Slashdot Mirror


If DVD Is Dead, What's Next?

uglysad writes "The Age has a piece discussing the fact that, from the home entertainment industry's standpoint, the DVD is dead. So what is next? From the article 'It will come as a shock to film fans who have spent their Christmases stocking up on their movie collections, but the technology industry is in agreement: the DVD is dead. Consumer electronics companies have begun to show off what they believe will be the next generation of home video technologies. But despite the common belief that the DVD is history, the industry is split over what the next step should be.'"

100 of 652 comments (clear)

  1. whatever by tfcdesign · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seems a little hasty to make such a claim. VHS isnt dead yet. The only media I can think of that is dead is the 8-Track and 70 RPM.

    1. Re:whatever by gid13 · · Score: 5, Funny

      And let's not forget FreeBSD...

    2. Re:whatever by hackstraw · · Score: 2, Informative

      The only media I can think of that is dead is the 8-Track and 70 RPM.

      Youngun. 33.3333, 45, and 78 is/were the standard record formats. I've never heard of a 70 RPM one.

      Back on topic, I thought that the article title is very sensationalistic. I thought they were going to talk about something new or whatever, but they just talked about the different higher capacity DVDs (blue ray and HDDVD) not something like crystalline hologram media or whatever.

      I don't see DVDs as a format going anywhere anytime before or after CDs. I mean, my DVD players/recorders can do both. The two new formats are the same form factor and I would imagine that they will be backwards compatible with regular DVDs and CDs as well.

      Honestly, since I was in high school in the late 80s, I though that we should put music on chips like game cartridges of the time. No moving parts, protected from bad elements, etc. I guess that they were and still are way too expensive for mass duplication. I mean, the movie and music industry people are already poor and living in the streets because of the cost of the current media right?

      Actually, when media is going to be free, I guess we will just transfer files over wireless to our car and homes and whatnot. I would kill to have my computer music collection not have to be put onto CD to listen in my car. And NO an MP3 player is not an option for me because I don't have any MP3s.

    3. Re:whatever by LordSnooty · · Score: 5, Insightful

      VHS isnt dead yet.

      Maybe so, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to purchase new mainstream titles on VHS. And as for the niche releases on a smaller scale, you've no chance.

      I hope that this time, the average consumer rises up and says "no". I think the reason that everyone happily bought into DVD was that it was such a huge leap from VHS - so many more features to make the switchover worthwhile. It was maybe 15 years since VHS started to become popular. This time, less than 10 years since DVD hit the big-time, what are the big reasons to switch? Increased space (more naff behind-the-scenes docos and dull commentaries)? Hmm. High-def? That's probably the only decent advantage you could point at.

      And strangely enough, what's the hardware industry currenly falling over themselves to sell us? HDTVs. I truly hope that this time, the average Joe sees what we have seen for many years, that is the content producers repeatedly selling us the same stuff on different media.

    4. Re:whatever by gid13 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, FreeBSD is an OS. It was a joke about some Slashdot trolls that keep proclaiming one of the BSDs dead (I don't honestly remember if it was FreeBSD or not). Apparently the joke is somehow flamebait. Shrug.

    5. Re:whatever by ajs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "That I can think of" would be the key phrase in your statement.

      Audio:

      Wax cylinder
      Wire recording
      Various sizes and speeds of vynil record that even scratch devices dissavow

      Audio-related:
      Player piano scrolls

      Video:
      Super 8 film (used by a very limited group of artists today)
      Beta (not the pro format that some TV stations still use, but the home format)
      VHS (it's not "dead", but it's certainly deader than DVD)

      Still images:
      Almost any format you mention is "only mostly dead", as artists tend to be overly nostalgic. However, the Disc Camera format is pretty well gone, as are most of the non-35mm roll formats until you get up into poster format range.

      Data:
      This one's very sticky. It's hard to ever say that data formats are dead, since some archive somewhere will need to keep buying it. However, it's very hard to actually get new TK cartridges, data-quality cassette tapes, 8-inch floppies, paper tape, optical tape, drum drives, core memory or any other non-PC, non-mainframe memory format of 25 or more years ago.

    6. Re:whatever by J.+Random+Luser · · Score: 2, Interesting

      VHS isnt dead yet

      No, just moribund. It's two and a half years since I recorded anything to VHS. As a major university we have to support a lot of obsolete formats, but it's a difficult job telling some academics that backwards compatability doesn't mean business as usual.

      However I confess I have never been a fan of the DVD format. Every hour or program, whether from DV tape, or direct to hard disk, takes ~2 hours to compress mp2, and then there's the obtuse but compulsory menu structure. I have found it quicker and easier to compress mp4 and store on hard disk, or as .mov on a data DVD. Sure, there are miniDVcams about now that record direct to DVD. Ever tried to edit mp2? or put a 3.5" disc into a slot loader?

    7. Re:whatever by manavendra · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think you raise an interesting and subtle point. Essentially, the hardware vendors (in collusion with the software creators - the hollywood studios, for one) are trying to put the high-turnaround consumer market spin on the entertainment media as well. So just buying the VHS tapes and the player isn't enough - as the new format guaranteed ease of use and better quality. The consumers then flocked to it, with a genuine alacrity since it was almost a quantum leap in quality.

      Inspired with this success, however, I believe is the attempt to pull-back the expiry date for DVD and push *ANOTHER* media (and *ANOTHER* set of players to the market). Push it along with *ANOTHER* type of TV, and you have the two markets creating penetration for each other. In fact, this market is so lucrative the corporates are fighting over WHICH format to push. Sounds like a rip-off, if I ever saw one = just look at the faster, bigger computer we get thrust at us every few months, while the price of new-improved box stays roughly the same (after the initial, rationalising drop)

      --
      http://efil.blogspot.com/
    8. Re:whatever by hackstraw · · Score: 3, Informative

      Maybe so, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to purchase new mainstream titles on VHS.

      Makes sense http://www.candisc.com/03price/03vhs.html vs http://www.candisc.com/03price/03pricedvd.html

    9. Re:whatever by trailerparkcassanova · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, 70 RPM was supplanted by 78 RPM and I'm never going back.

    10. Re:whatever by mgv · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Seems a little hasty to make such a claim. VHS isnt dead yet. The only media I can think of that is dead is the 8-Track and 70 RPM.

      No, its not dead at all. The HD/Blu-ray thing is a furphy for people who want to watch movies. Why?

      1. Most people don't know what is high definition anyway. Plasma TV's are 488 lines, which is less than standard definition that you get with a DVD. Most people (consumers) think they are fantastic. Technophiles might notice, but considering that the electronics industry got many people to DROP the viewing resolution by going from TV to Plasma says something important about how much punters care about resolution.

      2. Even if you want high definition, you don't need more storage space for it. Processing power is going up alot, and that means that more efficient codec's than MPEG-2 that DVD's use will easily do high definition in the 8.5 GB available on a standard DVD for a nice long movie.

      3. So why do they want to get rid of DVD? Hardware manufacturers want more sales, and can't think of a way to get consumers to buy another (more expensive) player. They could just go for a player that does a better codec (MPEG-4 or H.264), but that needs content. And the people who provide content - who mostly don't care about hardware sales except for Sony which does both - want a new DRM/encryption as DVD's are cracked.

      So, in essence, this isn't really a consumer oriented move. But this shouldn't be a surprise - how many people want DVD audio? Brought in by the content producers as there was not protection on a music CD; that hasn't killed off the music cd.

      Of course, Apple actually managed to get people to get people to give up unencrypted music for the iTunes music store, but that wasn't about quality - they offered something genuinely new, which was the iPod. Your entire music collection in a tiny package (or a good subset of it on an even smaller one).

      I don't see this coming with HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. Sure, I'd love the extra storage for hard drive backups. But for video - not the way that the content industry wants to package it - as a huge (20-30 GB) movie file that's heavily DRM'ed. No thank you. All my music comes off a hard drive now, and my videos will soon too.

      I can promise you that I won't be wasting 20 GB on each movie, and that I won't be unhappy with the quality of a MPEG-4 serial episode that weighs in at 0.35 GB for a 40 minute episode.

      The next real innovation won't be in larger, uncompressed storage - it will be in legal down loads of videos, at relatively modest quality, which will almostly certainly be compressed heavily to keep the traffic down. Until then, I'll keep on ripping my DVD's and digitising broadcasts .....

      My 2c worth.

      Michael

      --
      There is no cryptographic solution to the problem where the intended receiver and the attacker are the same entity.
    11. Re:whatever by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2, Funny

      Apparently the joke is somehow flamebait.

