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.

Comments

That's a Shame

[thesaint05]

HD-DVD was cheaper for both players and movies, but I'm glad the format war is officially over. Especially with wal-mart throwing their (considerable) weight behind BD. I just can't stand the fact that Sony won. Oh well. I'm still not buying a BD player until they get sub-$200.

Re:That's a Shame

[RetardsForRonPaul]

Unfortunately the lower cost never really materialized. All of the "combo discs" were more expensive than their Blu Ray counterparts. I never understood the point of those discs anyways. And Blu Ray was on "sale" for a long time. I have to wonder if Sony lost a bunch of money subsidizing costs just to get a foothold. That said, Sony and the rest of the BD consortium can go die in a fire. I'm not buying their crippled, DRM laden discs. I'm sick of being treated like a theif, when all I want is reasonably priced HD content. The music industry is slowly coming around, yet the movie industry is steadfast. If they want to treat me like a theif (no managed copy, region encoding, BD+, etc.) then I'll just steal their movies. The interactivity in HD-DVD always rocked. Transformers is an amazing disc. One of the few I own. BD is still catching up in that regard. It kills me, though, since I'm about over the 360, and really want a PS3 as a gaming platform.

Re:That's a Shame

[gEvil (beta)]

That's the "nice" thing about the different BD profiles--the manufacturers get to keep "updating" their player lines while keeping the price the same. This year at CES, they updated the players to profile 1.1, but kept the list prices the same. Next year, they'll update the players to profile 2.0, and the prices will stay the same (they might come down 50 bucks or so). I'm waiting for a sub-$200 profile 2.0 BD player, too, but I'm not holding my breath.

Re:That's a Shame

[mcsqueak]

This year at CES, they updated the players to profile 1.1, but kept the list prices the same.

Ah yes, I had forgotten about that bit. I'm sure they'll lower the price on the "older" versions... then the suckers who buy those won't be able to see the special features or whatever in the discs released after that point. Nice way to treat your customers I say.

Re:That's a Shame

[Dogtanian]

Now there isn't a reason to lower the cost of bluray players. Yes there is. Though many (but not all) overlooked it in favour of the more interesting Blu-Ray/HD-DVD rivalry, both players were fighting a bigger rival- existing DVD players and public apathy.

DVD became a runaway success because (a) it was cheap, and (b) it gave noticable picture-quality improvements and other advantages that could be enjoyed with existing setups.

Blu-Ray is not only relatively expensive, but it requires an HD set to make it worthwhile. Even those with HD sets could stick with upscaling DVD players. (*) And I suspect there are a significant proportion of people who rushed out and bought HD because it was the latest thing and they could boast about it to their friends, and haven't noticed that the picture from their $30 DVD player connected via the composite cable actually sucks :)

(*) In fact, it's a theory of mine that with improvements in dynamic image-processing technology (more than just upscaling), the picture quality from existing DVDs could be *far* improved. What I have in mind would require some fairly powerful chips doing intelligent analysis over multiple frames, and the cost would probably be horrendous at present- but I could see that changing. Then again, by the time that happens, Blu-Ray or some other HD rival will probably be established anyway. (OTOH, the same techniques could possibly be applied to HD sources to make them better *still*, so it might be worth pursuing anyway).

Re:That's a Shame

[Ucklak]

Hey, this is Slashdot.
When you boast of a Zenith DVD player that upscales nicely, please indicate the model number.

Re:That's a Shame

[Dogtanian]

If I was already out buying the movie on DVD, then I figured I may as well plunk down the extra $5 and get it in a combo format [..] Hell I might still get an HD DVD player anyways. I still haven't bought "The 300", and Wal-mart has a player with a bundled copy for $148 right now. Yes, but if- as appears almost inevitable now- HD-DVD really has lost the war and is killed off, you're still paying quite a lot of money to watch the few HD-DVD-compatible discs that you already have.

If you buy more discs, you're investing in a dead-end system, and when your original machine breaks down, you'll likely have to buy a secondhand player in a few years time if you want to keep watching your collection. Which might not have the benefits of newly-built (and Blu-Ray only) hi-def players- and what if you want to use them in your computer(s)?

And if you end up wanting to watch Blu Ray stuff, you'll end up forking out for that anyway, have two players cluttering up the place and (as above) effectively just be using the HD-DVD player for watching a few discs.

I'm not saying that you're necessarily wrong though- *if* they sold HD-DVD discs off cheaply enough, this may not matter if you get your money's worth of enjoyment from the system anyway. Particularly if you hadn't planned on buying Blu-Ray at present.

