Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Kutaragi Confirms End to Blue-Ray Talks

Posted by Zonk on 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."

79 comments

  1. What i never understood... by YellowCyclone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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?

    1. Re:What i never understood... by Leroy_Brown242 · · Score: 1

      Holds more, costs more.

      Lower costs make way for quicker acceptance by the public.

      --
      Pretty Pictures!
    2. Re:What i never understood... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The DVD standard was already firmly established when the PS2 was designed.

    3. Re:What i never understood... by crow · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

    4. Re:What i never understood... by Qzukk · · Score: 2, Funny

      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.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    5. Re:What i never understood... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey! You stole my violin!

    6. Re:What i never understood... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just have two things to say about that; Beta-Max and Laser Disc. Both formats had higher capacity and better image reproduction that VHS but VHS survived.

      With Sony's history of media formats I would honestly suggest that, if they're truly going their own way with this, that you seriously avoid whichever format they choose. Beta and Mini-disc were failures caused by sony's reluctance to 'share' their format with anyone else; I suspect that their PSP UMD format (for movies) will probably face the same fate.

    7. Re:What i never understood... by generic-man · · Score: 1
      I thought Betamax had just one hour of recording time whereas VHS had two at launch.
      #include <md-was-popular-in-europe-and-asia>
      #include <sony-also-developed-the-3.5-floppy>
      --
      For more information, click here.
    8. Re:What i never understood... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All I was saying is that what makes a format popular has almost nothing to do with its storage capacity or quality of reproduction of content. Prior to the acceptance of CD burners by customers the ZIP drive was the highest capacity writable format; for the most part these were not accepted by customers.

      Honestly, what WOULD make a difference in the minds of most consumers is if Sony or Toshiba could produce a format that could still be played on a conventional DVD player. For example, if you bought the Uber-Cool DVD and it had a movie (and tons of extras) on it at 1080p if you owned an Uber-Cool DVD player; if you only owned a regular DVD player it would operate like a regular DVD. If this was possible then the upgrade to a new format would be relatively painless.

    9. Re:What i never understood... by generic-man · · Score: 1

      I really, really doubt that consumers will buy their movie collections again in super-duper-DVD. Look at the SACD, which you can add to Sony's list of tech disappointments: regular CDs are Good Enough for the masses, and so SACDs and (more recently) DVD-Audio discs go unsold.

      Blu-ray and HD-DVD will sell mainly because of storage demand. There's definitely a market for 30GB or 50GB of writable storage. The former will give Sony an excuse to release its movies THREE ways (DVD, UMD, Blu-ray) despite consumer apathy. I really doubt that you'll see ordinary DVDs disappear from Wal-Mart shelves as a direct result.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    10. Re:What i never understood... by prockcore · · Score: 1

      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.

    11. Re:What i never understood... by egomaniac · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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 the disk. Even a 50GB dual-layer disk will generally only use one layer for the movie itself (the rest for extras) and so not require a mid-movie layer transition.

      On top of that, it's not clear that a single-layer blu-ray disk will be more expensive to manufacture than a dual-layer HD-DVD disk. The HD-DVD group conveniently ignores the fact that their opposition doesn't have to use two layers to store a full-length movie.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
    12. Re:What i never understood... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      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.

    13. Re:What i never understood... by jensen404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      CDs offer me about 90% of the audio quality of real life.

      DVD's offer about 1% of the visual quality of real life.... They have a lot more room for growth.

    14. Re:What i never understood... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know you meant to be funny, but material costs are one thing and content costs are another. With moviegoers staying home more, DVDs (and the next generation of them) need to be very profitable, and I hope they are because, without DVD sales, some movies would never be made. I know lots of movies are trash nowadays but the indie and limited release movies have to make a lot on DVDs to profit.

    15. Re:What i never understood... by Maserati · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
    16. Re:What i never understood... by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But stratch resistant disks would mean the consumer would never have to buy an extra copy if his old one gets scratched! We can't have that!

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    17. Re:What i never understood... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing everyone is forgetting is it is not just the god damn DVD. I know of no one who has an actual HD TV.