      Probably just a demon moderator.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    12. Re:whatever by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 4, Funny

      Netcraft confirms that the joke is dead.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    13. Re:whatever by timecop · · Score: 2, Interesting

      lol, maybe in u.s., but in Japan every new fucking movie comes out on VHS and DVD.
      And you definitely can't rent anything reasonably new on DVD either - most Japanese movies for rent ONLY exist on VHS. Typical Japanese rental store = 1 shelf of DVDs/new releases + 20 shelves of VHS

    14. Re:whatever by Robber+Baron · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...and Stephen King.

      --

      You're using her as bait, Master!

    15. Re:whatever by tricorn · · Score: 3, Informative

      What plasma TVs only have 488 lines (are you talking horizontal "lines of resolution" or vertical scan lines?) All of the plasma sets I see are HD or at least ED, typically with 1024x768 for the former, the latter typically at 852x480 for a 42" set (which is about 36.6x20.6 inches; that gives about 28 dpi horizontally and 37 dpi vertically for the HD sets, or 23 dpi for the ED sets, if the screens are 16:9). You don't get full HD resolution until you get to bigger screens; even 50 and 63" plasma seem to be mostly 1366x767, at least it's a square resolution (31 dpi for the 50", 25 dpi for the 63"). Full HD resolution is 1920x1080.

    16. Re:whatever by FFFish · · Score: 2, Insightful

      since it was almost a quantum leap in quality

      And, even more important was touted as ever-lasting: CDs and DVDs do not, for most practical purposes, wear out when handled with care. Everyone who grew up with vinyl and cassette and VHS knows what it's like to lose audible audio quality over time: the goddamn things wear out with casual everyday use! CDs and DVDs, hell, it's dead easy to keep them in prime condition forever and a day with next to no effort at all.

      That is what sold a huge chunk of us on those formats.

      The next format offers no additional advantage. Higher quality, sure, but at what price? When you've already got a couple K invested in your home theatre, and you're watching a nice sharp picture with CD-quality surround sound, on a reasonably good television... is ultra highdef worth the financial hit of starting all over again?

      Ain't in this house, at any rate. If I were going to sink $2K into something, it'd be a audiophile music system. Or a maximum games box for UT2007. Or another motorcycle.

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    17. Re:whatever by mgv · · Score: 2, Informative

      Did you just make this up? My 50" plasma is 1366 x 768, plenty big enough for 720p. I'm looking forward to HD DVDs, because I can clearly see the difference between DVDs and HD broadcasts. I'll buy an HD DVD player as soon as they have the Lord of Rings in HD.

      No, I didn't make this up.

      I do, however live in Ausstralia, which uses PAL rather than NTSC. The Plasma screens are still 480 or so lines, despite that PAL (which includes PAL DVD's) are 576 lines resolution. So if you display a PAL DVD on a standard definition Plasma, you are actually running on alot lower resolution than the DVD/MPEG-2 is encoded at. This has not stopped the uptake of plasma screens in Australia, or in a number of parts of the world that uses PAL for tha matter.

      You are using a high definition plasma screen, which is a nice thing. And you know its resolution, which puts you ahead of the average punter which buys a HD plasma. However, alot of people buy standard def plasmas, which are (as I said in my original post) of a lower resolution than DVD's that are encoded for PAL.

      What I'm really saying is this - Standard definition is good enough for most people. We have used this for over 50 years now and if the resolution wasn't enough it would have changed much sooner. In reality most of the deficiencies (eg poor colour matching with NTSC) have been fixed a while ago. The move to high definition is nice, but alot of people really don't care. If they did care, nobody would have paid for a video track of iTunes which is at a much lower resolution than standard definition. But millions of these video tracks have been paid for, mostly because the resolution is sufficient for the average consumer.

      You (and most of the readers on /.) do care about resolution, and so on. There is nothing wrong with this. You are however, not like most people. (This is why you read slashdot - news for nerds). There are millions of us out there - and nearly a million id's on slashdot. We are, however, a tiny proportion of the total population. Most people don't know or care about the difference between high definition, standard defintion and what you can download on the iTunes video section. These are the people that Sony wants to sell HD to.

      You won't buy a HD player most likely because you don't like the DRM on HD-DVD or Blu Ray. The average consumer wont care less about this, but they won't buy this sort of system because they don't know or care about HD versus standard definition.

      As I said in my original post, the next major increment in video delivery will not be a DRM's low compression high definition movie format. It will be a low definition compact video file that has DRM. You won't like it any more than me. It seems wrong and maybe it is. Most people on slashdot feel that way about apple's AAC encrypted format - why would you buy an encrypted, limited format like that when you can have MP3's, or ogg, or even a lossless format? If you feel like this, I understand - I'm there too.

      But I accept that most people aren't like me - they will be happy if things are good enough for use, and won't care if there is DRM (at least not for a while - maybe in 10 years people will start to understand when they lose their music collection because their motherboard dies before they can deauthorise their last valid computer for that account).

      Thats it - we are probably on the same side of the argument, and if we aren't, well post a reply - I'll be interested in your opinion.

      Hope this clarifies my earlier statements about PAL DVD's and standard definition plasma displays.

      Michael

      --
      There is no cryptographic solution to the problem where the intended receiver and the attacker are the same entity.
  2. just like hdtv by ronchie02 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    DVD is dead just like we're being forced into HDTV in... oh wait, it's smoke. How many people do you know that just got a DVD player? It's hardly dead.

  3. HD-DVD by Manip · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If HD-DVD 'wins' the battle then current DVD isn't at all dead... HD-DVD is backwards compatible thus allowing companies to continue to produce old style DVDs on the cheap while also supplying higher quality content or longer (in video length) disks.

    1. Re:HD-DVD by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

      If HD-DVD 'wins' the battle then current DVD isn't at all dead... HD-DVD is backwards compatible

      Blu-Ray drives will most likely be backwards compatible as well. From the Wikipedia article:

      While it is not compulsory for manufacturers, the Blu-ray Disc Association recommends that Blu-ray drives should be capable of reading DVDs, ensuring backward compatibility.

      The whole "DVD" on the end of the name is just a ruse to get people to buy into the standard. There really isn't anything I can think of that makes HD-DVD superior to Blu-Ray. Blu-Ray, OTOH, has many positive features including the ability to wipe the disk without scratching it, and larger data capacities.

    2. Re:HD-DVD by ilyaaohell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The one major point that is always cited when talking about HD-DVD is the fact that manufacturing is going to be cheap. Enjoy your $30 and $40 Blue Ray movies, though. I'll be sticking to DVDs and my fully-functional SDTV set for MANY years to come.

      --
      UNIX: A computer user is defined as a programmer. WINDOWS: A computer user is defined as a consumer.
  4. ATTN: Industry Types by croddy · · Score: 5, Funny
    It's dead when we say it's dead (not you). Now please, kindly return to the factory and make us some more DVD's.

    Thanks!

  5. Article summary by Anakron · · Score: 3, Insightful
    DVD is dead because device manufacturers say so.
    Your options are
    1. Blu-Ray
    2. HD-DVD
    Nobody wants a format war.
    --
    There are 11 types of people. Those who understand binary, those who don't and those who are sick of this lame joke.
  6. hooray, DVD is dead! by manavendra · · Score: 2, Funny

    But oh, wait! we *know* its dead, but we just don't quite know what killed it yet..

    --
    http://efil.blogspot.com/
    1. Re:hooray, DVD is dead! by FirstTimeCaller · · Score: 5, Funny

      we just don't quite know what killed it yet.

      Oh, but I think that we do! And we even know who... it was DVD Jon, on the Internet, with a DeCSS decryption alogithm.

      --
      Wanted: witty unique signature. Must be willing to relocate.
    2. Re:hooray, DVD is dead! by rworne · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes it's dead because the DRM has been cracked. If it weren't for DeCSS, there would not be so strong a push to get everyone switched over to Blu-ray or HD-DVD (which both are so far uncracked).

      After getting screwed over because the industry decided they would not trust anyone with analog composite inputs, I'm not about to fork over more cash for new hardware just because my "HD Ready" TV was obsolete after less than one year when the industry decided they wanted to encrypt the signal to the TV.

      --
      I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
  7. Am I the only one... by caffeinatedOnline · · Score: 2, Funny

    who gets just a little squeemish at the thought of high def porn?

    --
    The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel...
  8. VHS has just finally died off by winkydink · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Though you can still buy players and people have a ton of tapes. I see this more as wishful thinking on the part of consumer electronics mfgs (who'd love for you to have to buy yet another player format) more than anything else

    --

    "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

  9. Unlikely by Professor_UNIX · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since DVDs look absolutely fantastic on my 110" projection screen I don't see how they're going to make much improvement. DVD quality is head and shoulders above broadcast quality analog TV that HDTV is replacing so I'm not sure where the market is for HD-DVD since it's only a minor bump in quality.

