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.

Comments

Uh-huh.

[Musteval]

And what percentage were convinced by the cool name and blueness, rather than the fact that one is slightly different?

Re:Uh-huh.

[agraupe]

Umm... probably 80-100%. That's the point of marketing. Whatever speeds its adoption is a good thing, because it is technically superior.

How much of it is just the name?

[AtariAmarok]

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.

Re:How much of it is just the name?

[DigitumDei]

Yes, and right now its just the name of the hardware.

I bet whichever format gets more of the "cool stuff" to begin with will more than likely be the format that wins, regardless of the actual technology.

Re:How much of it is just the name?

[theNote]

Kind of reminds of when you had to decide whether you were going to get DVD+R or DVD-R discs.
Now you can get a dual format drive for less than $50 and not have to worry about it.
I'm guessing after a little while we'll see the same thing happen with the new formats and nobody will care which one you're using.

Re:How much of it is just the name?

[dsginter]

"Blu-Ray" is easy to remember, and does not sound like much anything else.

Unfortunately, the plan is to call it a "BD-ROM" or "BD-RAM", depending on rewritability. I can see it now:

CD-ROM
CD-R
CD-RW
DVD-ROM
DVD-R
DVD-RW
DVD +R
DVD+RW
BD-ROM
BD-R
BD-RW
BD+RW
HD-DVD
HD -DVD-R
HD-DVD-RW
HD-DVD+RW

I think the plan is to get the consumer to actually pass out when shopping for media. Then, the store clerks will just steal their wallets.

Re:How much of it is just the name?

[jacexpo069]

Right, like how the name FIREWIRE blew the jumble of letters USB2 right out of the water, even if it was technically superior

Re:How much of it is just the name?

[Sentry21]

Nonsense! I look forward to shopping for my first dual-layer 52x/52x/48x/32x/24x/16x/8x/4x/2x/2x/2x/4x/2x/2x/2x CD/DVD/BD/HD-DVD+/-RW/RAM drive.

Re:How much of it is just the name?

[NutscrapeSucks]

Unfortunately, Apple restricted the use of the "Firewire" brand name in the early days, so most PC implementations were forced to use the unsexy "IEEE1394" moniker.

However, the real reason USB2 was victorious is because it is free technology while Firewire still requires some sort of licensing fee. Hopefully now that Apple and Intel are in bed, they can come to some sort of agreement and 1394 will become a standard PC chipset feature.

Pepsi Challenge

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Pepsi Challenge

[sbrown123]

I liken this to more how TV resellers adjust the color and contrast settings on televisions so customers think one has a better picture compared to one next to it.

History Repeats...

[Manip]

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?

Re:History Repeats...

[Keebler71]

You are right on. What people "want" or "prefer" is largely irrelevant. What they will pay for is all that matters.

For instance, almost everyone I know complains about Southwest Airlines - particularly the dreaded "Cattle Call" seating assignments... yet when push comes to shove (pun) their planes are full of paying passengers and they are the only major airline to post a profit every quarter since 9-11.

From the very start of TFA

[Lord of the Wazz]

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...

But what do the pornmongers think?`

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?`

[jurt1235]

Small error there: What does Sony (biggest backer of blu-ray)allow? is the better question. Philips (the inventors of Beta) did not allow porn to be published on their format. The VHS people did allow this, thus the public nicely bought the VHS (sex sells).

So if Sony allows porn on the blu-ray, they are at least equal in competition (on that level).

The price will come down with volume, and ps3 will mean volume enough to be competitive

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?`

[Kjella]

The porn industry prefers SD over HD so you can't see the boob job scars, unclean skin and that the "20yos" are actually 30 and a thick layer of make-up. That is the norm. I'm sure a few high-enders like Playboy and such will come out with solid HDTV releases, but most of the industry don't want to. It screws up both the "cheap equipment" and "cheap actors" bit, the price of the DVD platter isn't the real issue.

Kjella

If it were up to the customers...

[Jjeff1]

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.

To be expected

[saterdaies]

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.

Of course they prefer it.

[91degrees]

Blu Ray has a sexier name. HD-DVD sounds like somethign for an IBM PC.

Feature List

[bigmurd]

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?

Twikki

[AtariAmarok]

"Unfortunately, the plan is to call it a "BD-ROM" or "BD-RAM","

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".

Re:the geeks will decide

[Blkdeath]

Seeing how most consumers don't own televisions that support hi-def content, the only people who will care about Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD are the geeks, folks who are likely to understand the difference and who will extract benefit from one format over the other. Joe Sixpack is perfectly happy watching his full frame flicks that he rents from Blockbuster on his 27" set.

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.

Maybe true, but the capacity is important

[tkrotchko]

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.

Re:Maybe true, but the capacity is important

[benwaggoner]

And how the heck would you know that? The Blu-ray camp has made that assertion, but it simply isn't born out in real-world testing.

Last week, for a test, I put a 123 minute movie on a DVD-9 using MPEG-2, using the HD DVD format (via Apple's DVD Studio Pro 4). Average of around 8.5 Mbps. Looked pretty darn good at 1920x1080.

HD-DVD gives you 30 GB, and the use of H.264 and VC-1 for codecs. No problem AT ALL sticking "Return of the King Extended Edition" on a single side of HD-DVD. So using codecs that are 2x better and 3x more capacity, yeah, HD-DVD is just fine. Single layer HD-DVD will be fine for the vast majority of films, and even offers more minutes per disc at HD than DVD gives us minutes of SD today.

I'm not so sure about Sony

[tkrotchko]

"I don't think Sony is about to repeat their Beta experience."

They certainly haven't learned from their ATRAC experience.

What about C3D

[zlogic]

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.
C3D presented this technology back in 1999 or even earlier, they even had working prototypes.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/ch ronicle/archive/1999/11/29/BU19966.DTL
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.

Re:HD-DVD is retarded

[DarkEdgeX]

I already covered the capacity argument here. As far as the video CODEC's go, check out this from the FAQ at www.blu-ray.com--

The Blu-ray Disc Association (BDA) is still in the process of finalizing the BD-ROM specification, but they have stated that MPEG-4 AVC High Profile (previously called FRExt) and Microsoft's VC-1 video codec (the proposed SMPTE standard based on WMV9) will be mandatory. They will also include MPEG-2 support for playback of HDTV recordings and DVDs. Please note that this simply means that all Blu-ray players and recorders will have to support playback of these video codecs, it will still be up to the movie studios to decide which video codec(s) they use for their releases. The BDA expects the BD-ROM specification to be finished some time in the beginning of 2005.

Also of interest is the H.264 article on Wikipedia, specifically the Applications section--

Both of the major candidate next-generation DVD rival formats planned for product deployment in late 2005 include the H.264/AVC High Profile as a mandatory player feature -- specifically:

• The HD-DVD format of the DVD Forum
• The Blu-ray Disc format of the Blu-Ray Disc Association (BDA)

All things being equal again, that leaves capacity as the only thing seperating the two formats as far as I can tell.