    18. Re:What i never understood... by Detritus · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  2. Higher capacity != better by yotto · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Pulp Audio Weekly - Geek News and Reviews
    1. Re:Higher capacity != better by 77Punker · · Score: 1

      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.

    2. Re:Higher capacity != better by Kevin143 · · Score: 1

      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.

    3. Re:Higher capacity != better by gabebear · · Score: 1

      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.

    4. Re:Higher capacity != better by Sebadude · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Eh.
    5. Re:Higher capacity != better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the first statement makes sense but
      It'll probably be the same with the PS3.
      makes no sense at all because the average dvd player costs about 30 bucks (USD).

    6. Re:Higher capacity != better by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      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.

    7. Re:Higher capacity != better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      since nobody watches DVD's on a PlayStation

      Hmm.. I do. All the time.

    8. Re:Higher capacity != better by Boing · · Score: 1
      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.

    9. Re:Higher capacity != better by gabebear · · Score: 1

      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.

  3. Why is it so hard? by RandomLetters · · Score: 1

    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?

  4. Sony probably wasn't willing to budge by Drakino · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Sony probably wasn't willing to budge by jclast · · Score: 1

      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 with support, and they'll be the only ones to support it. It's not like we saw movies specially formatted to play on the GameCube just because Nintendo decided to go with Mini-DVDs, and we didn't see movies ported to GCDs for the Dreamcast either. Eventually, we'll all realize that video game hardware and movie-watching hardware won't sell as combined units to non-gamers until the prices are comparable to those of movie-only players.

      --
      e2 | LJ
    2. Re:Sony probably wasn't willing to budge by Torgo's+Pizza · · Score: 1

      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.

    3. Re:Sony probably wasn't willing to budge by jensen404 · · Score: 1

      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)

    4. Re:Sony probably wasn't willing to budge by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > 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 to really catch on? A CD holds, what, 500 times as much as a DSHD 3.5" floppy? Comparing them is almost ludicrous. And the blank ones cost much less than blank floppies ever did, too. Sure, there'll be intermediate products that people will use who really need that extra capacity, like there were between floppies and CDs (LS120 SuperDisks, for instance, or Zip and Jaz disks) -- but most folks will stick with the CD or the DVD, just like most folks stuck with the floppy, until the storage ratio is ludicrous, like 500:1 or so. I predict the next format to really make it (i.e., to replace the CD and the DVD) will need to hold at least 500 times what a CD-R holds (say about 350GB) probably more, which means it's several years out. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are the LS120 and Zip and Jaz of our time: formats that will be picked up and used by people who need to push the boundaries, but they will not catch on enough to replace the more mainstream formats.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  5. well, this won't be the first time... by MattW · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    This won't be the first time Sony lost a format war.

    1. Re:well, this won't be the first time... by Nasarius · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Or the second.

      --
      LOAD "SIG",8,1
    2. Re:well, this won't be the first time... by aliquis · · Score: 1

      However I don't see the alternative for the MD back in the days, and I wouldn't call it unsuccesful, there have been lots of MD players haven't it? But sure, it has lost again flash memory based MP3 players, but they wheren't available back then was they?

    3. Re:well, this won't be the first time... by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      The alternative back then was DAT tape. Which was castrated because you know who (yes, the beloved RIAA) could not allow cheap digital recording for the masses.

  6. I'm not shocked. by game+kid · · Score: 1

    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, 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 pictures and Landsats...)

    --
    You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  7. Effect on Games by alvinrod · · Score: 1
    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 DVDs last I heard. The only problem with this is that the next generation games will take up a lot more space, especially since the Xbox 360 and the PS3 have been pushing the high resolution HD formats.

    Because you end up with more polies on screen, you need higher resultion texture maps to create larger detail. This results in bigger files, which means more space used on a DVD. Considering that a few games today have pushed the capacity of the DVD (Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas comes to mind) to the limits, we're looking at drastically nicer games, but also drastically shorter games. Eventually you start to trade of quantity when the quality hits a certain level, leaving you with less game (possibly at a higher cost to boot).

    This is why the Xbox 360 and the Revolution (well not quite as much since Nintendo isn't too big on the whole HD craze) need to embrace one of the future technologies. But which one?