    1. Re:Unlikely by Tim+Browse · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Seriously, the upgrade from VHS to DVDs was only about a 2X improvement

      More like 3X, really.

      and people were constantly saying how much better DVDs looked.

      But also people didn't have to buy a new TV to see the difference. They bought a DVD player - it looked better on their normal NTSC/PAL TV.

      If they buy an HD-DVD or BluRay player, it's not really going to look any better unless they buy a new HD TV. And they're still pretty expensive. (Mind you, the player manufacturers seem to be solving this problem by making the players prohibitively expensive anyway.)

      For me, a big difference with DVDs was the sound, too. Perhaps more so than the improved video. VHS sound is crap (inc. 'VHS HiFi') - I have pre-recorded VHS movies where I can barely make out the dialogue, and it's not like I've played those tapes to death. I'm talking about the first play through. DVD sound is great - and I have to ask, how much better can the sound actually get with HD-DVD? We're back into CD vs SACD territory there.

      I think high definition DVDs will take over eventually, but not at the speed the industry thinks, especially while they're still dicking around with competing formats. Until one HD format is settled on, I think most people will steer clear (esp. when the people who actually bought 'HD Ready' TVs find out it won't work due to no HDMI connector, etc).

  10. I don't think so by grasshoppa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is only one thing the next generation has going for it; Capacity. In everything else, DVD has a distinct advantage. It's cheaper, it's entrenched and it's easier to work with.

    Personally, I think the "industry" is in for quite a shocker this year, as bluray and hddvd barely make a blip on the radar. Same with next year.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    1. Re:I don't think so by Shadarr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The other thing DVD has going for it is that it's actually a standard. The next generation still hasn't sorted itself out between Bluray and HD-DVD. I know that I held off on buying a DVD burner because of the standards battle between DVD+R and DVD-R, until the hardware manufacturers got fed up and built drives that could burn in any format. I expect the same thing will happen here. Buying one or the other at this point is a gamble, and you might get stuck with the next Betamax. Not to mention that Holographic Video Discs are in development which hold a terabyte of data, making both of the "next generation" standards seem like a mere footnote before the real next generation arrives.

  11. My dvd is not dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just came from the TV room and the DVD as the VHS are working fine
    you scare me

  12. They wish... by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The industry wants to kill DVDs since it is so easy for people to rent and copy them now days. Maybe they think they'll make more money with (Uncrackable)DRM'd replacements.

  13. Fine. by Yahweh+Doesn't+Exist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    if the entertainment industry says DVD is dead I won't buy any more.

    what? you don't have the replacement out yet? well, you guys just fucked yourselves then didn't you.

    1. Re:Fine. by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Heh. Exactly my thought.

      They've been pushing the 'imminent' hidef stuff for a year now. So I made the decision to stop buying DVDs.

      Unfortunately there's no HD broadcast here and no HD media, so the only way to get it is off usenet... They really shot themselves in the foot - pushing HD like it was the second coming then making it so the only way to get any was do download ripped copies - and that situation isn't likely to change for a good 6 months too...

  14. Industry is in for a surprise... by GeorgeMcBay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The issue that is far, far bigger than HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray and yet the industry doesn't seem to understand is that a standard DVD is more than good enough for most people. As with the CD before it, the DVD hits a sweet spot where aficionados might want improvements but the average user just doesn't care enough (if he is even able to discern them). The industry is being lulled into a false sense that the masses want HD DVDs because of the success of HDTVs, but I believe that has more to do with people wanting larger screens that take up less real estate (LCD, Plasma), than it really does with the higher resolution (for the masses, not for everyone). Also, people expect to buy new TVs on a cyclical basis and it is much easier to get them to run through one purchase upgrade than to upgrade their entire old media collection.

    Someday HD DVDs (of one format or the other) will be the norm, but I'm quite sure this is going to be a much slower process (far slower than VHS->DVD IMO) than the studios seem to realize and will be driven more via a trickle of sales as people replace old TVs and DVDs with new models (which support old and new formats). In the meantime, they better keep cranking out those Plain Old DVDs.

    1. Re:Industry is in for a surprise... by ejp1082 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Heck, the mp3 is good enough for most people, and that's a step backwards from CD's as quality is concerned.

      I think the movies studios are seriously overestimating how much people care about quality. Sure, there will always be the high end types that always have to have the latest and greatest home theater equipment - the kind of people who bought laserdiscs back in the pre-DVD days. But the vast majority of people just want to watch the movie, and will do so via the path of least resistance - it's convenience that matters, not quality.

      The quality difference between DVD and HD is so marginal even I can barely see a difference, and HD-DVD/BluRay offers exactly *no* additional convenience that a DVD doesn't offer now (and depending on the DRM scheme they settle on, they stand to be a hell of a lot *less* convenient).

      The "next" format is going to be some form of digital download, probably around the same level of quality that a DVD offers now. My prediction is that both BluRay and HD-DVD are going to go the way of the laser disk, at least as far as buying movies on them is concerned. They'll find a niche market of high end consumers and that's it.

    2. Re:Industry is in for a surprise... by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I think the movies studios are seriously overestimating how much people care about quality. Sure, there will always be the high end types that always have to have the latest and greatest home theater equipment - the kind of people who bought laserdiscs back in the pre-DVD days. But the vast majority of people just want to watch the movie, and will do so via the path of least resistance - it's convenience that matters, not quality.
      I'll go you one further. There are a lot of movie buffs who like to see a high-quality picture. But, by and large, those types of consumers are passionate about old movies -- movies from the 1970s or earlier. None of those movies were filmed with DVD in mind, or even with home viewing in mind. The negatives will surely have deteriorated over time (George Lucas has said that Star Wars would have been lost forever very soon if he didn't go through the process of remastering it when he did; too bad he had to tamper with it at the same time). What's more, ultra-high-resolution HD processes probably won't be particularly flattering to the film stocks used at that time. Whatever classic movies do make it onto HD-DVD will either look slapped together -- with spots, hairs on the film, crackle and all -- or else they'll be heavily digitally retouched. Some people think that music fans are crazy when they say classic 70s albums sound worse after they've been digitally remastered for CD, but even the average consumer is going to be able to tell the difference between an original print of "The Godfather" and one that's been painted over with seven layers of Photoshop.
      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    3. Re:Industry is in for a surprise... by jms · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Motion picture film has phenomonal resolution. There's a lot of argument about what the "effective resolution" of film is, but you're very, very wrong about how classic movies will look in consumer digital formats.

      None of those movies were filmed with DVD in mind, or even with home viewing in mind.

      Yes, they were filmed with *THEATRES* in mind, back in the days when theatre screens were gigantic. Back then, movies were filmed on extremely high resolution, fine grain film stock, and they filmed using arc lamps to provide the enormous amounts of light necessary to expose the ultra-high resolution film stock.

      It's difficult to compare film resolution to video resolution because they are largely apples and oranges. If you do a google search, you'll find a lot of opinions in the 20-50 equivalent megapixel range. When motion picture studios render computer graphics for transfer to 35mm film, and want to avoid pixelation in the release prints, the images are rendered at 6K x 4K, or 24 megapixels per frame. This is also the resolution used when motion picture negatives are scanned for restoration.

      Also, modern motion picture film has a 1000:1 contrast ratio. Older black and white film stocks used much more silver than today, and had an even higher contrast ratio.

      The highest available HDTV resolution is 1920x1080, or 2 megapixels per frame, or 1/12th the effective resolution of motion picture film. It's not even close.

      The negatives will surely have deteriorated over time

      That would have been true 10 or 15 years ago. By now, most of the studios have recognized the value of their libraries, and a large number of classic movies have been restored. Ted Turner took a lot of heat for "colorizing" his motion picture holdings, but the first step he took on each movie was to pay for a complete, top-quality black and white film restoration/preservation of the best existing preprint material.

      The amout of deterioration depends on how well the negatives were processed and stored. Technicolor dye transfer prints do not fade, and if a studio has one in mint condition, it can provide a perfect color record. (George Lucas lucked out in that Star Wars was printed by Technicolor in Britain using the old dye-transfer process, so a few prints have survived with perfect, unfaded color. This allowed him to complete a near-perfect restoration of the film.)

      Color films from the 50s to mid-80s filmed on Eastman negative film have problems with color fading (which can be corrected in most cases.) In the mid-80s Kodak improved their film stocks, and greatly reduced color fading. Restored movies don't have "spots [and] hairs on the film", because those are not on the camera negatives. When a movie is completed, the hand-spliced-together camera negative (which has been only ever handled in a clean room with cotton gloves) is used to make a small number of high-resolution interpositives. Then the camera negative goes into a film can and into a climate controlled vault.

