 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
65.254.9.2
...Looks like Sony is getting set to shoot itself in the foot yet again. While their ad campaigns are great, the technology itself looks like it's going to be obscenely expensive to produce with estimates on how much they're actually losing from the sale of each PS3 console ranging as high as $350. Add to this that they have experienced repeated and serious technological problems in the rollout of this new technology and you have a potential marketing disater of epic proportions in the making.Toshiba seems to have been able to introduce the HD-DVD format for much less money (to manufacture the players) and I believe it's far more cost effective to manufacture the discs as they use current technology and lasers. Their problem seems to be that while they have the better (read: more marketable) solution to hi rez video, they're not putting any money (that I can see) into the marketing of their HD-DVD.
If they don't start throwing some money at the marketing of this format, Sony might win by default.
*** I Feel Strongly Both Ways ***
Follow Ups:
And I think the real winner is still going to be plain ol' DVD.
Until the NEXT generation comes along.
BluRay and HDDVD just do NOT do enough. Just as regular folks never picked up on SACD or DVD-A, the run of the mill crowd will stick to DVD. And BluRay and HD DVD will be small market segments.
The formats rolled out too soon, just to try to grab the lead... for no good reason. They are doomed from a mass market perspective.
When the next whatever level comes out with at least a 10X better resolution than DVD... in six to ten years, folks may be ready for the jump and abandone DVD the way VHS has been.
HD DVD and BluRay will NEVER do to DVD what DVD did to VHS.
BluRay and HD DVD to DVD are more akin to S-VHS in relation to VHS.. intersting but no real major breakthrough.
And I just put my money where my mouth is, as I just got 130 DVD movies (spent $1,000. plus) at sales for DVD at Columbiahouse (60% off and free shipping etc plus $2 free* for every one bought)
And another bundle at Borders 30% off,, (Criterion DVDs....)
As I said, both formats will probably be niche products-most people don't have a TV to take advatage of the higher(6.75X) resolution.
Most people just don't care.
Jack
I still haven't seen any practical superiority on one over the other at this time, despite lots of promises of what the future may or may not bring.
The numbers paint an interesting picture.
Jack
Blu-ray will win the format war, except it won't be as quickly as they thought.Keep in mind that Blu-ray is not just Sony. Many people get this wrong because Sony has put so much towards the format. There are over a hundred companies that are part of Blu-ray: Matsushita (Panasonic), Pioneer, LG, Samsung, Lite-On, Sharp, Mitsubishi, etc. NEC, at first solely an HD DVD supporter, is negotiating with Sony to make Blu-ray drives. Toshiba is the only HD DVD exclusive electronics company.
Blu-ray has more capacity now (50GB vs 30GB) and will have even more in the future (200GB is possible, but the potential is really for the computer side of the format rather than the movie side). It also has more bandwidth than HD DVD (54Mb/s vs 36Mb/s). That's really going to come into play in about a year when all of the tools mature along with developers' ability and familiarity with the format. This hasn't been emphasized enough, but HD DVD is going to have some problems in the bandwidth department.
Blu-ray has the exclusive support of numerous movie studios, while HD DVD only has Universal as exclusive.
The PS3 advantage is that it can grow not only as a game machine, but as a Blu-ray player as well.
Just 10 years ago there was a cluster-fuck known as DVD. Look at where it is now. No reason Blu-ray can't be even better.
I seem to recall reading that several studios got together & went to the manufacturers & said "we will release NOTHING, until there is one unified format". Since these studios controlled most of the movies that was the push to develop ONE format for DVD. Result, everybody made money & consumers could buy a single machine.
Poor quality MPEG encoders that made the laserdiscs they were replacing seem superior, non-anamorphic encodes (how stupid was that?), region coding (studios needed to control the format and what you could watch), firmware updates (Uh, like my computer?) on several models that wouldn't play big $ releases, no recording at the start (If it was going to replace the VCR, shouldn't it have been able to record?), DVD-R/+R issues when recording did come around, etc.Should I go on? Like I said, cluster-fuck.
Your points are well taken...What I am saying is that we do not have multiple DVD PLAYBACK formats because there was a decision to have only one, which is why DVD took off. This is why you can buy a movie for under $10 in some cases. The 24/96 playback that every DVD player can manage is also a result of pressure from organizations (lead by Meridian) to have a higher audio standard (which did not take off).
As a plumber once said to me, "standards are wonderful things, that is why there are so many of them!" Or you can use your more "colourful" expression.
Basically, we agree there are always conflicting standards & dumb moves. Region encoding may well fall by the wayside, given the hacks that have been developed in Europe, so they can play our Region 1 movies.
Why would nearly every CE manufacturer back Blu-ray and all but one studio say "Yes." to producing movies for the Blu-ray format?And if you truly wanted one format, why would you not back the one that has more support for movies, more support from CE manufacturers, more future options/capabilities, etc?
Ah, the oversimplifications of fanboys...> > > Why would nearly every CE manufacturer back Blu-ray < < <
Maybe they beleived the hype that Sony spews out. Maybe they are just hedging their bets. Some are also backing HD DVD.