    Personally, I'd place my money on the Blu-Ray format. Sony will be mass producing a lot of these since they did sell well over 80 milliion PS3's. Add in the fact that they own a motion picture company (Columbia, I think) and they already have at least one studio supporting it.

    Additionally, in the long run, the Blu-Ray seems like it will be more scalable. 50GB might seem like a lot now, but in 10 years 50GB will be laughed at. Quality won't likely be an issue, so it will probably come down to price, in which case the HD-DVD wins. However, if Sony waves any fees to use their format, in the end it will be about even.

    It will be interesting to see how much this plays out like the VHS, Betamax war.

    1. Re:Effect on Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Currently, the majority of 'content' that actually fills up any of the discs is full motion video; that is video clips. With the invention of highly compressed videos (and the capabilities of each of the upcomming systems to produce high quality real-time cut scenes) there really is almost no reason to move to a format that has 30GB of storage.

      I personally suspect that Sony has moved to the Blue-Ray DVD on the PS3 for 2 reasons; it will provide the storage space for the handful of developers who want hours of video at a resolution of 1080p; and it will provide a method for Sony to limit the ammount of piracy on their system (for a limited time).

    2. Re:Effect on Games by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 1

      Standard Resolution right now is 640x480. That comes out to 307,200 pixels. True High definition is 1920x1080 which is 2,073,600 pixels. That's 6.75 times more pixels. Thus if you use the same compression methods it's not far-fetched to assume that the compressed size is also 6.75 times the size of standard res compressed. A DVD holds at max a little over 9 GB. If you use it all (and it's safe to say that many now do) then to go to true High Definition you need over 60 GB of storage, more than twice what HD-DVD can hold. You might point out that blu-ray can't even hold that much. Yes it can. TDK has developed a 100 GB version (http://www.blu-ray.com/) and I've heard a 200 GB version is in the works (http://addict3d.org/index.php?page=viewarticle&ty pe=news&ID=3062). HD-DVD should die. It's a lame excuse for an upgrade.

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
    3. Re:Effect on Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your argument is flawed.

      First off the PS2 has no 2 disc games (to my knowlege) and the PS2 could only use a ~4GB DVD; that is a single layered DVD. Most of the games that use full motion video on the PS2 have it compressed using MPEG-2 compression (standard DVD compression) whereas by using a MPEG-4 compression algorithm (XVID or DIVX) you can get 8-10 times the compression with limited loss. What this means is that you can get ~16-20 times as much video on a DVD than you could have when the PS2 first launched (and as a guestimate 3-5 times as much video in 1080p).

      Now, what is the benefit of Blue-Ray? You could, potentially, get 20 DVDs worth of HD-FMV on a single disc; that would be about 40 hours of video. No developer can afford to create a game with 40 hours of FMV, thus Blue-Ray is mostly going to be a more expensive format that never gets used.

    4. Re:Effect on Games by cluke · · Score: 1

      Altough you may have a point about better compression algorithms, there is a PS2 game on 2 disks (Star Ocean: Til the End of Time) and at least one dual layer game (Champions of Norrath).

    5. Re:Effect on Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Higher resolution doesn't always mean bigger files. The textures are already quite big. Increasing the poly count on the models won't be that much of a hit.

      And at least for the xbox 360, the keyword is Procedural synthesis.

      http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/xbox360 -1.ars

    6. Re:Effect on Games by jclast · · Score: 1

      Devil May Cry 2 is also a 2-disc game, I believe.

      --
      e2 | LJ
  8. Mistake by James_Aguilar · · Score: 1

    I think that in the end Toshiba will find that not updating their requirements for the PS3 will be a huge financial mistake that might lead to the adoption of Blu-ray as the primary disk type in the future of mass storage and movies. The cost of this mistake could potentially reach into the billions of dollars for Toshiba.

  9. Reliability and durability? by American+In+Berlin · · Score: 1

    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?

    1. Re:Reliability and durability? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      I think the HD-DVD where close to the current DVD, like 0.6mm thick coating or whatever, but only 0.1mm for the Blu-Ray. I guess someone else can tell us for sure.