      Those interpositives are used to make a larger number of internegatives, which are then used to print all of the release prints that are sent to theatres and gather the "spots and hairs" that you are referring to. If, for some reason, the camera negatives are overused, and become dirty and scratched, the dirt and debris can be cleaned off, and scratches on the film are eliminated by "wet-gate" printing, where the film is wetted with a liquid just prior to scanning that makes the scratches disappear. You are seriously underestimating the motion picture restoration industry. Given enough money, virtually any motion picture, in any condition can be made to look like new *in the theatre.*

      In short, wait and see. Old movies are going to look fantastic when scanned for HDTV. And the best news is that they are going to look even better for about the next 5 generations of consumer video media.

      No consumer video system has even come close to the image resolution of motion picture film, and HDTV is no exception.

    4. Re:Industry is in for a surprise... by PCM2 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      This on the other hand seems like an absurd statement. Most of this stuff was shot on 35mm or better. It was shot to be viewed on huge screens with actors 15 feet tall. Sure, people are a little further away, but still. 35mm has far better "resolution" than does HD. Why would this not convert well?
      Because of film grain, which can look strange when converted to pixels and requires digital filtering to clean up. Because of scratches on the negatives, or dirt that inevitably made its way into film prints in those days. They already have to clean this stuff up for the current generation of DVDs. Look how many DVDs have been re-released in "special editions" because the original pressings looked so awful ("Scarface" is the most obvious example). There's a lot of technology used to clean up original film prints for DVD already, but the process is only going to get harder when you start converting for high-resolution HD picture. Stuff that you might be able to "get away with" on a low-resolution NTSC screen won't cut it for a crowd that bought an HD-DVD specifically for its miraculous picture quality.

      And so what you'll get is films that have been extensively digitally remastered, a la Star Wars. When the DVDs of the original trilogy came out there were lots of Web pages comparing frames from the new prints to the old ones. In my opinion, and that of a lot of people who grew up watching those films, not all the digital retouching was for the better -- and I'm not even talking about the scenes Lucas added or replaced.

      Creating an HD-DVD of an older movie with picture quality up to the standards that have been hyped for the format is going to be extremely costly. Thus, I predict you won't see HD-DVD "Special Editions" of classic movies appearing in any particular hurry -- not any faster than they showed up for plain ol' DVD, at least. When they do appear, I'm willing to bet that a lot of the film-buff types, whom you might think are the ones most eagerly awaiting the new format, are going to be disappointed. But hey, Hollywood ... prove me wrong.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
  15. 1. Exaggeration 2. ??? 3. Profit! by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Seems a little hasty to make such a claim. VHS isnt dead yet. The only media I can think of that is dead is the 8-Track and 70 RPM.

    Exaggerating death throes isn't meant to end sales, gods no. If that suddenly happened Bush would probably have to slash taxes and then tell everyone to take that $300 out and buy a stack of DVDs (except anything he finds morally repugnant, such as gay cowboys). The MPAA would have to suddenly circle the wagons, up-end the Bucket 'O Lawyers and proclaim the fall-off is the result of rampant piracy.

    Nope, nothing like that.

    What they mean to do is push the new HD-DVD or Blu Ray technology, even if it's not on the store shelves just yet. What's desired is to whip up a frenzy -- to make it a self fulfilling prophecy.

    Anyone remember (the late) Richard Pryor as the Wiz, changing the colours? Red is dead, wouldn't be seen in green, etc.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:1. Exaggeration 2. ??? 3. Profit! by tfcdesign · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In that light, I see iTunes' tv and movie downloads, the new Google downloads, and several others wiping out DVDs sooner than another storage media.

    2. Re:1. Exaggeration 2. ??? 3. Profit! by ackthpt · · Score: 2, Interesting
      In that light, I see iTunes' tv and movie downloads, the new Google downloads, and several others wiping out DVDs sooner than another storage media.

      You could very well be right. It's probably only a few more years that fixed media will be relevant.

      i say, were can i find the buggy whip shop?

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  16. DVD is dead, long live DVD! by msauve · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They only want us to think it's dead for two reasons, first, content cannot be securely protected (like they hoped). Second, you can now get a player for twenty bucks (same as in town), so there's little profit left.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  17. Indeed by TheSpoom · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm in the technology industry, and I don't think the DVD is dead. Hell, we just got a new DVD player with our surround sound kit. Does anyone see Blockbuster renting out something more than DVD?

    This guy is making stupid generalizations to draw attention.

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
    1. Re:Indeed by timeOday · · Score: 3, Interesting
      For the content producers, DVD is "it."

      But for hardware companies, it's a totally different story. Where do you go with a product that has hundreds of parts yet sells for $29 at WalMart? There can't be any profit in it. Worse yet, the expensive DVD players hardly work any better than the cheapies. So for the hardware comapanies, I'd say the DVD player is "done", or "dead," or whatever you want to call it. They must be itching for the next big thing.

  18. Not Dead Yet by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am sure that as time goes on DVD will be replaced by something better. BUT consumers will profoundly ignore anything that is engaged in a format war!

    It took many years for DVD catalogs to reach their current levels, and there are a number of titles that are still not available in DVD format. Plus a good DVD player looks pretty decent on a HDTV. So there isn't a huge incentive for customers to buy any new HD format. With all this there is little or no incentive for consumers to buy into a new technology - especially if it comes with a price premium.

    There is a good chance that a format war will delay the acceptance of HD resolution disks for years. It might even fatally wound the the new formats - like it did with SACD and DVD-AUDIO.

    In the meantime people like me are using Netfix instead of buying DVD's - why own something that will eventually become obsolete anyway.

  19. 70 RPM? by commodoresloat · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you mean 78 RPM, it is very much alive, if gasping for air. I have an old wind-up Victrola and about 250 78s of old blues and jazz that I still crank up from time to time. The sound is crap for an audiophile of course but it has its own rickety charm. The best thing is you don't have to plug a damn thing in. Came in handy when there was a blackout - I'm also into candles; half the neighborhood showed up at my place with booze because it was the only place on the block with light and music. When the power came back on, we continued to party, but I admit we did switch back to 33.3 RPM for the music :)

  20. Not the industry's decision by Thaelon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When people stop buying DVDs in signficant numbers, then and only then will DVD be dead.

    Just because they want us to buy more, newer, less reliable, more expensive shit doesn't mean we will.

    --

    Question everything

  21. DVD is going to stick around by Schlemphfer · · Score: 5, Insightful
    >The only media I can think of that is dead is the 8-Track and 70 RPM.

    I think for purposes of this argument, we can fairly say that if it's not given at least an aisle at Best Buy, it's dead. LP's are dead as a doornail. VHS tapes will be soon. But I can't imagine the DVD section at Best Buy going away within the next three years. Keep in mind it's in the interests of the electronics industry to have DVD die off as soon as possible. And despite the fact that the MPEG-2 encryption was a rush job and has long since been blown away by newer codecs, DVD's remain an outstanding technology.

    Whatever the next standard is, it won't have the clear advantages over DVD that DVD had over VHS. The several hundred million consumers who already own DVD players and stacks of DVDs have no urgent reason to jump to the next standard -- not until most of these people own high-def Televisions. DVD will be with us for some time.

    --
    I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
    1. Re:DVD is going to stick around by angle_slam · · Score: 2, Insightful
      But I can't imagine the DVD section at Best Buy going away within the next three years.

      Three years ago, you probably could have said, "I can't imagine the VHS section at Best Buy going away within the next three years."

    2. Re:DVD is going to stick around by gwiner · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Vinyl LPs are not dead as a doornail - There's plenty of new vinyl being pressed up. Being a DJ is every kid's dream. Some "turntable-ists" are actual well-respected muscians. Records are a very much alive, albeit underground media. New albums by indie rock bands are often presseed in limited runs on vinyl and are treasured by record-player and music nuts everywhere. Believe it or not, many audiophiles consider records to still be the superior-sounding medium. And by the way, it was 78 RPM was the standard, not 70. Sorry - I know I'm off topic.

    3. Re:DVD is going to stick around by Aadain2001 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Oh I did! I knew VHS was going the way of the doodoo as soon as DVDs started hitting the shelves. How could anything like VHS survive DVDs? Smaller form factor, better quality (both in sound and video) (that doesn't degrade each time you play it), more extra features, etc, etc, etc. Everything they are holding up to "replace" DVDs are nothing more than increased storage/better video quality, but that is only benificial to people who do have HD TVs (which isn't many). Oh, and different/better/more draconian DRM features, which we all just LOVE! Nope, DVDs will be around longer than the industry wants them to be, but just as long as consumers want them.

      --
      Space for rent, inquire within
    4. Re:DVD is going to stick around by tfcdesign · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I understand what you are saying, but I disagree about LPs. If you go to the Targets and Walmarts in my area (San Jose, CA) there are LPs but mostly in Spanish.

