BD? You get more space to store extras, how can you complain? And when you start adding things like PiP and whatnot, that's definitely going to come into play. Sure, HD DVD has all the super benefits right now, but as Thraxen stated, the HD medium market is in its infancy, and only the early adopters are getting 'screwed'. But guess what, HD DVD is going to be treated just the same in the coming future, if it manages to hang on long enough, because I seriously doubt the 51gb disc will play in current players, and then you got, well honestly I cannot remember the feature atm, but its supposed to render current HD DVD players 'obsolete'. In this day and age, most early adopters realize the products will change and they will end up missing newer features, but the early adopters are merely serving as fodder to help get the format going so that it will reach the mass number of consumers later, and at cheaper prices. The first thing is do 'win' over the other HD format, but that isn't as important as succeeding DVD, and having a single HD format is required before a format can succeed DVD, as right now the general consumer has no clue. The main barriers will continue to be the adoption rate of HDTV's and HD services, and the price of HD hardware and software.
and me? I wouldn't really be all that upset if my PS3 couldn't handle Profile 1.1. my reasoning? I generally don't care about extras, and rarely watch them. Especially when a lot of them are in 480i, then its just a low blow to the HD consumer. And I definitely will dodge PiP... sure, it's a neat feature, if you have the screen real estate and don't have ADD. But seeing as I don't have the screen real estate and I do have ADD; I don't care to sacrifice any of my 32" display and my attention would constantly be shifting between the PiP and main display, and well... I would miss important things.
dainthomas
Lifer
- Dec 7, 2004
- 14,913
- 3,892
- 136
I'd say it's all about Joe Sixpack. All the college kids, gamers, and technophiles on this forum have no problem dropping $4-500 on a PS3. However, the average guy who works a long week and has two or three kids to keep him busy isn't going to spend hours gaming on a PS3. And he isn't going to spend that kind of money to watch a couple movies on the weekend either. If I were Toshiba, I'd spend whatever necessary to get the retail HD-DVD price down to $100. The hardware deficit could be erased real quick.
Eug
Lifer
- Mar 11, 2000
- 24,052
- 1,685
- 126
If TL51 doesn't play in current players, that would be majorly lame, I agree.
It should be noted though that the NEC drive in even the HD-A1 first generation HD DVD player had TL45 compatibility listed right in the manufacturer specs. That I know to be true, because I've seen the specs myself.
Now, this may or may not be true, but the claim is that people going to trade shows have been told that TL51 works on existing players in the lab. However, working in the lab is not the same thing as working in the real-world obviously. Right now they're in the testing phase for TL51 on real-world players.
I am personally guessing that they'll do testing, and then declare it works... and then basically never use it for more than a few discs at most, cuz I see as really just a publicity stunt. And one of the reasons I think it's just a publicity stunt is because even if it is declared to work I betcha it will not work as well. The reflectivity of the 3rd layer is lower, which statistically means there could be more problems with manufacturing, a problem they'll not want to deal with very often.
Fortunately, TL51 isn't necessary if VC-1 or H.264 is used, unless the movie is 5 hours long or something, and like I said it negates the manufacturing advantage of HD DVD. TL51 doesn't work on existing DVD lines without some major modifications, it has a comparatively lower yield, and thus it costs a lot more than DL30. The situation of TL51 is similar to DVD-18. Such DVD-18 discs do indeed already exist and have been used for commercial movie releases. However, the yields are low and the disc production cost is high... and it really isn't necessary except for movies like The Stand, which is 6 hours long. (I will also note that the manufacturing methodology for TL51 is very similar to DVD-18, so the analogy is very appropriate here.)
BTW, I agree the biggest barrier for hi-def adoption is the price of hardware and software. Software is priced similarly between the two formats, but right now HD DVD does have the price advantage for standalones. If this persists, even the PS3 won't be able to overcome the price difference. The key for Blu-ray is to lower the price of the PS3 (which they've done and which they need to keep doing in 2008) and to lower the price of standalones as well... but with Profile 1.1 hardware IMO.
The PS3 will get Profile 1.1 very soon. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it's one of the few players that can get upgraded to Profile 2.0 as well... which would add the network jack support for movies, to bring it in line with what HD DVD players can do today.
I never said the ratio was in HD DVD's favor. I said HD DVD so I listed its percentage first in the ratio is all.
I think next week might be very interesting. We might see a 50/50 split from the two formats.
Thanks for playing, please try again soon.
I went out and did my part for the 4Q push today, including buying Alexander Revisited. The movie is split in half and spans two Blu-rays. Thanks to Warner's long commitment not to admit Blu-ray has advantages, they did *not* use a BD50 just so the Blu-ray version is comparable to the HD DVD version which *needed* to be spread across two HD30 discs. 50gb *was* needed on this title.
Last week I picked up Pirates 3, and it is an absolute fantastic picture, the battle in the rain is unbelievably crisp. Disney needed not one, but *two* BD50 discs packaged together. I would be surprised if VC-1 could encode the full movie and the battle be the same detail with 30gb and 30mbps limits.
You've also mentioned you have Battlestar Galactica on order, that set spans *six* HD DVDs. And if you're lucky not to need scratched discs replaced, that makes it a good 180gb used for the release, or 4 BD50 discs. And Blu-ray has the bit-rate to include not only stellar video quality on every movie released, but also ample room to easily add on multiple lossless audio tracks, picture-in-picture, and other coming features next year.
Take a look at these links:
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/releasedates.html
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/releasedates.html
After reading through them, predict again what the trend will be with movie purchases in January and February.
dainthomas
Lifer
- Dec 7, 2004
- 14,913
- 3,892
- 136
Whew, good thing it's a conspiracy and has nothing to do with production costs or other unknown factors. I bet they even snuck subliminal messages into the movie ("HD-DVD RULEZ BLURAY DROOLZ!")
Originally posted by: dainthomas
Whew, good thing it's a conspiracy and has nothing to do with production costs or other unknown factors. I bet they even snuck subliminal messages into the movie ("HD-DVD RULEZ BLURAY DROOLZ!")
That came out weird. Anyways, the point is simply, 30gb is not enough for all movies.
Warner has many releases that are one HD30 for HD DVD, and one BD50 for Blu-ray, including the huge successes The Departed and 300. The two BD25s were used in Alexander to keep the dual releases as similar as possible.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter