Slashdot Mirror
Sony Calls Current Blu-ray/HD DVD Format War a 'Stalemate
unger814 writes "Sony CEO Howard Stringer says that Blu-ray and HD DVD are currently in a 'stalemate' and is 'playing down the importance of the battle.' Stringer addressed a crowd at Manhattan's 92nd Street Y cultural center Thursday, where he said that 'it was a matter of prestige' which format wins. Stringer pointed to the switch by Paramount from producing movies in both formats to only HD DVD as a turning point. 'We were trying to win on the merits, which we were doing for a while, until Paramount changed sides,' Stringer said."
If Sony's calling it a stalemate, then HD-DVD is already ahead. If all Sony can manage with it's PR department is to call the situation a "stalemate," then HD-DVD likely ahead in real terms. Incidentally, I just conducted an informal, non-scientific poll here in the office. Of 20+ people, only two had heard of Blu-Ray. Half had heard of HD-DVD, but almost all were able to figure out what it was by the name alone. It makes me think that HD-DVD has an advantage just because of its name.
What a load of drivel. If this was true, then nobody would ever win a game of chess...yes, that would be exciting, wouldn't it.
Wow, didn't really think this was even in question, I thought everybody new this.
http://www.tech.co.uk/home-entertainment/high-definition/news/toshiba-welcomes-paramount-hd-dvd-deal?articleid=734466306
First link that came up in google for "toshiba paramount deal"
This is just the cost of doing business.
As usual, it's an idiotic Slashbot simplification - if you don't like the results, pretend it's all about bribery. Paramount was paid for switching to HD-DVD, but it's not the only reason. Paramount does appear to believe HD-DVD is technically a superior system.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Blu-ray has, right now, a 50gb to 30gb advantage. That's pretty significant. Blu-ray has the potential for 100gb and hd-dvd might be able to get 50gb. Those extra gigs could be put towards quailty or quanity. Consumers might care, or they might not.
But if you want to point to something that blu-ray has that consumers will care about, it's the Sony catalog. It is huge. And the crown jewel is the entire James Bond collection. Joe Six-pack WILL want to see those on his player.
Who modded this insightful?
The laser diodes are identical for both BluRay and HD-DVD.
Too bad there isn't a (-1, Wrong)...
The fact that you've been modded 5 for this comment is interesting to me, because it probably means that some of the moderators agree with you. Which blows my mind.
The difference between HD and SD is light and day. HD-DVD is blatantly superior to DVD, and the different is excruciatingly obvious to myself and any of my friends who watch movies with me (I've even had friends buy a version of a movie on HD-DVD just because they wanted to check it out on my HD setup).
A great way to notice the difference is ESPN. Wait for a game to air, and switch to the HD version of the channel. Then switch to the SD version (well, my cable company carries both... I'm assuming most others do, too). Channel switch a few times. If the difference isn't obvious, then I would argue that either you have very poor eyesight, awful cable company service, or an improperly setup configuration (running RCA cables to the TV instead of Component/HDMI, for instance).
Everybody I've shown my HD setup to has been bowled over. I just can't understand how someone can't tell the difference on a 50" TV. Even my grandparents, who are nearing 80 years old, could perceive the clarity.
Actually it can. The issue is (using the VC-1 Codec) it can only contain ~83 minutes of it, which discounts most "non-animated made for TV movies".