    5. Re:DVD is going to stick around by slashdot.org · · Score: 4, Informative

      And despite the fact that the MPEG-2 encryption was a rush job and has long since been blown away by newer codecs

      I'm sure you meant MPEG-2 compression, not encryption. MPEG-2 compression was certainly NOT a rush job. I agree that there are better codecs now. MPEG-2 has simply been one step in the evolution, and a significant amount of effort went into the development.

      Or maybe you are confusing CSS encryption that is used on DVDs with MPEG-2. CSS encryption was evidently a rush job. Which is probably more of a reason than anything else why the movie industry wants to see it dead. Video quality isn't really the issue yet (even today very few TVs display native 1080p movies to begin with).

    6. Re:DVD is going to stick around by Psykus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think what they really mean when they say "DVD is dead", is that the DRM for DVD is dead, and that's why they want to move on to Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, so they can have more control.

    7. Re:DVD is going to stick around by dpilot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But my MPAA Media Overlords really WANT me to buy a new HD-DVD. They also WANT me to replace all of my equipment and media library. After all, they need to keep their revenue stream flowing. After all, if digital bits last forever, forced obsolescence is a necessity! Plus this gives them the opportunity to institute the DRM that they messed up, first time. THEY NEED THIS!

      Who are we to refuse?

      --
      The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
    8. Re:DVD is going to stick around by arminw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      .....it won't have the clear advantages over DVD that DVD had over VHS......

      Indeed true. It is the convenience of random access that disks have over tapes that made most consumers switch to DVD and audio CDs. The lack of wear when played and the superior quality were bonuses, but not the driving points for consumers to re-buy all or at least much the old content over again. The old TV's used with VCRs worked and still do just fine with that new DVD player and the audio systems already in use were useable with the digital audio CDs.

      The new formats will really only have better quality as the reason to switch to the new technology. If a customer does not also buy an expensive big screen HD TV, the new format will not do much more than the current DVDs do. Much of the material in the vaults of the movie companies would not benefit consumers in noticeable superior quality anyway.

      The video equivalent of mp3, where a user an store a few thousand movies at today's DVD quality in a holographic chip the size of a compact flash card, storing about 100 terabyes or so, at about the current price of one might be a compelling reason to buy new movie storage equipment.

      --
      All theory is gray
    9. Re:DVD is going to stick around by Vellmont · · Score: 2, Informative


      Three years ago, you probably could have said, "I can't imagine the VHS section at Best Buy going away within the next three years."


      What planet do you live on? 3 years ago was only 2003. It was obvious that VHS was on the way out at early as 2000. In 2003 VHS was on its last legs and if you weren't betting on the VHS section at Best Buy going away in 2 or 3 years, you weren't paying attention.

      --
      AccountKiller
    10. Re:DVD is going to stick around by Zerathdune · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I'm on the exact same page as you, and my tv is 53". I watched remember the titans on TNT in hi-def tonight, and it does look beautiful, but not better than batman begins on dvd. and as a side note, it actually sounds worse on my cambridge soundworks 5.1 system, because while some hi-def channels support digital surround, TNT is one that doesn't, so I have to switch to pro logic to get it to use all 5 speakers and the subwoofer.

      in the coming months and years, this is going to be a new challange for the consumer electronics market: what happens when your products are already so good, that when you make them better, it is humanly impossilbe to notice? dvds are relatively new, but the industry is already calling them dead. cds have been around since the 80's, and though the industry has introduced two competeing formats, sacd and dvd audio, no one is buying either for the same reason. I have excellent hearing, and I have one dvd audio disc, with which I'm pretty sure (not certain) that I can hear a difference in sound quality. it's so slight however, that I wouldn't even consider spending extra money. indeed I rip cds into a lossy format anyway usually mp3's at 192kbps. 128 is crap, but 192 gets into that same range where I'm not even certain I can hear a difference.

      who's going to pay extra for high quality media when the "low" quality media already breaks the limit of many people's senses?

      so of course it has to be all marketing from here, since they have to manage to sell a product that for all intensive purposes the consumer already has, and has no need for a spare.

      when I set up the aformentioned sound system, I found I had failed to get all of the cables nessicary, I need another component video if I wanted to be able to switch video and audio sources just by pressing one button. at this point I have five remote controlls to keep track of already, so I figured I would spend the money to consolidate one more feature. I also needed an audio cable for my hi-def cable box. it already sounded sweet with analog, but not quite at the level of dvds (which if the programming supports it, it now is), so I dropped by circut city to pick one up. at cambridge soundworks, they just handed me a coaxil cable to use with my dvd player. it was just one cable, they didn't give me options, and this didn't suprise me for a digtial cable; if you were getting cable loss on a usb cord, would you accept it as a trade off for not paying extra for higher quality cables? so when I went into circut city looking for optical audio cables (my cable box doesn't support coaxil), I assumed the only varations would be the lengths. they weren't, some were supposedly higher quality in some way, which might have made sense if they were analog, but even rock bottom quality digital cables should have perfect signal reproduction. I bought the cheapo, which being fiber optic cable, was still not so cheap. it sounds as good as it did in the store. monstercable, which was the only brand circut city carried, must not think much of consumers.

      --
      No single raindrop believes that it is responsible for the storm.
  22. Outmoded tech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What about LD or BETA? I own several LDs not sure what I'll do when that player breaks. But at least they can be copied to video tapes. Should be possible to scan them into a divx file as well, if I had a video capture card..

    The problem is that we are all investing in media which we will most likely not be able to view in a view years. I had to buy a new DVD player this year because several of my new DVDs would not play on my older player. Presumably because of slight changes in the software.

    DVDs for the most part can be hacked and backed up. But what about new technologies. Will this be possible with DVD-HD or will all of the media purchaced turn into an expensive and ineffective paper weight in 10 years when our players break and the tech is outmoded?

  23. I should be so healthy... by SpecBear · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The technology industry agrees that DVD is dead? Alrighty then...

    How many companies have stopped producing DVD players?

    How many stores have stopped selling DVDs?

    How many DVD pressing factories have shut down?

    Where can I buy a next-gen media player (HD-DVD, Blu-Ray, whatever)?


    WTF do they mean when they say DVD is dead?

  24. Unreliable storage mediums by msid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    DVD and CD are two very, very unreliable mediums for storing data. And for some people storing data is an important part of their lives. Besides that, most people treat DVDs and CDs very clamsy. You don't even know which scratch is going to be "the lethal one". On the other hand I would appreciate the fact if some people would bother creating reliable hard drives that do not die unexpectedly. At least to have a way to warn the user before they die. It is awful to live with the fear that one day, you don't know which, your HD will die. And S.M.A.R.T. is not always reliable.

  25. I wouldn't be so hasty... by stickyc · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The first alternative formats are just now being introduced. If you rewind the wayback machine, the first DVD format wars started in the early 1990s with the first consumer players not becoming available until 1997 in the US. Betamax was released in 1984 with "a winner" in the tape format wars not being declared until 1988. I'm not up on HDTV's timeline enough to quote actual dates, but I picked up my first "digital ready" HDTV in 2000 and it wasn't until just last year that the industry had actually agreed to an input standard for digital content.

    Despite what the industry says, I'm betting on at least 4 years before I really have to worry about my precious DVD's being truly obsolete.

  26. Right... by RickPartin · · Score: 2, Informative

    Technology doesn't just die like these sensationalistic articles tend to believe. It slowly loses momentum over several years. VHS is still widely used for Christ sake. DVD is still in it's prime. Players are cheap and people are buying disks like crazy. It seems way early to start shoving a new standard down consumers throats. Another thing is that consumers get comfortable with a technology and tend to stick with it for as long as possible. For Christmas I bought my dad a new DVD player. I set it up and showed him how to use it the best I could. He calls me up the next day completely confused and jokingly says "You might as well have brought me a fucking space ship". So I guess the moral of the story is that it is not time to give the average Joe another fucking space ship to figure out.

  27. Ah, well, you misread the tone by Julian+Morrison · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't think: Bones with a tricorder in hand saying "he's dead, Jim". Do think: Al Capone gritting his teeth and snarling "That no-good punk is dead. Dead, ya hear me?".

    The movie industry hates DVD for the same reason it hates unadulterated CD: the pirates have cracked it so thoroughly that the studios might as well post the disk images on mininova themselves.

  28. Only to those who can't get enough $$$ out if it.. by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 5, Insightful

    DVD is only dead to the greedy who aren't happy with the deflation in profit margins, due to the huge array of competition from everywhere, including scads of historical movies and TV programs and imported foreign content. They prefer to think it's not due to the competition but to piracy, but they're wrong. When you consider the time required to copy DVDs, its probably actually cheaper to just by a legit copy. Sure, there may be some bootleggers out there who are showing up with counterfits at flea markets, and a few downloaders who will D/L a movie to watch just because they can, not because it's convenient. But not enough to explain the hit big media is taking in the pocketbook, despite their claims.

