Slashdot Mirror
Majority Of Customers Prefer Blu-Ray
bonch writes "A poll shows Blu-ray as the preferred choice, as conducted by Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates. Customers were given a side-by-side comparison of HD-DVD and Blu-ray. The results were that 58 percent of the 1,200 polled chose Blu-ray, and 26 percent were undecided. Generally speaking, HD-DVD is preferred by those seeking to reduce manufacturing costs while Blu-ray is preferred by those more interested in features and data storage." Sony's PS3 is to use the Blu-Ray format.
And what percentage were convinced by the cool name and blueness, rather than the fact that one is slightly different?
Note to mods: I'm probably being sarcastic.
How much of this customer preference is just the name? "Blu-Ray" is easy to remember, and does not sound like much anything else. "HD-DVD" sounds like just more tech alphabet soup, or part of a features list string for a Dell desktop ad.
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
This isn't like one of those setup Pepsi challenges where they would shake up a bottle of Coke making it flat so the people would choose Pepsi is it?
Now why is it I think that all side-by-side comparisons can be equated to the Pepsi challenge? Well with a rhetorical question I'll be the one that answers it for you. If you're seeking a certain result you will find it; thus, whatever side-by-side comparison done always seems like a Pepsi challenge whereby the results are skewed by either a deliberate or unconscious malicious act in some way.
If history of technology has shown us anything, in a two horse race the cheapest normally wins unless their is a VERY good reason for it not to.
This might be one of those cases; HD-DVD seems perfectly capable as a higher capacity DVD; why would people want to pay a premium for a few more features about 10% higher quality?
A poll conducted by the group backing the Blu-ray next-generation DVD standard shows that the technology is supported by a majority of consumers, putting rival HD DVD on the defensive.
Shock horror, the Blu-ray guys have come up with a poll that says their product is better. Next story please...
As we all know from the VHS-beta wars, which format wins out depends not on what consumers want, but what the pornography industry prefers.
On DVD's we wouldn't have to sit thru FBI warnings or have region restrictions, or not allowed to fast forward thru scenes.
That survey is good to make people think they're being listened to. They're not.
Blu Ray discs hold more data. Anyone hearing a run down comparison is going to go with blu ray. Personally, I'm still a bit scared about potentially loosing data because the layer of protection is so small. Of course, I'm sure the comparison didn't say "the protection layer is almost non-existant in blu ray discs".
It might be an unfounded fear, but I won't know that for at least a year after I get blu ray stuff.
Blu Ray has a sexier name. HD-DVD sounds like somethign for an IBM PC.
The study's editor insightfully removed the "death-ray" option from the final results, despite an 82% preference rate among the 12-32 demographic.
Sounds like the Blu-Ray people have the clearly superior product. I guess I'll be stopping by Frys on my way home from work to pick one up.
On second thought, they'll probably all be gone if I wait that long. I'd better swing by during lunch.
It's the land of the brave, and the home of the free
Where the less you know, the better off you'll be.
Sounds like they missed the price tag out of the feature list. If you compared the feature list of Fords and Ferraris, you'd expect people to want the Ferrari more - but what do people buy? Getting slowly annoyed with these skewed PR surveys. Surely press hacks must be getting bored of filling space with meaningless copy?
And now Sony will dust off that damn pan-faced robot from "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century" for commercials: "BD BD BD BD BD BD".
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
Maybe people who voted actually wanted these rays: http://www.crystalinks.com/bluecrystals.html
FYI: Google gives a ration 1:3 for "blue-ray" vs "blu-ray".
I'd be careful there; with no payments until 200x, no interest equal payments for 24/36 months, etc. you'd be surprised what kind of home theatre Joe Sixpack has in his house. 52" Hi-Def screen, 7.1 digital receiver with pre-amp, 1000w tower mains, 100w sub-woofer, 5-disc DVD player connected with Monster Component video and digital optical audio cables, XBox and PS2 with A/V upgrade pack, RFI filtering power centre, ...
In short Joe Sixpack has a better theatre setup than I do.
BD Phone Home!
Shameless plug. Like you weren't expecting it.
The capacity of HD-DVD is not enough to hold movies and extras at 1080i.
So it seems to me if studios favor HD-DVD its because they want to sell us all the movies on HD-DVD, and sell us the movies again on HD-DVD mkII which will have more capacity.
From my narrow perspective, Blu-Ray would make a good medium for backup now that 300-500G hard drives are increasingly common.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
"I don't think Sony is about to repeat their Beta experience."
They certainly haven't learned from their ATRAC experience.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Remember the C3D company? They invented a CD which could hold a nearly infinite number of layers because each of them is completely transparent, but if the laser is focused on a layer and shining on it, the layer is self-illuminating.h ronicle/archive/1999/11/29/BU19966.DTL
C3D presented this technology back in 1999 or even earlier, they even had working prototypes.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c
These discs could hold as much as 140 gigabytes of data!
Compared to this, blu-ray looks kind of outdated.
But the company went banckrupt (I think), and now in 2005 we are presented a technology IMHO less advanced than C3D.
No, VHS won because Sony wouldn't license porn. But, with the porn UMDs out there that Sony seemed happy to license, it looks like they have learned from their mistake on that one.
Also of interest is the H.264 article on Wikipedia, specifically the Applications section--
All things being equal again, that leaves capacity as the only thing seperating the two formats as far as I can tell.
All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
Generally speaking, HD-DVD is preferred by those seeking to reduce manufacturing costs while Blu-ray is preferred by those more interested in features and data storage.
Personally, I'm the most interested in a format that can be at least as reliable (preferrably even more) than the DVD-R format. Now that would be something for data archival -- a common format that's reliable as hell. Especially as the storage size keeps increasing, I keep finding this to be an important factor. But for some reason you rarely hear about it in the Blu-ray/HD-DVD debate, but rather just what's more costly. If Blu-ray is more expensive but also clearly more reliable in addition to a greater storage, I'll happily pay at least 50% more for one of those than a HD-DVD.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Folks,
.dmg file of it. The only player I've tested this with is DVD Studio Pro 4.6 on a Mac G5, but I think there is a beta Moonlight player that could do this as well. I'd be curious to hear about anyone not on a G5 Mac that can get this to play.
m g.torrent?1C6B407CD6671B2BB03F55C49D67CEB584A74D90
I also posted this as a reply, but I figured some non-nested browsers might want to see this as well.
If I could break with Slashdot tradition and post an actual example instead of half-understood innuendo, here's an actual HD-DVD for your edification
I made a HD-DVD a few weeks ago with Apple's DVD Studio Pro 4. Here's a torrent to a
It's nothing fancy, but I say a big advantage of HD DVD is that I CAN ALREADY MAKE THEM!
http://216.99.212.233:6969/torrents/HD_DVD_TEST.d
My video compression blog
45GB for HD-DVD vs. 50GB for Blu-ray isn't that big a difference...
No, 5GB isn't that big of a difference. The problem is that in order to do 45GB, HD-DVD's need to use 3 layers, while they were only intended to ever do 2 layers. Yes, they did recently hit 3 layers, but they will probably never get to 4 layers and they will only be sold as 2 layers when they first come out.
Blue Ray was intended, right out of box to get to 8 layers. Right now with 2 layers they're at 50GB. They've already done 4 layers (100 GB) and wholey expect to get to the 8 layers in the future. This is a format with room to grow. HD-DVD just BARELY squeezed in 3 layers and still doesn't reach the capacity of a 2 layer Blu-Ray disk.
It's no contest.
200GB > 100GB > 50GB > 45GB > 30GB. (The two at the bottom are 3 and 2 layer HD-DVD respectively)
--
Don't fight Firefox! Let FireFox fight YOU!