Oh, and remember that the "worth" of a movie is the minimum of either (a) the most you'd be willing to pay for it and (b) the lowest price you can get it for without too many drawbacks. So perhaps it's "worth" $30 based on the RRP, but what's its real worth? Then again, $30 doesn't sound too bad to me, so forget this last paragraph :-)

Re:That's a Shame

[Christophotron]

I'm still not buying a BD player until they get sub-$200.

Hell, I'm not buying one until they get sub-$50. Hopefully by then the spec will be stabilized and the DRM will be more easily cracked and ignored (like DVD). If I can't burn a backup on my computer and play it in my official Blu-ray player (at FULL QUALITY), then I ain't interested.

Re:That's a Shame

[cens0r]

Apparently you didn't buy DVD when it was new. I paid over $500 for my first DVD player, and I didn't even get a 1st gen player (more like 1.5 gen). And that was in 1997 dollars. If adjusted fro inflation, I would almost guarantee that Blu-Ray is following a similar path to DVD in price. DVD really didn't take off until 3-4 years after it came out, when the players got really cheap.

Re:That's a Shame

[Maximum Prophet]

I'm waiting for a sub-$200 profile 2.0 BD player

Given the problems that some people have had with 1.1 players, I think I'll wait for at least X-Ray 10.0

Re:That's a Shame

[barzok]

Apparently you didn't buy DVD when it was new. I paid over $500 for my first DVD player, and I didn't even get a 1st gen player (more like 1.5 gen). And that was in 1997 dollars. ... DVD really didn't take off until 3-4 years after it came out, when the players got really cheap.

1997 + 3-4 years = 2000. PS2 came out in October 2000, mass availability in early 2001.

Quick show of hands...how many bought a PS2 not because it was a game console, but because it let them get a console and DVD player in one, for not a lot more than a high-quality DVD player?

PS3/Blu-Ray is going to follow a very similar track, I think.

Re:That's a Shame

[zmollusc]

If it weren't for the evils of DRM, you could do your image-processing on commodity hardware for bugger all cost over however long it took to process the honking great output file.

Re:That's a Shame

[Lord Apathy]

Anything above 200 bucks is insane to me. The ps3 is an awesome machine, I drool every time I see that commercial, you know the one, the one with kick ass music. But, hell, I still have games for my PS2 that I haven't even opened yet.

One day I will get a ps3 but I don't see it happening soon.

Re:That's a Shame

[DrXym]

HD DVD was only cheaper for players because Toshiba massively subsidized players. So yeah they were "cheaper" but in reality Toshiba was taking the hit. I think Toshiba's plan was to subsidize the early adopters and hope that technology and economies of scale caught up by the time they had already won. The BDA's plan was to sell stuff at the price it cost with prices dropping as technology and sales increased. In the end Toshiba's strategy failed - Blu Ray players were still outselling HD DVD players 2 to 1 even at their true price.

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.

Re:That's a Shame

[badasscat]

Given the problems that some people have had with 1.1 players, I think I'll wait for at least X-Ray 10.0

Or just buy a PS3 and don't worry about it.

I have a 60GB PS3 and there's not a BD or a special feature out there that it won't play. Nor will there ever be.

Re:That's a Shame

[badasscat]

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.

Re:That's a Shame

[Citizen of Earth]

(more than just upscaling), the picture quality from existing DVDs could be *far* improved

Yes, they should implement the CSI filters you see on all those forensic-investigation TV shows. There'd be no need for Blu-ray at all.

Re:That's a Shame

[C0vardeAn0nim0]

underwear ? why do you need underwear ?

Re:That's a Shame

[king-manic]

Hd-Dvd might still find a niche , if the price of a hd dvd burner and disks reaches a reasonable price point many people may invest in the technology for backups. Given that none of the major (APPLE/DEll/Sony) PC producers except Toshiba are in the HD DVD I find this idea difficult. As well the economies of scale will force BD down to tolerable back up levels long before a niche product like HD DVD. Also if you need back up, there are currently cheaper HDD and SDD options.

Re:That's a Shame

[Gizzmonic]

I'm glad you put "nice" in quotes. BluRay is a moving target of a platform. Newer profiles don't add much (who the fuck wants to watch picture in picture through an entire movie?) except complexity and consumer confusion. Consumers don't want to have to check the fine print every time to see if their movie will play, especially since Blu Ray costs more and does not offer anything over DVD except a high resolution.

Re:That's a Shame

[Dogtanian]

DVD really didn't take off until 3-4 years after it came out, when the players got really cheap. Which was my exact point! Even though the Blu-Ray/HD-DVD battle that everyone was excited about is supposedly all but over, the less interesting, but ultimately much bigger war- to get people to buy hi-def players at all- isn't. As I said, the quickest way to overcome that *is* to reduce the price.

Although I don't think it'll happen here, it'd be quite possible to end up with one side technically winning, but still doing badly. Who won out of DVD-A and SACD? Who cares, because neither grabbed a notable share of the market, and hi-def audio as a whole flopped commercially.

Personally, I don't think interest in HD as a whole will flop the way that hi-def audio flopped. That doesn't mean Blu Ray should rest on its laurels, however. The most obvious problem with keeping the price high would be that it slowed adoption (as you imply).

Even if the Blu Ray camp could live with that (it'd probably make them more profit in the short term), it'd be a bad idea, simply because of the other understated factor- downloadable HD content. The market is moving that way anyway, and at this stage I reckon it's ultimately a much bigger- but less tangible- threat to Blu-Ray than the moribund HD-DVD.

In short, the battle's not over. Blu Ray faces threats from current-generation DVD and apathy on one side and the should-have-seen-it-coming threat of downloadable content bypassing their petty squabbles on the other.

The GGP was so wrong- Blu Ray players need to come down in price as much as ever.

Re:That's a Shame

[Dogtanian]

I don't want to go too far into the details, but the processing I had in mind would be a combination of several ideas I'd been mulling over, many of which would require tracking a given object over several frames to average out noise, artifacting errors, and so on. And also to use simultaneous-equation-style processing on the multiple frames of the same object to increase the static resolution (or maybe this could be done more simply by aligning, overlaying and resharpening the multiple copies). Also ideas like more intelligently spotting the difference between genuine detail and pseudo-detail which comes from encoding/compression artifacts, and removing or repairing the latter. (Repair- or guessing what the most likely hi-res detail was that caused or was damaged by the artifact- might be one of those "easier said than done" computationally intensive tasks). Again, easier if you are looking at multiple frames.

I'm not an expert in this area, but I suspect those that are have probably come up with similar ideas. Whether they're doable in reasonable time, and in hardware is more open to question.

Re:That's a Shame

[Dogtanian]

Slight tangent, but apparently the "H" in HQV stands for Hollywood. I always thought that Hollywood came across as a kitsch, tacky and sleazy place, but even if you disagree with that, the problem is that most things *named after* Hollywood are cheesy, low-rent type things trying to grab a piece of its alleged glamour... like crap nail bars and hairdressing salons. You don't see Prada (for example) naming their stuff "Hollywood" in an attempt to impress people.

It makes the HQV product come across as cheap, and the fact that it reminds me of that stupid place is a strike against it. Adding the crap misspelling "optix" just makes it sound worse. Ugh.

Re:That's a Shame

[Abcd1234]

Umm... frankly... I know of only *one* person who got a PS2 for the DVD capabilities, and surprise, surprise, he was a young, single guy. Sorry, but your average blue collar worker or housewife doesn't want to use a joypad to control their DVD player. The idea that PS2 was somehow the magic that caused the DVD to take off is a Sony fanboi wet dream, and nothing more.

Re:That's a Shame

[PuckSR]

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.

Re:That's a Shame

[cens0r]

I think people can easily tell the difference between high quality video and low quality video but struggle to hear the difference between high and low quality audio.

If you had the same movie, one on a DVD with a decent up converter, and the other on blu-ray shown on the same TV with the same settings side by side, I guarantee most people would pick the blu-ray one as looking better.

The same test with audio just doesn't work. Most people can't tell the difference between MP3 and CD much less CD and SACD. About the only advantage SACD and DVD-A had are surround sound. The problem with that is that it requires decisions to be made when the music is recorded. Most bands just aren't going to up and start recording in surround sound. Plus you can't just easily convert old music into surround sound. Plus the majority of people listen to music in their cars or on headphones. Surround sound doesn't help much there.

Blu-Ray isn't going to be expensive much longer. I'm pretty sure it's price is dropping at least as fast as DVD did. Now that the format war is over, the cheap Chinese products will come out and push the cost even lower. You will probably see players in the $100-$150 range by Christmas. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if you find it very hard to buy a DVD player that does not also play blu-ray 2 years from now.

Re:That's a Shame

[networkBoy]

PiP for directors comments...

Re:That's a Shame

[B4RSK]

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.

Re:That's a Shame

[angus_rg]

Early adopter phase? It's getting more and more difficult to buy a NON HD TV nowadays! When you can get decent sized HD TVs for sub-$400 it's hard to argue against it. Tubes are practically obsolete, flat panels are all the rage, and there aren't many flat panels out there that aren't HD capable. The numbers say it. We aren't even at 50% of the house holds owning them. Heck, more people have wireless access points, and that is finally starting to become mainstream(do some war driving and count the houses w/ vs w/o). Just because it is getting more difficult/impossible to buy a SD TV doesn't mean people are lining up to buy them. Yes, take a way choice, it will help adoption, but people don't look through the best buy ad they get with their paper(yes, people still get papers) and think, "Wow, I oughta get a new TV since they no longer offer old ones." The average TV should get you at least 7 years use. Lack of choice will simply slowly phase things out. It does not force adoption.

Insignia 32" LCD HDTV currently on sale for $499CDN. I could buy that with the leavings from my next paycheque. If you'd prefer something smaller you can get a 26" for $399. If you'd rather a name brand you can get a Toshiba 26" for $499. A few years ago I paid $899 for a 32" Sony Vega CRT that's not HD and now I can buy a slim form factor television for half that that's both widescreen and HD capable. Samsung Blu-ray Player (BD-P1400) on sale for $399. So I can meander into Future Shop and pick up a full HD TV visual experience for $901.74 including all of our Ontario and Canadian sales taxes. HD capable also proves my point. HD Capable, 1080i, etc. does not mean you are getting 1920x1080 pixes. When you consider they are fixed pixel devices that down scale a picture to 720p, you aren't getting the full detal that a 1080p tv offers. Considering 720p is a little over double the detail of 480p, and 1080p is over 5 times the detail of 480p, no one is getting excited over it, and for goood reason. I have a CRT TV that can render 1920x1080, even if only 1080i, as well as a Marquee CRT projector which makes the best Best Buy projector look like crap. On both, I see the significant difference and find it is worth it. Most I have talked to say that there isn't enough improvement for them to buy in.

The cheap TVs are few and far between, most of which lack HD tuners which every sales rep will bash in hopes of the larger sale. You're $399 for a for a player proves my point. Most of the mindless sheep think a $70 upscaler is as good as a BR player. Which do you think the average clueless user is going to buy. AV consumers include a lot of people who aren't technophile. The average user is clueless, and intimidated by the selection.

HD DVD joins Betamax in tech hell!

[molex333]

Betamax,Laser Disc,Minidisc, DIVX rentals, and now HD DVD. When will tech companies learn that everyone wants one standard and that these wars usually end poorly for someone. You would think that by now they would learn to all cooperate and back one product, thus making it cheaper for the consumer and getting thier product into more households.

Re:HD DVD joins Betamax in tech hell!

[Beau6183]

Without competing standards new innovations and price wars would never happen. Wars like these are only to the benefit of the consumer...

Re:HD DVD joins Betamax in tech hell!

[molex333]

I don't think my comment is ignorant. Think of all the people who spent thier hard earned money on an HD DVD player that is going to now become an expensive paperweight. Toshiba and sony could have gotten together and developed a standard that probably would have been better than the two available options now. My comment centers around the fact that companies can share information and create standards and still make a substantial amount of money and not have to confuse the general consumer. The prices would be lowered not by a price war but by the competition of multiple companies making the hardware. If all the hardware companies are given one standard the can decrease the manufacturing costs involved. When there are two competing standards, less units of each are made, thus increasing the cost per unit.

Re:HD DVD joins Betamax in tech hell!

[Anonymous Psychopath]

Think of all the people who spent thier hard earned money on an HD DVD player that is going to now become an expensive paperweight. This is a known risk every early adopter makes, whether they accept it or not.

Re:HD DVD joins Betamax in tech hell!

[cyber-dragon.net]

This war was not about consumers, it had nothing to do with people in any way. It was about licensing fees. MS wanted to secure it's hold on MPAA DRM contracts (see Netflix explanation on why they can't offer Linux or Mac streaming yet to understand this) and Sony wanted to increase PS3 sales and ensure their home theatre setups did not get encroached on by Toshiba.

On top of that the per disk money Sony and/or Microsoft gets for the "interactive" portions.

This was a war about money and control, the consumer had nothing to do with it except as an afterthought in trying to figure out how to market one particular version of DRMd crap over another.

You forget the driving factor... companies do not care about the consumer any more, the fact they need consumers is unfortunate in their eyes. Large corporations have not cared about the individual consumer over the all mighty dollar for decades. They care about the consumer and their employees only enough to be efficient on the bottom line. Bad PR means less revenue. There are entire JOBS where people are payed to research this balance of "how badly can we screw people and still have them buy our stuff"

All the people who shop at Circuit City, Best Buy etc instead of mom and pop shops caused this. All you have to do is get into those stores, and only megacorps can, and you are golden. Consumers have never learned to control the corps, which despite what they may think IS possible. See above paragraph on people who are payed to deal with balancing PR. It is YOUR responsibility to force companies to do what you want by voting with your money. If your beliefs aren't worth not owning a copy of some DVD well they weren't very strongly held.

At least it's over...

[framauro13]

Had I not received a PS3 as a gift, I probably would have went HD DVD. But given the circumstances, I'm glad (and suprised) that the choice will eventually only be one single format.

Hopefully I'll soon be able to get all of my favorite movies in high definition, not just the particular ones owned by production companies who signed specific format deals.

A lot of people won't be happy about it, but I've gotta admit I'm impressed with how Sony marketing pulled this off. I definitely didn't see it ending this way.

Re:At least it's over...

[BobZee1]

...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/

Re:At least it's over...

[rastoboy29]

heh, it wasn't their marketing, but the fact that the DRM is stronger.   That's what won the studios over, period.

Funeral Plans?

[pavon]

So does that involve excess stock being quietly disposed of in an Alamagordo, NM landfill?

betamax, minidisc, 8-track

[irtza]

Wasn't Sony on the wrong side of all these battles? What gives? Sony may actually win a standards war? What's next, other companies will use memory stick?

Re:betamax, minidisc, 8-track

[RDW]

'Wasn't Sony on the wrong side of all these battles? What gives? Sony may actually win a standards war?'

Yes, apparently the mood in the opposing bunker is pretty grim:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB2e7pfZmGA

Re:betamax, minidisc, 8-track

[Applekid]

Well, the 3.5" floppy had a pretty good run.

Re:betamax, minidisc, 8-track

[Anonymous Coward]

They may have to, since it is becoming increasingly difficult to find a working Xbox360.

They never had a chance

[Amorymeltzer]

Their competition is called Blu-Ray. It's shorter to say, it has the word "Ray" in it (which is awesome), sounds new and different from DVDs, and even has a "cool" misspelling of a word. It's the same reason Yahoo! will never succeed - people simply like saying "Google" too much.

Re:They never had a chance

[PrescriptionWarning]

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.

Ew...

[morari]

Does that mean Sony now rules what will probably become the next main data format? The world just began sucking a lot more.

Oh well, I'm not all that interested until the players (and the televisions) drop to a reasonable price. Oh, and easy-to-do piracy is another must on my list! ;)

Re:Ew...

[samkass]

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.

Re:Ew...

[samkass]

I can't see them satisfied with the market share of 20% in next-gen consoles

The Wii is doing great, but the PS3 has been picking up quite a bit of steam. The XBox360 is also doing great in the US, but not so much elsewhere. Sony got broadsided early on, but has been surprisingly competitive as of late.

I think the interesting thing is that the Wii is selling to a lot of people who would probably never, no matter how Sony would have priced, packaged or marketed it, bought a PS3. Thus, the Wii is increasing the size of the total market, which isn't all bad for Sony. Also, the Wii is cheap enough that for those would WOULD buy one of the other consoles, it's not necessarily an either/or decision-- many can buy a Wii AND a PS3.

Re:Ew...

[Charcharodon]

1 button easy pirating (fair use or Yarrrrrr!) has been available since practically the beginning for both HD DVD and Blu-Ray, it's called AnyDVD HD by Slysoft.

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.

Re:Ew...

[coop247]

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

You mean like CD and Betacam?

[tepples]

I guess Sony had to have a successful format eventually. The ubiquitous Compact Disc Digital Audio format was developed by Sony and Philips. The variants of Sony's Betacam format (not Betamax) have enjoyed long periods of success in the broadcast industry. And the PlayStation and PlayStation 2 video game formats outsold their contemporary competition.

Re:You mean like CD and Betacam?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do your research before stepping up to the big boy table. Betacam is not Betamax. Betamax was the failed competitor to VHS. Betacam has for a long time been the major format for professional tape acquisition, from Betacam to DigiBeta to HDCAM and now HDCAM-SR -- it's all one train of development.

The only confusion is that they both have the word "Beta" in the name, and are frequently abbreviated as such.

Again, Betacam has nothing to do with Betamax.

I'm glad blu ray has won

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm glad blu ray has won.

My point of view: I don't watch movies. I don't even own a television. What format is better for movies and TV doesn't matter to me.