    Big media figures if they start up something newer and better they can get us all to transition to it and spend more $$$. However, while I think it could mean a short term windfall, I'm not convinced that HD gives you enough additional value to make it worth the transition-- most of what I like to watch already exists and isn't in HD format, I have no interest in spending extra $$$ just to see the modern crap that's mostly written by ad executives.

    The DVD is not just going to go away, there's a huge amount of content out there that, even if the disks and the players start dying out, we'll be able to back them up on new storage mediums and still preserve them. And, much of the content remains worth watching, in fact, mostly more so than what's targeted for HD.

    But let them pull out all the stops. And maybe there'll be suckers who will buy into it, but if I ever do I'll be about the last to do so, after the cost has dropped to about what DVDs are going for now...

    They only wish it was dead because while it's alive it's a low-cost content rich alternative to the high-cost content poor HD market...

  29. No exposed bits and solid-state by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They should pick a format that can last centuries. This may sound ridiculous at first, but consider what the ideal shape is regardless of technology. It would be something like a thin pen-drive. If you only store something small or compression improves, then it can be a short pen. If you want to store 50 movies, then it may be a longer pen.

    If it is like a pen-drive, then the technology inside does not matter such that it can change. Only the interface has to stay the same.

    A disk, especially a 5 inch disk is too bulky. Plus, it is too easy to scratch the surface and the technology determines the interface. You cannot increase the number of groves (or whatever they call them now) without needing a new interface. A pen-drive-like interface does not care how many groves or how much RAM is inside. Only the "plug" and outer body has to remain the same. Inside it can use bacteria, pizza, or gerbal poop to store info. It ain't matter.

    However, I must say that USB is a little awkward to insert. But, I have not seen something significantly better to replace it as an interface. So a pen-drive shape it is in the right direction.

  30. When did this happen? by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think DVD is alive and well, and will continue to be for a few more years at least.

    Even with HD-DVD or Blu-ray looming around the corner, the bottom line is that DVD media will be supported on these newer devices.

    If your talking about the end of using physical media for distributing movies, then I think your are a long way off. Hollywood is not really embracing online digital media, whether its for music or movies. Too many competing standards are vying to be the dominant online media format, Apple's quicktime, Microsoft's WMV, DIVX, XVID, etc, etc, etc. None of these players are going to want to give up their proprietary format to create a single industry standard, at least not with regards to Microsoft and Apple. Having too many file formats being distributed over the net will just be annoying. Having to buy or install multiple products to get a chance to watch a Hollywood movie will cause consumers to protest.

    Also, I have yet to see a truely decent mergin of the PC in the living room. Most are still klunky hacks that try and force a PC into a home theater component, complete with boxy case, noisy fans, and cumbersome operation. DVD's are popular because of the easy of use, slip a disk in a try and hit play. Until computers match that in terms of simplicity, using a PC to playback movies won't become popular.

    So what are these people talking about, other then making some grandiose statement to attract attention? Physical distribution of movies may change, but its still digital media, whether its in the form of a DVD, or someone comes up with a square holographic cube, any new digital player will support the previous generation of media, there is no reason for DVD to die to become obsolete.

    DVD will be dead when Hollywood stops fighting online distribution of copyrighted content, Apple and Microsoft embrace the same file format, and someone finds a way of turning the computer into a dirt simple consumer electronics component. As you can see, it ain't going to happen anytime soon.

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
  31. It's not dead. by NeuroManson · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's pining for the fjords!

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  32. DVD is not dead by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    nor is VHS. Even BetaMax still is alive and kicking and in use in some places.

    Remember that Laserdisc system and how VHS and video tapes were dead? Laserdisc is the superior product with a superior quality picture and sound than VHS had.

    Guess which format people supported and used the most?

    The DVD is not dead, do I need to invoke Monty Python here "I'm not dead yet!"

    HDTV formats are way too expensive for the average person to use and own. Ever tried to price HDTV cable and satellite boxes lately as well as the monthly fees for them? Ever priced an HDTV TV set lately? Wonder why those TV sets under 35 inches do not support HDTV? Only the wealthy can afford them.

    I know a lot of people who don't even own a DVD player and still use VHS players and recorders. Most of them have older TV sets that cannot take the DVD digital input and need an adapter just to use one. Now try to convince them to spend thousands of dollars on an HDTV system to play Blu-Ray and HD-DVD disks instead of their 20 Inch Analog TV set with the VHS video tape device? The most they can spend is like $50 to $100 for new equipment if they go without certain things for a while and cut their budgets.

    DVD Players sell for as low as $35 each with $15 for the Analog to Digital adapter to use them on that 20 inch Analog TV set. A $50 minimum investment just to upgrade to a DVD playing system. $100 for a good one that won't shoot craps in the next few years or so.

    The way I see it, as far as HDTV DVDs go, Blu Ray is BetaMax and HD-DVD is VHS as far as formats and pricing and marketing goes. My money is on HD-DVD, because it seems only handful of suppliers will support Blu Ray like Sony (who invented it). This is the BetaMax vs. VHS wars all over again.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  33. Viva La VCR! by tfcdesign · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have 2 VCRs with 6 hrs of recording scheduled for each, every week. Its a lot cheaper than DVR or TIVO and the quality is good enough.

  34. Re:i love this by J.+Random+Luser · · Score: 2, Interesting

    how can something in the technology world be dead if there is nothing replacing it?

    Because it's time is up? Do the math: 78rpm phenol discs 60 yrs; vinyl 30 yrs; CD 20yrs; mp3 ??. 16mm film 60yrs; VHS 30yrs; DVD 10yrs; ???

    [Flag Paranoid Conspiracy] Notice the logarithmic scales in a number of technologies all seem to hit the wall at the Singularity, 2012. You won't be needing your DVDs after that...

  35. I'm so sick of this crap by Empty+Yo · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Battles, battles, battles. This industry is so combative that they are introducing a new technology before even a minority of the population has adopted the *old* technology. The gap between what the average citizen has in their home and what is considered 'cutting edge' is getting wider and wider and wider and eventually no one will be able to keep up.

    Ever seen the back of a receiver? Take a long look at those analog RCA jacks because that was the last time the industry ever got everyone on the same page at the same time. When was that? 1970 something. Since then, Sony and Toshiba fought it out over Toslink and SPDIF and the CD format. Dolby and DTS fought it over the new surround sound ... both of which were obsolete a few years later with 6.1 and 7.1 coming fast and furious. Component barely started to become a standard before it was supplanted by DVI, which lasted on a year or so before HDMI came along to replace it. Every day I deal with pissed off and frustrated consumers who can't get their DVDs, cable terminals, satellite receivers and TVs all working together because of incompatible technologies.

    My computer is my entertainment center for a reason.

    --
    I'll tolerate anything except intolerance.
  36. Not Dead. Not Dying. by DarkVader · · Score: 2, Interesting

    DVD - Alive and well.

    Blu-Ray and HD-DVD - Dead on arrival.

    I'm sorry, I'm just not interested in ANY medium until the DRM is cracked, and if it's really as strong as they say it is in those, I'm never going to be interested.

  37. 3.5 inch blue dvds by transami · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think the industry made a terrible mistake. In the day of 5 1/4" floppies 3.5" floppies gave a nice incentive for continuing the upgrade path. Smaller dics were much nicer to handle for their dimunitive size. They had an opportunity to repeat this again with the higher capacity blue laser discs but they have squandering it. They're only selling point is 5 times capacity, but at 5 times the cost who cares? 3 times capacity for 3 times the cost would be much more palatable and I for one would have been happier justfor the reduced size.

    --
    :T:R:A:N:S:
  38. heh by smash · · Score: 2, Insightful
    DVD = cracked, more like.

    DVD is more than acceptable quality for 99.9999% of the population, and as a PC storage medium, it's fine.

    For audio, it's fine.

    The only problem I can see is that the built in copyprotection was cracked, and certain people aren't happy about that :)

    Perhaps they mean that the dvd-player market is saturated, and they need something else to sell?

    smash.

    --
    I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
  39. DVD was miles ahead of VHS; HD is barely a leap by DECS · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree: DVD and VHS were very different "new" things, and DVD is hardly in need of replacement.

    VHS wasn't commonly in homes until the mid 80s. Being tape, it required long winding time to find content, and had an inherently limited lifespan. Being analog, it could not be copied or duplicated more than a generation or two. Videotape in general was introduced with less than broadcast audio and video quality, and as better technology came out, VHS slowly progressed toward being near broadcast.