    2. Re:Reliability and durability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the biggest thing right now (atleast for me)for cdr and dvdr is the minor scracthes that ruin the data. From what i can tell bluray will be in a cartridge format, no clue about HDDVD though.
      So bluray should be no problem regarding the scratches etc. the temp warping though should be a problem still.
      but just guessing though.

  10. Neither format will matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Honestly, if either Sony or Toshiba are delusional to think that Blue-Ray or HD-DVD will catch on I've got a laser-disc system to sell them. The truth is that people are reluctant to move towards a new format, unless there are dramatically noticeable improvements, because of the cost involved.

    Every new format costs the customers a lot of money. First off there is the money to replace your existing hardware to new (far more expensive) hardware. The other problem is that you have to upgrade your entire library; even if you don't upgrade your library new movies will cost more than existing movies regardless of the manufacturing costs (just look at CD vs Tape, DVD vs VHS).

    Personally, I have no plans to support a new Disc format regardless of the costs involved. Discs are terribly fragile and not all that portable (what I'm saying is that you can't carry CD's in your pocket); what I want to see is either a flash memory based system or a download based system.

    1. Re:Neither format will matter by VoidWraith · · Score: 1

      With consoles, it doesnt matter. having a different format is in sony's favor (in their opinion at least) because it makes piracy nearly impossible. Also they want people to have to upgrade. Thats how they make money!

  11. Consumer-friendly? by vertinox · · Score: 1

    "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 about 1,000 per run for my record label)

    --
    "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
    -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  12. Blu Ray Lasers by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 2, Funny
    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

    --
    Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
  13. more consumer-friendly product? by ignatz72 · · Score: 1


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

    Sounds like Sony is pulling an Apple - "screw you, get the fudge out!"

  14. Sony, Toshiba fire up talk of a compromise by Kn0w1 · · Score: 2, Informative
    http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/06/20/news_61278 15.html

    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

  15. They're talking again... and Blu-Ray shall win. by iamghetto · · Score: 2, Informative

    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 however is that the talks are back on. 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. :)

    1. Re:They're talking again... and Blu-Ray shall win. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dang you have a lot of friends. At least 100?

  16. Economies of scale by r_jensen11 · · Score: 0
    ...but the HD-DVD camp argues that lower manufacturing costs make for a cheaper, more consumer-friendly product."

    Don't they realize, once these things get mass-produced, they won't cost what they cost now? And in the long-run (in technology, so about 5-10 years), I wouldn't imagine Blueray costing much more that current DVD's do now....
    Blueray has a 50GB capacity right now, while HD-DVD has 30GB. If they both add x number of layers on top of the disk, Blueray will still hold more data than HD-DVD, using basic algebra. Come on, think: 50*X > 30*X as long as X>0. As long as one wins out globally, though, I think it will be okay. I would get pretty upset if Europe used one while America used the other....

    1. Re:Economies of scale by CokoBWare · · Score: 1

      If the production factories had to upgrade the facilities in a major way to accomodate the BR format, then they end up spending money that they'd rather keep! Why spend more money than you need to?

      This is a classic example of the Betamax/MiniDisc scenario, where Sony closes their format, and everyone gets pissed and chooses the alternative... I predict that the industry will produce HD-DVD over BluRay because of this scenario. *sigh*

      Personally on a technical level, I like BluRay better. Business-wise, I think HD-DVD makes more sense.

  17. Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No games today have "pushed the limit" of DVDs. GTA:VC was rumoured to be the first game to ever use a dual-layered DVD. In fact in the end it clocked in well under the 4.7GB, single layer limit.

    Some extremely long RPGs with many big cinematics might make use of a dual-layered DVD or next-gen technolgies, but otherwise, why bother with the added expense? Because most people will have HDTVs in the next three to five years? But isn't that when the next generation of consoles will be due?

  18. I whole hartedly agree. by zentu · · Score: 1
    Here here, I like the fact that the camps are fighting.

    I know too many people (I work in a video store (small chain)) that don't even own DVD's since they are too fragile, but that is what you get when people don't take care of the products that they are renting. I personally want either a flash based medium, or a Hard Drive Based medium.