What does matter for me, however, is being able to use a re-writable form of the media for making backups. HD-DVD only offered 15 gigabytes of storage; Blu-Ray offers 25 gigabytes of storage.

Now that a format is decided on, economies of scale can kick in and, in a few years, blu-ray blank media will be as cheap as DVD media is right now (I just bought 100 DVD blanks for under $23 at a two-for-one loss leader sale at CostCo; I remember, five years ago, when DVD blanks were $3 or more per disk at the same time CDR blanks were 30 cents a disk).

Am I the only one?

[Conspiracy_Of_Doves]

Am I the only one who doesn't give a damn one way or the other?

At least Blu-Ray rolls off the tounge easier. And yes, I'm convinced that's at least part of the reason it won.

Re:Am I the only one?

[cjb658]

Blu-Ray causes less confusion too. I went to Best Buy with my mother and we were looking at DVDs. She picked up an HD-DVD and I said "that won't work with your DVD player." "Why not?" she said. "I have an HDTV and a DVD player, so I can play HD-DVDs, right?" "You mean I need an HD-DVD player too?" Imagine how hard it will be to tell her she needs an HDCP-compliant TV as well.

Re:Myself?

[samkass]

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.)

Hatred of companies

[jsheedy]

I really find it hard to understand why everyone hates Sony. Yes they did have the rootkit scandal that was not right at all. Though, how many times in your own company have you not agreed with how it handles things. I am in a software company, and they try things that are questionable at times. Really, different sides of the company, may not even know what the other sides are doing (that is wrong too, but when you are a peon, you are just glad to be working). I am not at all saying this is right, but it happens. Companies make mistakes, they learn from them (sometimes not good enough). I just find it hard to hate a company unless what they do is morally objectionable. I guess some could argue that what Sony did was, but I am more on the side of human pain and suffering, like sweat shops or things of that manner. Let us not forget that Toshiba has had scandals arise in the past, I seem to recall something back in th e70s related to selling technology to the USSR...

There must be a time limit, ok it has been 30 years, I no longer have to hate them. :)

Just my thoughts, I am sure there will be many that will disagree.

Re:Hatred of companies

[PriceIke]

Sony has a long history of behaving badly.

Re:Looks like Sony's gamble paid off.

[Kjella]

Then again, I also believe that Sony will only have a few years of profiting from being the next-gen DVD standard - downloadable content should slowly take over within the next few years. In the market space Blu-Ray is in? I doubt it, those 50GB discs are a broadband killer and I think they just bought themselves more time on top of the DVD, which hasn't been significantly threatened either....

Sony wins, everyone loses

[PriceIke]

In this war I didn't WANT there to be a winner. I was hoping both camps would be forced to accomodate to an ongoing market share tug-of-war, while consumers owned hybrid players and weren't locked into EITHER format, and could choose whichever suited them. Movie studios would release movies on whichever they wanted, or could do double-sided discs (HDDVD on one side, Blu-Ray on the other) and release them in both formats, like music albums were released on cassette as well as CD for many years.

Now that Sony owns the HD movie format, it's a strong disincentive for me to start buying movies in HD, until the DVD format is phased out completely, or until it becomes possible and easy to rip movies from Blu-Ray and reauthor them minus the DRM.

Re:Sony wins, everyone loses

[PriceIke]

This was true for me too for many years, however two things recently have made me a lot more aware of the DRM on DVDs and thinking of ways to nullify it: 1) a recent acquisition of an iPod Touch, on which I want to watch movies without having to buy them again for the privilege, and 2) my increasing frustration with UOPs, which seem to be getting worse and worse. I am already irritated by the FBI warnings and mandatory THX brag screens (and other such nonsense) on DVDs, but has anyone else received a copy of POTC: At World's End recently? That endless and infuriating Disney "whee-we're-Disney" intro (that you can't skip or FF) was more than enough for me to rip the movie off that disc.

Re:PS3 now viewed as "more attractive"?

[AdamTrace]

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

Poor execution

[TheAxeMaster]

They should have pushed the combo discs harder via advertising. I think people would have taken to the idea that they could buy a combo disc (for the same price as a standard HD DVD, eat a little profit there guys) and use it in their DVD player right now and in their HD DVD player when they were cheap enough (like now). But few people knew about them or what they were and they were rarely on the shelves. They made several marketing errors with the format (no v2 xbox360 with HD DVD built in being another) and chose to try to sell it on the definition alone, which wasn't a strength over the BD setup. No region encoding? Awesome.
 
