Slashdot Mirror
Toshiba Making Funeral Plans for HD DVD
Blue Light Special writes "With HD DVD on life support, Toshiba is reportedly preparing to bow to the inevitable and allow HD DVD to expire quietly. 'While denying that a decision on the fate of HD DVD has been made, a Toshiba marketing exec left the door wide open. "Given the market developments in the past month, Toshiba will continue to study the market impact and the value proposition for consumers, particularly in light of our recent price reductions on all HD DVD players," Jodi Sally, VP of marketing for Toshiba America Consumer Products, said.'" A few folks have also noted that Wal-mart is joining the Blu-ray train, further lowering the stock of HD DVD.
If you go to Fry's this weekend, you can get a blu ray reader for ~$180.
...probably would have went HD DVD? Why? I always looked at the specs and could never understand the draw of HD DVD: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_high_definition_optical_disc_formats#Technical_details/
dumber people are doing harder things everyday
As silly as what the you said may sound, its would actually make a lot of sense for something as simple as an outrageous/uncommon name might be a key factor of success. However, I also have a slight notion that the tables might possibly have been turned if only the xbox360 had come standard with HD-DVD as the PS3 did with blu ray. In this stage its all a guessing game, whats done is done. Honestly until we $100 blu ray players at walmart, and blu-ray movies that don't cost 50-75% more than their DVD counterparts, the pickup will be extremely slow even as it becomes possibly the definite standard for high def movies.
Does that mean Sony now rules what will probably become the next main data format?
Not really. Sony isn't even the majority patent holder in Blu-ray, they're just the most visible proponent of the format and have sold a few million of the players.
E pluribus unum
HD DVD typically had a better picture, better contrast, better compression, better sound quality, and a cheaper method of production.
Actually, the truth is pretty much the opposite of this statement. Because Blu-ray had 50% more bandwidth, it could be compressed less, and since it supported exactly the same video codecs as HD DVD that's all that really matters. Although some of the audio codecs are optional on Blu-ray that are mandatory on HD DVD, when present Blu-ray requires greater bandwidth for those, too, leading to better fidelity.
Yes, HD DVD were cheaper to produce, but the discs cost the same to the consumer. (And much less $ per megabyte, which matters for the geeks out there who will use it in their computers.)
E pluribus unum
Ars Technica called the PS3 the "most future-proof player".
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080118-new-nlu-ray-2-0-spec-makes-ps3-the-most-future-proof-player.html
Sony has a long history of behaving badly.
It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
You forgot
* Use standard USB drives to back up Movies, Music, Pictures and Saved games.
* Use Standard Bluetooth Headsets with the console.
* Use Standard Bluetooth Keyboards with the console.
* Use standard Bluetooth Mice with the console.
* MS's other major reason for backing HD-DVD: So they could try to stall out PS3 adoption, since Sony had announced they were including a Blu-Ray drive in the PS3.
http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_analog_output 1.12
Will Blu-ray down-convert analog outputs?
No, Blu-ray players will not down-convert the analog output signal unless the video contains something called an Image Constraint Token (ICT). This feature is not part of the Blu-ray Disc spec, but of the AACS copy-protection system also adopted by HD-DVD. In the end it will be up to each movie studio to decide if they want to use this "feature" on their releases or not. The good news is that Sony, Disney, Fox, Paramount, MGM and Universal have already stated that they have no intention of using this feature. The other studios, which have yet to announce their plans, will most likely follow suit to avoid getting bad publicity. If any of the studios still decide to use ICT they will have to state this on the cover of their movies, so you should have no problem avoiding these titles.
Yup. Pr0n started coming out last March on Blu-Ray.
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
Almost a year ago.
I'm so sick of people assuming Blu-Ray = Sony. Look it up people, Sony is one of 9 founding companies, one of 18 companies on the Board of Directors and one of over 250 companies total in the Blu-Ray Association. Sony was just the most visible member of Blu-Ray since they have the most to gain or lose, so they have been pushing it the hardest. If you don't like Sony, then get a Samsung, or LG or Pioneer or some other Blu-Ray player. I'm not a big fan of Sony either, but I'm tired of people saying "I hate Blu-Ray cuz I hate Sony" or "I'm pissed that Sony won" Yes, Sony won, but so did 250 other companies and us consumers in general now that we'll have one format. sheesh, you anti-Sony guys are almost as bad as Apple fanboys!
