Slashdot Mirror
Most Consumers Sitting Out The High-Def War
The New York Times notes that, despite the increasing variety of programs on the Blu-ray and HD-DVD formats, most US consumers are staying out of the DVD format war. This is a wise decision, the article states, because the two formats are essentially at a stalemate. "The two camps are victims of their own earlier success with DVD. The standard DVDs offered a quantum leap in quality from the picture and sound of VHS videotape, and for many that was more than adequate. In addition, DVD players that can convert images to near high-definition quality can be found for under $100, hundreds less than a true high-definition DVD player, further reducing the urgency to upgrade to one of the new formats."
Most of us are waiting for inexpensive, dual format (Blueray & HD-DVD) players. Who wants to buy into an expensive player that can only play half the movies or programs out there? As the work, friends, and family "hi tech" person, I recommend to everyone to wait for dual format. They find it amazing that I don't have either format yet.
Another group of prospects are waiting for ripping capability, so they can assert their fair use rights (even though they don't have any under the DMCA).
I don't predict either format will "win" nor "die" over the next few years. So, by each camp resisting dual-format, all they are doing is hurting the whole prospective market.
Lastly, a HUGE number of consumers can't even tell the difference between DVD and HD quality! The difference in sound is total marketing drivel. But the difference in picture- oh yes, it is major. But that goes to show... if most consumers can't even tell the difference, why should they pay more?
I have the 50" Panasonic plasma--bought it last year. There's no impetus for me to get an HD player because when I sit 15 feet away, standard DVD quality is good enough. Sure, I'd like better, I just don't want to pay a ton for it. I appear to fit inside the bell curve. It's comfy in here...
So, I wait. Wait and see.
Camping on quad since 1996.
The jump from VHS to DVD bought be a better picture, better durability, much greater convenience, cheaper prices (eventually), more variety, and there was only one format so I didn't have to worry about buying a DVD player only to have it turn into a blinking boat anchor. It cost me the ability to record since I wouldn't shell out for a DVD burner, but I found I didn't miss it all that much.
The jump from DVD to High-Def DVD will buy me a better picture, and that's it. And I get to worry that I'll chose the wrong format and it will be worthless in 2 years. The dual format ones are still too expensive.
So, I wait for the dust to settle before I toss more money into the bottomless technological gizmo pit.
- HiDef is expensive... tick
- HiDef is fighting with HiDef*... tick
- HiDef for the average user gives no gain... tick
- HiDef cannot be (in theory) copied to your MP3 player to watch the movie on the player... tick
- For computers, HiDef only works on that abomination called Vista... tick
- HiDef disks (pressed or recordable) are expensive... tick
- One HiDef format is backed by Microsoft... tick
- Neither HiDef format has a "cool" name... tick
Now with all those ticks, let's all rush out and buy into the HD format.
Or, you could stick to what you have now, and rip** the DVD for your MP3 player to watch on, not have to get into the whole "this cable is not compatible with this type of HD content" crap, not get into "you machine thinks you're really a hacker and your new hardware has decided to offer you shitty vision" instead of what you paid for, not have to worry about full HD pixel ratios or interlaced / progressive video, and not have producers enforce region coding (cartel protection).
* I bought superior Betamax, don't want that kinda purchase again.
** in some places legally.
Take Nobody's Word For It.
Cue my dad.
He's a war movie fan. Especially 2nd World War. From Tora Tora Tora to Midway, from Battle of Britain to One Bridge too far, he has them all. He wants them all. He watches them all. When DVD came out, he was one of the first to go and get a DVD player, because now his previous movies would never go grainy from being watched a million times over.
Now, his movies have been made in the 60s and maybe 70s. Sound? Mono. MAYBE stereo. 5.1? C'mon, be sensible. Film quality? At DVD level you already saw the flaws, why bother with HD?
For him, there is no reason at all to even consider HD. Whether HDDVD or BluRay is moot for him, he's happy with his DVD.
And that's another problem. When someone is a fan of 60s movie, or of a movie star from the pre-80s era, he simply does not benefit from HD.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I tend to watch most DVDs on my laptop these days. I upgrade roughly every three years, so in two years I might end up with a BD or HD-DVD drive. At that point, I might start watching movies on whichever format the drive supports. I don't buy DVDs anymore though, I only ever rent them. I rarely want to watch a film more than once, and so I'd rather pay a fixed rate for access to new films than buy them individually. In two years, if someone is offering a download service over the Internet then I'd use that instead of renting disks in any format, as long as it's not tied to Windows and offers a flat-rate cost.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Then you need a Better DVD player, one that doesn't prevent you from skipping that stuff.
If I have nothing to hide, don't search me