I really only want documentaries in HD (planet earth) so I don't much care about HD yet and I'm saddened that I'll have to buy some crippled format if I ever want the content. But for me, Blu Ray = Vista, I'll skip it if I can.

Just as well HD-DVD DRM was cracked

[MrSteveSD]

Otherwise all those HD-DVD movies people have bought would be useless and a waste of money. As it is, they can just rip those high def movies to their hard drives.

Re:PS3 now viewed as "more attractive"?

[Chyeld]

Actually what it means is we'll be seeing a press announcement in the next few months that the latest revision of the PS3 will be dropping the bundled Blu-Ray drive and moving to DVD drives as a cost cutting measure. The expected drop in price will be $20 and those who want to purchase an add-on drive can do so for $300.

The add-on will be a complete blu-ray player but can only output to the PS3, which will then pass the signal along to the display.

Re:Once again, the inferior product

[Buran]

Because people who just want to watch hi-def movies (and I can definitely tell the difference on my TV between upscaled SD and true HD) don't care which is "better". I sure didn't. If HD-DVD had won I would have bought an HD-DVD player. But once it became apparent that Blu-Ray had won, I went out and bought a Blu-Ray player and I have Blu-Ray movies on their way from amazon right now.

Why is Blu-Ray inferior? If "inferior" means "where all the movies are going", then I guess inferior it'll have to be. But the people who just want to use hi-def disks for storage are a minority. A vocal one, apparently, but a minority.

The best medium in the world that has nothing that most people want to use it for is of little use, after all.

And I don't see why one or the other is inferior or superior over the other, either. This is not a request to inundate me with tech specs or whining about how your pet format won or lost, though, like every other blog post on the net seems to be.

Blu-Ray won. People, just deal with it. Did people whine this much when VHS won out, too?

Re:Congrats to those who bought into that crap :)

[Divebus]

That's one down. Now we just need to decommission the VC-1 codec that snuck in the back door of Blu-ray. Don't need it.

Silver lining

[The-Bus]

I supported the HD DVD format while it was viable (until WB pulled out). The silver lining is that the competition between the formats made hardware very, very cheap. Less than 18 months into the launch of both formats, we had HD DVD players go for ridiculously low sums. Blu-Ray backers didn't counter with matching prices, but they did drop the prices of their players (to sub-$500 levels). Software, too, became a bit cheaper. In-store, non-web pricing of high-def media was usually $29-$39, a good two- or three-fold increase over the regular DVD price. In 2007, especially in the summer and fall, there were numerous great deals on Blu-Ray discs. For every sale on HD DVD media, there were 4 or 5 on Blu-Ray: buy one, get one frees, etc. This was a smart move, as it lowered the cost of entry for people who had PS3s and honestly weren't too excited about the new formats. Now instead of paying $10 or $15 more at the store, the price difference would be $5 or less.

Of course, the counter-part to this was the whole confusion between the rival formats and a lot of people who cashed into a new format weeks before its demise. But, even if HD DVD is dead, the discs and players still work.

Poor advertising

[HTH NE1]

HD DVD had pretty ineffective advertising for the format.

While Blu-ray has ads that put the format up front and show you multiple movies you can get for the format, HD DVD ads are mostly ads for a single movie, available on DVD and HD DVD. The only ad you could say was an ad for the HD DVD format itself focused far too much on characters of Shrek, and the characters were actually complaining about the superior quality of the picture, either for Donkey's dragon girlfriend looking too big and scaly or Gingie finding himself looking too delicious and taking bites out of himself, ([crunch] "Ow. Yummy!"). Rather than promoting the format, it felt like it was promoting the Shrek franchise.

I find it interesting too that though Apple backs Blu-ray, DVD Studio Pro supports HD DVD instead. Apple's DVD Player software included with Leopard only plays HD DVDs mastered by DVD Studio Pro, but still is the first OS to ship with native support for an HD media format, and it was HD DVD. Still, the mastering time is ridiculous: 1 week to encode 22 minutes of 1920x1080i video to H.264 on a 4-core Mac Pro with Compressor running 24/7.

Re:It's not really over until Porn embraces Blu Ra

[powerlord]

Yup. Pr0n started coming out last March on Blu-Ray.

Re:BD+

[corychristison]

Almost a year ago.

Name Wins Afterall

[rjcarr]

I remember reading on the various tech sites that blu-ray was bound for no other reason than the name. People know what HD and DVD is, but WTF is a blu-ray? This seemed to be the unanimous opinion of techies, myself (somewhat) included.

It turns out that every non-techie I would talk to would ask about blu-ray but I never heard anything about hd-dvd. It turns out the techies were wrong, people bought onto blu-ray since it was something they hadn't heard and immediately understood it was a new format.

HD-DVD, on the other hand, didn't come across as a new format, but simply watching DVDs on your (new) HD television. I've had so many non-techies tell me how they are excited to get some HD-DVDs to watch on their new HDTV, not having a clue it was a different format requiring a different player.

Anyone want to apologize for getting it totally wrong? Maybe not "ipod ... lame" wrong, but still pretty wrong.

We have good stuff now though

[TheAxeMaster]

My $350 HTPC can upscale a DVD marvelously at 720p (my TV resolution) and I can't imagine the need for BD to get approximately the same picture (due to downscaling). At 1080p it might make a difference since software would be scaling to ~5x the resolution so your dynamic image processing might take over there. But you're still limited by the display. Besides, you only notice the picture sucks if you set less than ~5ft away ;)

Blu-Ray != Sony

[TheAngryIntern]

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!

Re:Blu-Ray != Sony

[elrous0]

Sony is rumored to be the one bankrolling most of the big money expenditures (including the recent advertising campaign and some of the studio payoffs). They also get a significantly larger chunk of the blu-ray licensing fees than the other BDA members, since they developed much of the actual technology behind the spec.

Re:Myself?

[samkass]

You're misinformed, the GP is correct.

I don't think so. I think you haven't kept up with the latest information over the last year or so.

Blu-tay has a larger capacity, but the 1st several releases suffered from bad transfers and use of old MP2 compression.

Yes, but that was years ago.

Since Blu-ray seems to be prevailing I hope that this is old news and no longer the case.

It is indeed no longer the case, and hasn't been for some time. The Blu-ray discs are now generally regarded as higher quality than HD DVD.

Re:BD+

[droopycom]

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....

It's Over, But Blu-Ray Isn't Ready

[CritterNYC]

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.

Re:It's Over, But Blu-Ray Isn't Ready

[noidentity]

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.

Why are you not outraged that it takes half a minute just to open the drawer?!? What the hell is wrong with these things taking more than a second to open the tray, and less than 5 to start playing the feature? I just don't get it.

Don't throw it away... Recycle it...

[FellowConspirator]

If it's a commercial failure, then why bury it. Just make the spec, tools, etc. free without license. There's a huge market for a low-cost high-capacity storage and video medium. Toshiba could make HD-DVD free to everyone. Blu-Ray can't beat that. Sure, the MPAA members will only ship Blu-Ray, but if it costs nothings to add to your drive, why wouldn't a vendor throw it on top just because. Home video and amateur cinematographers will have a reasonable format for producing, sharing, and storing footage, there'll be an HD replacement for VHS, and the cost for the blank media will plummet.

Then let's see who wins in the long run. Toshiba can still ship HD-DVD recorders, media, etc. Being fully open, the platform will reach every corner that Blu-Ray doesn't, by design. Blu-Ray is a very consumer-hostile format as-is; it's designed to limit the medium. Toshiba should give up not by burying it, but by becoming the antithesis of its competitor.

Re:Don't throw it away... Recycle it...

[OrangeTide]

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.

Re-brand to "High Density"...?

[keith_nt4]

I don't suppose I'm the first one to think of this (or maybe I am) but it seems like they could re-brand HD-DVD from "High Definition" to "High Density" and sell the discs as blank storage media for PCs and other devices. It'd be perfect. Am I really the only one who has thought of this?

Re:Re-brand to "High Density"...?

[RoboRay]

Well, since writable Blu Ray is already available as a PC storage format (has been for years, especially in Japan), and capacity is the only thing that really matters in a storage format, and Blu Ray has 60% more capacity than HD-DVD, I'd say positioning HD-DVD exclusively as a storage format probably won't happen.

Re:BD+

[VisceralLogic]

It's ok... the mods believed you. :)

And their name

[jjrff]

Might as well put that one to rest too; Toshiba - sucks; sounds like shit and tofu collided.

You do not need Profile 1.x

[SuperKendall]

If you just want to watch movie (most people do) any Blu-Ray player will do (yes, Samsung fixed the problem that lawsuit as around where a few discs would not play).

If you want to be able to shop FROM YOUR disc a specialized web store based on the movie you just watched - well then, may God have mercy on your soul.

HD-DVD had all kinds of cool internet features - that hardly anyone used more than to show it could be done.

Oh yeah, I forgot the other hot thing you can do with internet access from your movie player - watch up to date trailers, just like you can on your PC. Wohoo!