    I mean it has a better ability to survive. We have had more improvements in transistors and magnetic storage than all of the optical storage mediums combined. If you really wanted me to support one, I would want a harddrive technology, why, we could still have a vast ability for improvement, it would require a case (imagine not having to do much packaging on shipping and opening up 245 cases in one week (on your busiest nights (video clerks know what I mean) with a minimal effort, who really cares what the damn case looks like, you only see it about 3 times, (when you bought it, when you open it, and when you store it)). Plus you could place the heads in either the case or in the player, not to mention that you could allow for Limitless upgrades by just putting a few wires on the system that are unused. OH! and I forget that you would have a better seek time (then any optical product), and an ability to record, so you could even market them as a HD Tivo Like device. (hey Tivo should be the one striving for this, visualize people being able to not only store things in the Temporary storage of a TIVO, but being able to make your own archival copy of your favorite TV shows to hold over until they are released on a format without the Station Bugs and with the comments of the cast and crew)

  19. Sony and standards, or rather Sony OR standards by IntergalacticWalrus · · Score: 1

    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...

  20. Scratches? Caddies? by Neuticle · · Score: 1

    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 gets any worse, then we will be FORCED to "pirate" and rip the discs to a more durable medium, or handle them in clean rooms with soft-latex tools.

    I heard that Blue-ray was going to be in caddies - Sony seems to get this much right, e.g. UMD and minidisc - since then I have heard that isn't the case.

    Considering the way most people treat game discs (coasters) It could cause a big problem when a game doesn't run right after a couple dozen trips in and out of the machine. That said, the pessimist in me thinks that Blu-ray and HD-DVD will do this purposefully, to squeeze more money out of people who have to RE-buy a disc that is scratched beyond usability

    --
    "Cheeze it!" - Bender
    1. Re:Scratches? Caddies? by iainl · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
  21. Japan firms may restart talks on DVD format after by Kn0w1 · · Score: 1
    And now on forbes: Japan firms may restart talks on DVD format after mgmt changes - report

    again from driverheaven

  22. ..c--.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..--.c.

  23. Yeah, I'm bitter. by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

    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 phased out in a few years. How long was the VHS format around for again? A whole lot longer, IIRC.

    ...In fact, I'm going to root for Blu-Ray just so it'll be a little bit longer before we "need" another @#$% video format.

    --
    "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
  24. capacity? by dostick · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:capacity? by CokoBWare · · Score: 1

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

      Sony's press release regarding the PSP and UMD format
      "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 video clips, movies and sports programs can be provided on UMD. To protect this entertainment content, a robust copyright protection system has been developed which utilizes a combination of a unique disc ID, a 128 bit AES encryption keys for the media, and individual ID for each PSP hardware unit."
  25. The stage is set... by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 1

    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, innovative controller (yet to be seen), No true HD, plays all DVD's

    So far the Revolution and the PS3 seem to have the edge, even with Sony clinging to blue-ray like a vice... let's hope it isn't beta/vhs all over again and vhs winning or the PS3 suddenly is useless.

    My money is still squarely focused on the Revolution.

    --
    http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
    1. Re:The stage is set... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...or the PS3 suddenly is useless.

      Because, you know, it's not like it plays games or anything.

    2. Re:The stage is set... by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 1

      umm, you seem to forget Sony is the one publicly claiming the PS3 is not a GAME console. The Xbox 360 and PS3 will have long development cycles for games, this means less games over the life of the console. That is why they are heavily relying on the media console slant. So yea, if Blu-ray tanks the PS3 is useless, plain and simple. Expensive Blu-ray will become even more expensive if it is not adopted and will then be prohibitively expensive... again PS3 would be useless.

      --
      http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
  26. Why should we care, beyond the games? by WaterBreath · · Score: 1
    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 solves so many of the entertainment industry's problems. No more ownership issues, and piracy would be much more difficult. So my only question is, how long will it be? Less than 10 years, surely.

  27. Except by Dachannien · · Score: 1

    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.

  28. I for one ... by davidyorke · · Score: 1

    welcome our Betamax overlords.

    Snoogins.