> > > and all but one studio say "Yes." to producing movies for the Blu-ray format? < < <
BTW, that "one" happens to own something like 80 years worth of movies. Others haven't commited yet, and will wait a while before doing so. Also, while Warner is doing both formats, it is putting out more movies on HD DVD than Blu-ray-using both, but not equally.> > > And if you truly wanted one format, why would you not back the one that has more support for movies, more support from CE manufacturers, more future options/capabilities, etc? < < <
They will end up voting for the bottom line, regardless of the pie-in-the-sky promises. Whichever one (if any) the public picks, will be the one they eventually back. Not all companies are enamoured with Sony, and all are aware of its *ahem* less than stellar history with new media. Not to mention, price *will* be a factor. Joe sixpack isn't going to pay $1K for a DVD player(PS3 doesn't count), especially if it doesn't play CDs (the Sony won't).
I'm not trying to start an argument, and as I've said before, I think both will just be niche products.
The real war isn't Blu-ray Vs. HD DVD, its HD Vs. SD.
JackPS. Apparently, PS3 didn't do as well as expected at saving Sony's butt, so the demoted the "father of the playstation".
I just have more reasons to believe Blu-ray will be around after HD DVD goes away.Why do you say the PS3 doesn't count? I see it as a Blu-ray player that also plays games, rather than a game machine that also plays movies. The PS3 is going to get better and better as Sony makes changes and updates to the system/firmware. It has the potential to become a better Blu-ray player than a stand-alone player because of the technology that Sony put inside that case.
Universal will cave in due time. Next to FOX, it's my next favorite studio so I am disappointed that they don't support Blu-ray at this time. As far as Warner Bros, I don't really care for them. They are supporting Blu-ray, but holding back quality because HD DVD is limited compared to Blu-ray. Their belief that audio quality is not important really pisses me off, so they fail as a worthwhile studio for me to consider.
I think the PS3 advantage is a bit overstated. First, xbox 360's are flying off the shelf as Sony can't get their act together and ship a glitch free product on a timely basis. That means xbox is making signifigant inroads in market share. Not to mention the xbox is cheaper out the door for consumers.Second, Xbox has an HD-DVD player that is very affordable (I think 199 with a remote) that allows users to output full 1080p. Sony still can't get their resolutions straight and have made many a ps3 useless after their most recent update fiasco.
I'm not saying HD-DVD will win- heck if I know who will- but after reading your previous post re: the advantages of blu-ray and the studio support, you've certainly made a convincing argument. Just pruning your Ps3 point.
Vik
.
The 50GB Vs. 30GB is a red herring. The only reason Sony needs that much space is because they are using 10 year old encoding-MPEG4. VC-1 is far more efficient,and gives a better picture in less space-they got that *painfully* long King Kong on HD DVD, and still got a stellar picture. What do you want with the other 20GB? Fill it with junky extras?
As far as studios goes, with the obvious exception of Sony (and maybe Fox?)the other studios' loyalty isn't carved in stone. HD DVDs are out selling BD discs by anywhere from 3:1 to 11:1, depending on your source. All it will take, is for the studios to look at those numbers. I suspect we'll some interesting news sometime in early '07.
FWIW, I expect to buy into Blu-ray, as soon as they meet my requirements:
1)The picture has to be as good or better than my HD-A1. This rules out the Sammy.
2)The player shouldn't cost 2X-3X the price of my HD-A1. This rules out the Panny, the (late)Pioneer, and the (very late)Sony. If I can find one *heavily* discounted(50%), I'll think about it.
3)There should be a reasonable amount of movies on BD that I want to see, with good PQ.
Time will tell.
Jack
The 50GB Vs. 30GB is a red herring. The only reason Sony needs that much space is because they are using 10 year old encoding-MPEG4. VC-1 is far more efficient,and gives a better picture in less spaceI think you mean MPEG2. Sony's initial encodings were not of high quality. However, the most recent MPEG2 encodings that are being done are much better. So much better, in fact, that some of the MPEG2 titles are considered reference (that's quite a turnaround).
And, like CE companies, Sony is not the only studio. FOX is doing their encodings in AVC and MPEG2, Warner Bros is using VC1 and MPEG2, Disney will be using AVC or VC1 for future titles, etc. And despite the better encodings that Sony is doing in MPEG2, they will switch to AVC or VC1 sometime in 2007.
-they got that *painfully* long King Kong on HD DVD, and still got a stellar picture. What do you want with the other 20GB? Fill it with junky extras?
How about uncompressed PCM or the new lossless audio codecs. Why not raise audio quality in movies to where it belongs -- on par with the picture quality. Oh wait, HD DVD is having some problems with encoding even the lossless audio codecs, which take up less space and bandwidth than uncompressed PCM, to allow for the highest quality of video as well. Extra features along with the movie? It's getting rough for HD DVD's bandwidth. Blu-ray beats it by > 10Mb/s and that's going to come into play as the formats mature.
1)The picture has to be as good or better than my HD-A1. This rules out the Sammy.
Not by much. If you don't like the Samsung, there's the Panasonic, the Sony, the Pioneer and numerous others coming in 2007.
2)The player shouldn't cost 2X-3X the price of my HD-A1. This rules out the Panny, the (late)Pioneer, and the (very late)Sony. If I can find one *heavily* discounted(50%), I'll think about it.
That Toshiba is heavily subsidized, so you can't compare prices. Yes, your wallet can do a comparison, but that's on a different level. I believe the new Toshiba "high end" player, which has the features of the Blu-ray players, is around $1k.
Want an "inexpensive" Blu-ray player? Just get a Sony "subsidized" PS3 ($499 20GB, $599 60GB). It will continue to grow as a game machine and as a Blu-ray player: it does more than the Toshiba HD-A1 now and will do even more in the future.
They both may survive for years without a clear winner. I strongly suspect they will both just end up being niche products.
Jack
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