That was AACS.
BD+ is another layer on top of it.
I dont think commercial titles with BD+ where available a year ago (or they just came out)
As far as I know, they didnt "crack" BD+ yet, but I havent followed doom9 in a while....
You can use it to rip or just simply to disable HDCP so that the disc will play on your non-DRM ready hardware at full resolution.
The downside to ripping is HD movies are 25gb vs 5gb for a DVD, and you'll need to find a software player that can handle HD content since most media players wont.
As for movies, I see no difference whatsoever in the retail prices of either format. I doubt there's much difference at the production cost level either.
Just like how those economies of scale kicked in and made all those high-def LCD screens so cheap? Sorry to rant on a tangent but I'm still waiting for LCD prices to drop like they're supposed to before I think about high-def disc formats.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not. Because, you know, 4-5 years ago, a 1080p 42" LCD would have cost $4,000. Today, if you pay more than $1,000 for a major brand, you've paid too much.
A 75% reduction in cost over a few year period is not enough for you? I think it's time to admit that you're probably just a cheapskate.
This is a table via zdnet showing the bitrates for these "HD" movie download services. Yeah, that HD download service picture will look great.
Source Resolution Bit-rate
Blu-ray 1920×1080 40
HD DVD 1920×1080 28
ATSC HDTV 1920×1080 19.39
Digital cable 1920×1080 ~ 16
Video on demand 1920×1080 15
DISH HD 1440×1080 10
DIRECTV HD 1280×1080 10
Xbox Live Video 1280×720 6.8
DVD 720×480 8
Apple iTunes 1280×720 4
Web "HD" 1280×720 1.5
//TODO: Insert catchy phrase
The format war is over, unfortunately, Blu-Ray is far from ready for general consumer adoption. Profile 2.0 players, the players that actually do everything they are supposed to (and everything that even low-end HD DVD players did), are few and far between... not to mention very expensive when they are found. The standalone Blu-Ray players pretty much universally suck. They're woefully underpowered to do things like load the Java VM which is required for viewing many newer Blu-Ray discs (Disney's newer discs like Pirates of the Caribbean and Ratatouille take a full 2 minutes just to load on most standalone players). And the machines by some companies are so buggy that there's already been a class action lawsuit.
The only Blu-Ray player even worth considering for consumers is the PS3. But then you're stuck with a big game console instead of just a standalone movie player, which is what many people really want.
I had bought a Toshiba HD-A3 HD DVD player for $159. Feature complete. Booted to drawer open in under 30 seconds. Loaded all movies in under 30 seconds. Did everything I needed (my TV has fine 3:2 pulldown so 1080i out is all I needed). And it came with 10 movies. Even now, there's really no equivalent on the Blu-Ray side. No standalone 2.0 player that isn't dog-slow.
When Warner switched, I simply stopped buying HD content. Most of my friends that were buying HD DVDs did the same thing. Sure, I may buy into Blu-Ray eventually. But it looks like it's gonna be a while before it's capable of doing what it should.
Portable versions of Firefox, GIMP, LibreOffice, etc
the lawyers' and executives' time would cost a fair bit to work that out. no point in opening it up for free since it would not make them any money.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
You are upset that Sony's format won?
I am a little confused on this point. Sony has lost a lot of format wars, but rarely have they lost because of poor quality.
Betamax had superior video quality when compared to VHS
Hi-8 was technically better than VHS-C
Minidisc was an intelligent solution to cheap portable storage
Atrac was actually a better format for portable devices than MP3
Also that little idea known as the "Compact Disc" seems to be very popular still...
I think the 3.5" floppy disc did alright...
Sony has had some trouble with the severe limits they place on their proposed "formats", but they are also usually the best format.
PiP for directors comments...
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
Millennium Camera is one of the seemingly endless number of scam-stores based in Brooklyn. They have a lifetime Reseller Rating of (drum roll...) 0.31/10.
The excellent Brooklyn StoreFronts project lists Millennium Camera as being at the same location as several other known scam-shops: A&M Photo World LLC (AMPhotoWorld.com), Preferred Photo (PreferredPhoto.com), Wild Digital (WildDigital.com), Time 2 Envy (stores.ebay.com/Time2Envy)
Needless to say, the $999 price is not real and no one should order from Millennium Camera.
Some people are like slinkies--basically useless but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs.