Slashdot Mirror
Consumer Problems with Blu-ray and HD-DVD
bart_scriv writes "Business Week looks at the upcoming Blu-ray and HD-DVD product launches and predicts problems and confusion for consumers. In addition to anticipated difficulties in distinguishing between the two formats, some studios will be using copy protection that will intentionally down grade the picture. When combined with Sony's plans to upconvert based on hardware configuration and the fact that most HD TVs aren't capable of displaying either format at full resolution, early adopters may be getting a lot less than they bargained for. As the article suggests, it may be that 'the best bet for either format to gain acceptance now lies with next-generation game consoles.'"
Which DRM is easier to crack?
Simple as that.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Could this be any less surprising? I've been following it closely and I have a hard time keeping everything straight. As I work at a video store, I can safely say that average consumers are nothing less than completely screwed.
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
Neither of these formats will be accepted as easily as, historically, other formats have.
1. Cassetes --> CDs: CDs are thinner and higher quality that does not degrade. Even still, it took *almost* 10 years before cassetes were completely and fully replaced. Even to this day, unless you count, say, iTunes, CDs reign supreme and music on DVD is still a joke.
2. ?? --> Beta/VHS: No fromat existed for viewing movies at home... except maybe an 8mm projector!! But I can't remember video stores that had 8mm rentals... is it just me?
3. VHS --> DVD: DVD is smaller, thinner, and holds more at a better quality. Plus, like every previous post has pointed out, many people have invested in buying DVDs and, like me, see no reason to "upgrade" the quality of their movies... for... $30+??
The Mass-Media-Powers-That-Be have succeeded in royally fucking themselves by taking a perfectly simple concept (watch videos at higher resolution) and turned it into a crippled, convoluted mess.
Ball's in your court, online video distributors (namely Apple).
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
In order for a new format to be adopted, people need to buy it. Early adopters are typically technically minded people, and are generally "informed" about what it is they're purchasing.
...
The content produces are doing everything in their power to make the format unattractive to technically minded people. Meaning they're scaring away all of the early adopters. Which means that the format will never be adopted.
For me, degrading the signal over analog connections was the thing that pushed me over into the "not gonna buy it" category
Solution 1: Wait two years after product mass introduction to buy the same technology with all the bugs worked out, for one-third the price.
Solution 2: Don't buy DRM and other invasive products.
Either solution will work, the former assumes you're just a cog in the machine and you don't need this technology absolutely today but can wait until 50 percent of the population has switched over, the latter assumes you think a non-DRM OpenSource-friendly version will be adopted at some point.
Choose your poison.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Because they suck at what they do.
I mean, HDTV is what a late 90s thing? And we still don't have hidef content. They only hidef that I can get is from cable, satellite, or OTA TV. CDs are late 70s technology (maybe early 80s). The oldest digital recording I own is from 1978.
Why can't these people flood us with content at a reasonable price that we simply do not have the time or need to pirate the stuff?
My HD DVR has firewire output that I can copy the stuff to my computer. Supposedly some of the channels are encrypted, and it takes realtime to make a copy. But I never have made a copy, but I always have 80 gigs of fresh content on my DVR that I can watch anytime. I love it. Oh, and someone is getting the $70 a month or so that I pay for content, right? I mean, sometimes I even watch or listen to the commercials because I'm busy doing something else and don't feel like fiddling with the remote control.
What I don't understand is that the content "providers" dabble in all aspects of the modern era, but they insist on putting stuff on plastic disks and sell them at a brick and mortar store. I mean, Sony makes electronics, but they are talking about making the PS3 so that it does not play Sony movies. Huh??? Time/Warner owns a cable TV outfit and internet, but won't let you download their movies or with little streaming capabilities.
The movie industry lets TV channels broadcast their stuff. The music industry lets radio broadcast their stuff. When are they just going to get with the times and deliver modern day technology?
Oh, the funny thing is that I would assume most people would prefer the lower quality DVDs via DRM. Look how popular iTunes and AACs and MP3s are. Can't figure that one out.
I'm surprised it hasn't come up more, but "pornography" has driven adoption of virtually all modern forms of media. Tin-types, 8mm movie film, VHS, DVD, DSL... you name it, and naked people (or their images) has been behind it. I'm gonna go on a limb and say whatever format is generally adopted by the adult industry is what will win out. Sony and the rest will quickly fall in line. imgunby
No problems at all ...
Consumers hear the DVDs won't work with the HDTV they already have.
Consumers don't buy new HD DVD formats.
Media companies find themselves holding onto a billion dollar albatross they've made unpopular with people.
No problem.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
This format war is turning into a twisted modern day version of the parable of King Solomon. In that parable, two women both claim that a baby is theirs. Solomon guilefully says the only way to resolve the issue is by cutting the baby in half and giving a half to each woman. The first woman agrees, but the second woman pleads with the King to spare the baby's life and let the other woman have the child. Solomon knew the second woman was the real mother.
Today, that baby is high definition DVDs, and unfortunately for us, both women would rather see that baby slaughtered than give up potentially lucrative royalties from it. The HD-DVD and Blu-ray camps are trying to compete with each other for money, and their greed is about to kill what could be the successor of the DVD. So what happens now? Well, as other people have pointed out, most will wait for one format to beat out the other. Or wait for players that play both formats, assuming such a thing would be made. I don't see it happening. After this whole battle, why would you license a player if it will decode the competition?
In a way, we are Solomon. I think the only smart thing to do is to keep the baby ourselves and leave them both empty handed, by not buying the players or the discs. If the two camps could just get past their greed and see that their actions mean both of them will lose revenue, they might rethink their strategies.
*blinking cursor*
HDTV is over 10 years behind where the "experts" claimed it would be. It has been extremely slow to go mainstream becuase the consumer did not care about it or want it. The only reason I have one is because of the other features that the digital TV had that were handy. I don't even watch HD.
For movies, HD-DVD and BlueRay won't sell very fast becuase the studios have to still make the releases on standard DVD to make any money. The consumer won't care. Only the game machines will pick up the players and that is only for the kids and young adults that waste thier time doint that.
Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
As my relatively new 2 year old HDTV only has DVI and component and no HDMI I suppose I'll be in the "screwed early-adopter" category so I'll be buying a few HD-DVD units and returning them when, "Ooops, I just found out it doesn't actually do HD unless you have HDMI, oh well, can I return it? K Thx, bye!"
I suggest others do the same so we can send a message and make sure the MPAA et al know there's a segment of the market who won't stand for degraded standards for committing the crime of purchasing an HDTV before THEY got THEIR act together.
Whenever you use term "DRM" in a post, please put the words "infected with" before it. Stuff like that catches on you know. The RIAA and MPAA did it with the terms "p2p" and "thief". Why shouldn't we do it too? "Infected with DRM" sounds just as good as "stole material via p2p".