    DVD was introduced with CD quality sound and digital video significantly better than standard broadcast. DVD's are more convenient, durable and smaller than VHS tapes. DVD also offers perfect copies across generations.

    DVD was also quickly integrated into computers; playing DVD's from a PC or laptop using VGA or DVI to a computer display offers a very high quality video, competitive with HDTV. Since common DVDs are better than commonly broadcast video quality, and since little HD content available, and since HD displays are not commonplace, there's hardly demand for a new HD media.

    Satellite providers have had the capacity to deliver HD for some time now, and have instead chosen to deliver more content at standard resolution. If, as that suggests, there is scant market for HD video, why do we need an HD media disc to suddenly replace DVDs?

    The only real benefit HD-DVD and BlueRay offer over DVD is in data storage capacity and in DRM, and consumers don't look particularly needy for either. They already have hard drive storage in excess of HD-DVD's (recall than when CD-ROM arrived, it offered FAR more storage than hard disks of the day).

    CD's certainly didn't disapear for SACD, and in fact most consumers have never seen or heard of SACD. And remember when Phillips (and others) were presenting the "future of audio cassette," which was suposed to replace audio tapes the way that CD had replaced records? Those products bombed.

    If anything, I think there is more growth potential in HardDrive based DVRs to replace and expand upon the functions of VCRs, a job that DVD isn't very well equiped to perform given its slow and finicky write technology.

    New iterations of the iPod, as a DVR, have the potential to serve new markets better than bigger DVDs. And as broadband becomes more commonplace, and faster bandwidth arrives, larger discs may not be that necessary after all.

    I can already:

    -get iPod sized movies on demand (via iTMS)
    -get DVD quality movies on demand (via NetFlix)
    -get TV style episodes and shorts on demand (via Tivo)

    I can see those services migrate toward HD slowly without any need for HD discs along the way. Think of NetFlix using downloads and hard disks instead of discs and postage, and its hard to imagine what problem a HD-DVD standard would solve.

  40. They want it dead SOOO BAD... by whyde · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...because that's the only way they can make their DRM a reality. The studios don't want you to own anything. They want you to license the rights to view a performance over and over again.

    The problem is that DVD is a "good enough" technology that there's not a compelling reason (for most people) to want anything different. The same with CDs. They tried to kill the CD format by trying SACD and other variations, but they don't understand that to 99.9% of the listening public, the CD is a "good enough" format for their music. Sadly, MP3 is also a "good enough" format for a vast majority of people, even at a low bitrate with a crummy encoder. Let's face it, when I'm in my car, the noise floor is so loud that MP3 is just fine.

    So, they're doing the best to stay "on message" and try to convince us that it's dead because that's the only way they're going to get any more money out of the people who already are happy with the status quo.

    Wolfenstien 3D and Doom were technically compelling content to make a lot of people buy new computers. I've yet to see a movie that made me want to upgrade my home theater.

    For my part, DVD is just fine to watch the mediocre movies that they put out. Especially on a TV set, or (gosh forbid) a portable media player.

  41. Re:Only to those who can't get enough $$$ out if i by terjeber · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I agree that Hollywood is losing money because what they create is junk, and that watching the old stuff will keep most of us happy for a long time to come. Besides, your comments are just a little off, Hollywood is not seing a decline in DVD sales, they are seing a decline in Box Office sales. DVD sales are more than twice that of the Box Office.

    You seem to imply that they want to push HD so that we will stop copying DVDs and start buying their cr@p, that is just not the case. In fact, Hollywood has seriously mixed feelings about HD. Why? Because they are afraid that it will make you and I stop going to the theatres. It probably will, but I do not think it will have a hugely negative impact on Hollywoods bottom line, they will just have to do business slightly differently.

    Which brings us to:
    most of what I like to watch already exists and isn't in HD format

    Most of what you watch already exists, and in formats that are vastly superior to HD. It has been downconverted to DVD, but DVD is a pretty cr@ppy format for viewing on a big screen, try a DVD on a 50" screen, it actually looks pretty bad. Compare that to HD.

    As HD is adopted, all your old stuff will also be released in HD, and believe me, you are not going to want to own a cr@ppy DVD once the HD version is out if it has been down converted well. Why do you think Sony bought the movie studio with the largest video library in the US? So that they can release all that old stuff on HD.

    HD is coming, and once your TV size goes to 42", you are going to want to have it.

  42. No its not by diorcc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Since when is the DVD dead? I can tell BY FAR its not dead. As mentioned above, not even VHS is dead... why the rush to kill it? More profiteering?

  43. Direct Transfer by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think Sony and Toshiba are going to spend so much time fighting the battles that they will lose the war. People will refuse to move away from DVD to a multi-hundred dollar player while the battle rages. But they WILL be willing to download a piece of software that lets them buy movies online. I think Sony and Toshiba will postpone the next disk winner for so long that people will go strait to direct download, (which I see as being the eventual next step).

    --
    I do security
  44. Wow, exageration for a story! SHOCK! by MrPerfekt · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Um, ok, How is the DVD dead when the next technology is just essentially a backwards-compatible, high density version?

    Boy, those high density floppies really killed floppies... wtf? And if I recall high density 3.5" media lived alot longer than the low density 3.5", granted ED disks didn't catch on but that's because better alternatives were available RIGHT THEN. (zip disk, cd-rom)

    The DVD will last a very long time, at least another 10 years before something not backwards compatible replaces it.

    --
    I just wasted your mod points! HA!
  45. I dont get why would anyone buy into either one by Hackeron · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You buy a MythTV box for around $500, and you have a player capable of playing 10x the quality of HD-DVD and Blueray with far superior capacity. Why dont they just have a contract where you pick a resolution and bandwidth and download anything you want for, I donno, a flat rate of $50 per month or $5 per movie (-/+ 30% for different resolutions).

    Who the hell wants the media, new TV, new player? -- My monitor is capable of displaying 1600x1200 and is using DVI. All this shit makes no sense. I get BETTER quality on this cheap monitor than I get if I spend $10k and for what? - What improvement do I get?

    Fucking makes me mad, I'll carry on pirating the HD content popping up all over the web...

    1. Re:I dont get why would anyone buy into either one by evilviper · · Score: 2, Informative
      You buy a MythTV box for around $500, and you have a player capable of playing 10x the quality of HD-DVD and Blueray with far superior capacity.

      "10x the quality" my ass... The highest-end CPUs right now can just barely handle realtime playback of H.264 at 1080... I'd love to see what kind of framerate you'll get on 5760x3240 material (only 9x higher res).

      and download anything you want

      People don't want to buy a movie, then have to delete it because their hard drive is full. Let's use the example of a dual-layer blu-ray disc... Just how many 50GB movies can you store on your hard drive in your $500 MythTV system, and how much does that hard drive cost??? Who will pay even $5 for a movie, when costs them $25 for the hard drive space to save it? If anything, people would buy burners, and start storing their movies on discs... Selling the discs cuts out the middle man, and saves everyone's time and money.

      My monitor is capable of displaying 1600x1200 [...] I get BETTER quality on this cheap monitor than I get if I spend $10k and for what?

      Not only is that not 10x the resolution of HDTV, it can't even display 1080 material. A very cheap HDTV will be higher resolution than your monitor, and even cheaper than an equivalent-sized monitor. Point me to a 50" computer monitor for under $1,000.

      Believe me, if you spent $10k, you'd get a display that would put your monitor to shame.

      I am really amazed your stupid, baseless, factually incorrect rant got modded up.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  46. Re:Only to those who can't get enough $$$ out if i by tfcdesign · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My iBook and Mac mini fit fine into my entertainment system. Without additional hardware or software I can view a DVD played on the computer on the TV. With EyeTV products, my Mac mini is a DVR.

    I am currently watching TV and recording on my Mac mini right now!

  47. Re:Only to those who can't get enough $$$ out if i by ivan256 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree that Hollywood is losing money because what they create is junk

    Excuse me? Just because they call making less money than they though they would, and making less money than some other year "losing" money doesn't mean you have to help spread the lie.

    HD is coming, and once your TV size goes to 42", you are going to want to have it.

    My TV is going to grow? Amazing. Especially considering that it's just the right size for the spot it's in. I wonder how it will fit... Seriously though, we're a minimum of 5 years away from widespread HD adoption. It will probably be longer, since most people replace their TV after 10 years on average, but not everybody buying new TVs today are buying HD sets. Actually not even a majority are buying HD sets. 32" SD is the norm. The only reason the masses will buy HD media in that time frame is if it's the only media available. It won't be though, because all the HD players will be DVD compatable, and all the non-cartel members will keep publishing on DVD to maximize the potential market. The early push to HD media with extra DRM is going to open the door for "independant" creators and publishers, and the *IAA member companies are going to see their market share decrease more and more.

  48. Not in this household by sheldon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Back in 2002 or so, I bought a very nice system for surround sound movies. 52" rear projection HDTV, a Dolby/DTS receiver, a new DVD player, etc. etc. I think that TV cost me about $2300 at the time.

    It's still working. In fact it works great, and the picture is a lot better than most of the newer plasma sets out on the market today. Although not as good as the DLP or LCD rear projection... sniff

    But the new HD DVD standards don't work with my system. Oh, sure it's more than capable of displaying high quality, but it only has component video input and you need HDMI inputs. And guess what? I'm not buying a new television. Sorry charlie, just ain't gonna happen. I might buy a new computer, but I'll be damned if I buy a new TV.

    So good luck selling me something to replace my existing system.

    Maybe in 5 years, perhaps 10. When this thing is old and outdated and doesn't work. But not today. Cause the way I figure it, any decent improvement is giong to involve a new TV, a new receiver, and a new DVD player. We're talking about $4k there, and that's not chump change.

  49. There's a niche for everything by bradleyland · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There is a niche for anything you can think of. From a mass-market perspective, they're dead.

  50. Re:"God is dead." - Nietzsche by kennygraham · · Score: 2, Funny
    I'm hoping for HVD.....

    I just gave you regular VDs last night. Now you want the new and improved ones? I'm telling you, it's not worth it just to get in the "it's about supression" commercials.

  51. All I can say is.... by crawdad62 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    whatever the next trend is they better be backward compatible with todays DVD's. If those mooks think I'm buying my whole video library again in a new format they've got another thing coming.

    I did it from VHS to DVD which was fairly understandable since most of my video tapes showed their age and DVD did bring a whole new experience with 5.1 sound, interactive content, etc. but I have a HD TV and while I welcome HD content it's not compelling enough for me to want to replace many of the DVD's I own now.

  52. DVD is not dead. by Kaldaien · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hell, VHS still is not dead, so there is no way DVD is "dead." Even with the introduction of HD-DVD and BluRay, non-HD content will continue to be released on less expensive, more compatible, MPEG2 DVD discs. It would be folly for a company such as ADV, whose content base is almost exclusively standard definition Anime to start releasing HD-DVD or BluRay discs simply because DVD is no longer the latest and greatest. HD-DVD / BluRay will come at a premium initially (and honestly, that premium may eventually become the standard price point :-\); consumers will not pay that premium unless they have something tangible to show for their investment. Only movies and recent seasons of more popular television shows are available in HD. Granted, a season of the average NTSC television show rarely fits on one or two DVDs, but that is not reason enough to insist on moving to HD-DVD or BluRay. Most people who buy television shows on DVD are content to swap discs, and those that are not are always welcome to do as I have and buy a 400 DVD Mega changer. On a side note, It is frustrating when studios think they have a clever solution to the problem and release double-sided DVDs (i.e. Quantum Leap) - because even with a DVD changer, you have to flip the disc manually. :)

    I own two HDTV sets and I am not fanatical about the transition to HD-DVD / BluRay. It is going to happen eventually, but considering the crap that has graced the big screen in the past 5 years I would rather just wait until a movie is on Showtime HD, HBO HD, INHD, etc... than pay $5+ extra for a movie that was not even worth seeing in the theatre. Movie studios will not begin to reauthor the good, but older, movies until there is a sufficient player base and there will not be a sufficient player base until there is content worth investing in a new player / TV (for some) to watch.

    That said, there are a couple of people who actually buy UMDs and actually I know one of them. Despite the lackluster demand, movie studios continue to publish UMD videos. Which leads me to believe that HD-DVD and BluRay will be a similar boat, it will take studios years to figure out which format the consumer actually prefers. In that time, I am sure we will see hybrid HD-DVD / BluRay players enter the market to fill the gap that SONY and Toshiba could have easily filled before costing the consumer. BluRay discs may be more expensive to produce for the publisher, which is partly why Toshiba was such a ... about merging HD-DVD and BluRay, but the consumer is the one who ultimately pays when two very similar but very incompatible formats are allowed to linger.

  53. Add to that... by Belial6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Add to that the fact that consumers just don't care that much about quality. They want convinence. The MP3 boom shows that. At the same time the Media Barons are trying to convince us to buy SACDs, the people are ripping their CDs to the lower quality MP3. Why because people want convinence. This is what DRM takes away. Heck, I would go back to VHS quality video in a second if they could make it even more convenient than my ReplayTV.

  54. DVD is good enough by metamatic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Absolutely. I knew DVD was going to catch on as soon as all the movie companies got behind it. That was when I got a player. VHS was dead from that moment.

    DVD won't die and be replaced by HD-DVD or Blu-Ray. They were predicting that CD would die and be replaced with SACD or DVD-Audio, and that didn't happen.

    Even though my DVD player supports DVD-Audio, I don't have a single DVD-Audio disc. I don't even have the player hooked up to support it. Why not? Because the DRM is so cripplingly inconvenient, it's not worth it. With a CD I can listen on my iPod, stream over my home network and listen at any computer, listen on my PDA, play the CD in the car, make mix CDs for the car, and so on. With DVD-Audio, they won't even allow digital feed from the player to the amp, so I'd need to buy a set of extra analog cables, I'd get lower quality (my amp has much better D to A than my player), and I wouldn't be able to rip the audio conveniently. And though some 'goldenears' folks will disagree, CD is basically good enough.

    Similarly, DVD is good enough for the vast majority of people. I actually have an HDTV, and with a well-encoded DVD and a player with a good upconverter, the limiting factor on the image quality is either the source material or my eyesight. When I can see the fingerprints on the glass pane used for the 'floating pen' effect in "2001"--and that's a famously poorly encoded DVD--I know that there's really no great need for finer resolution. I can see the film grain on "Lawrence of Arabia" already, I don't need to see it any better. I can read the paperwork on Sam Lowry's desk in "Brazil". The resolution is just fine. Now, let's have more good movies...

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  55. Re:LPs are not dead by Tatsh · · Score: 2, Informative

    Finally, someone who knows posts!

    Yeah. You guys who think LP's are gone are really really uninformed. In case you didn't know, CDJ'ing (or MP3J'ing) is not nearly as easy as mixing vinyls. In all kinds of music, for DJ's (and for me who just likes that music (and it doesn't come out on CD!)), vinyl is great. The quality is just the same as CD if you ask me.

    Audio tape is really what is dead. That shit was shit!

  56. rubbish by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 2

    It is upto consumers to decide, the tech industry can only wish, and the entertainment industry can just stick it up their ass if they believe they can get consumers to rebuy their media every couple of years.

  57. Recordability by rishistar · · Score: 2, Informative

    Absolutely. I knew DVD was going to catch on as soon as all the movie companies got behind it. That was when I got a player. VHS was dead from that moment.

    I agree with most of what you say - I just think that VHS as a medium for buying movies on died a long time ago, but in many UK homes still use them. In fact there seem to be a fair number of movies still available in shops here. Why?

    In the UK Tivo never really take off (well they stopped selling new ones) and what kept VHS players alive here was that they were the only mass-market item (partly due to the fact people already had them and had just figured out how to record with them) with the ability to record TV programs of the box.

    We are only now just getting DVD recorders at the sub 100 pound mark. So to make permanent recordings of broadcast programs whilst shelling out less that 100 pounds most people are either going to stick with a DVD recorder (or get the Sky+ box I think that has that capability). Its cost and ease for the non-techy consumer.

    I am tempted to try and skip the format war and see what new formats are being suggested in another five years. I base this on the assumption that for any movie *not* to be released on DVD format over the next few years would be commercial suicide for the studio. I know I'm going to have a DVD player over the next 5 years otherwise thats a hundred or so films I already own that I won't be able to watch. I also know that the DVD disc version of a movie will be cheaper to buy than a new format version. Unless someone wants to give me a lot of money I'm unlikely to have a HDTV or a PS3 over that period. As you say, a good quality interpolation algorithm in the box makes something good enough to watch.

    I guess there also needs to be the must-have content (like Matrix was for the DVD and Brothers In Arms was for the CD). If the LOTR trilogy was coming out *now* that would have been ideal for the high-quality camps.

    --
    Professor Karmadillo Songs of Science
  58. Re:Read only movie chips-flash card sized=landfill by mnemotronic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What happens when those hundreds or thousands or millions of ROM chips (and handy plastic packaging) become "last week's movie"? You would need a major recycling & remanufacturing operation to prevent landfill. We already have a plastic recycling industry, but can chips be ground up & recycled? There's a lot of energy and resources that go into distilling a bucket of sand down to an integrated circuit, and it would be a shame to not recover some of that....

    --
    The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.