First of all, everyone needs to understand a few key points about HD DVD:
- It is the only approved format out of the DVD Forum, as the true successor format to DVD.
- HD DVD is a finalized spec, it includes and requires mandatory elements like a second video decoder and audio decoder, for things like Picture-in-Picture video commentary. An Ethernet port, for web content and extras that can be downloaded after the disc has been sold, for example Transformers on HD DVD offers new content not available initially. The port also serves for firmware updates, both formats need them for changes but with Blu-ray you need to mail off for a free disc whereas with HD DVD you can instantly update any changes right from your living room.
- Cost, entry levels players were as low as $100, but now average roughly $199. Blu-ray has a higher cost with players that will soon be obsolete (read on for details) for as little as $399 and up.
- Lossless audio codec is mandatory only on HD DVD, with Dolby Digital TrueHD lossless sound. With Blu-ray, no true next-gen audio codec is mandatory.
- Persistent Storage, memory built-in that can store your user acct for content, preferences, downloads, bookmarks, etc.
- Combo Discs which have an HD DVD and DVD side, allowing you to watch the HD side on your HD DVD player and use the same disc on your DVD players in your bedroom, car, friends using the DVD side.
- Both formats offer superior 1080p video quality.
Read what HDTV Magazine has to say about the formats and which is the best:
http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles/20 ... lu-ray.php Do your own research and find out for yourself.
2099net wrote:Microsoft did not pay Paramount $150m, Toshiba did.
Actually not quite so. Paramount has already stated the reasons for dropping Blu-ray and they were not pretty. All of this talk regarding a NY Times anonymous source cited $150M is a major false flag to divert attention away from the REAL reasons. Come on, Viacom (Paramount parent company) is a huge multi-billion dollar corporation; $150M are pennies to these guys. People say Blu-ray is doing so well, so why would Viacom take pennies and dump the "very successful" format? Again $150M isn't much to these studios. So to suggest it was the sole reason for the stragey change is a bit naive.
Some of the reasons Viacom decided to dump Blu-ray are clear and make sense. Read these answers from a PC World magazine interview to ascertain a better understanding why Paramount/DreamWorks dropped Blu-ray in support of HD DVD:
PCW: Presumably, making this move wasn't something you did lightly. What led up to the decision to shift your production exclusively to HD DVD?
Paramount has been getting experience with publishing titles in both formats for the last year. We've had a hands-on ability to see how these formats work in practice. And after some hands-on analysis, we decided that HD DVD was the format we wanted to support.
PCW: Why was that?
Bell: For one thing, the lower prices of the players: It's good for consumers, it's good for our customer base.
For another thing, HD DVD came out of the DVD Forum. The DVD Forum is very experienced at developing and managing specs. [HD DVD] was launched in a very stable way, with stable specifications, and they had specified a reference player model, so all players had to be compatible with the HDi interactivity layer, and all players had to be capable of the interactivity. So when we publish titles in the future that have interactivity, we can be assured that every HD DVD player will be able to handle this content.
PCW: So, as a studio, you believe that the underlying stability of HD DVD's specs is a benefit?
Bell: When you look at what the DVD Forum has specified as required, it's a good set of advanced technologies. You can be assured that that benefit will be available to all consumers, no matter what [player] model they purchased. That speaks to the DVD Forum, that it published specs that were complete and market-ready, and that it didn't need to publish up [and change the specs], as Blu-ray has. To some degree, [such changes are] going to create some legacy issues.
For example, HD DVD players have [ethernet] connectivity built-in. If the player doesn't have that, or it's optional, you can't rely on that [as a feature].
PCW: Didn't we see the same thing with DVD players, though, where some features were mandatory and others weren't?
Bell: When you have a format, you generally have mandatory requirements on players, and you sometimes have optional features. On DVD, Dolby Digital 5.1 was mandatory, but DTS 5.1 was optional. But that meant that when you published a title, you never really knew how many customers had players that supported the feature you were adding to the disc at some cost. On HD DVD, the mandatory audio technologies are Dolby Digital, Dolby Digital Plus, and Dolby TrueHD. [For more details, see an explanation of the differences among the various Dolby technologies.]
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,13625 ... ticle.html
Keep in mind that Paramount unlike others had experience with both formats and thus knew firsthand the pros and cons of each. Subsequently they decided HD DVD was superior for their needs and more robust overall.
Now the incentives, which have not been identified as $150M but confirmed from Toshiba were marketing incentives and in-kind payments, basically so that the HD DVD Promotional Group can use DreamWorks SKG IPs in marketing campaigns. Such as the two TV adverts featuring characters from Shrek the Third. Here are the two:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NAYxYxn3iTA and
http://youtube.com/watch?v=PxuJDgxIpR8
2099net wrote:And its likely most of the money was not included in the transaction but will be used in contra services (disc replication, co-branded adverts etc).
About disc replication and co-branded, Sony was heavily subsidizing or is still doing so, the high cost of BD50 which is a dual-layer 50GB disc. Also while Rupert Murdoch of Fox and Iger have chastised Paramount for taking the bribe, yet they have not made any statements to "vindicate" their studios of receiving any payments or incentives. Iger did state they did not receive money to chose Blu-ray but never ruled out any in-kind payments or deals, and never commented any further. Nor has the BDA ruled out any money, in fact all of the studios were asking for money and Sony revealed they reduced licensing and royalties for two studios to get them on board. So it's not a big surprise in the least when Hollywood studios engage in marketing deals and money is exchanged.
TM2-Megatron wrote:These new 51GB discs with their questionable compatibility are nothing more than a gimmick. I very much doubt this variant will be made use of in the home video market.
Yeah we don’t know, more than likely yes. The HD DVD Promotional Group would not press forward with a disc that would be incompatible. Of note, a Toshiba VP did mention that the discs should work on all existing hardware but testing needs to continue. We probably won’t know until CES 2008 (Consumer Electronics Show) in Vegas.
95% of movies are under two hours anyway, and HD DVD can easily handle several hours of HD 1080p video, with lossless audio 7.1 and extra content on a 30GB disc. If they need to add more extras or content, the very inexpensive 15GB disc will suffice. Besides data shows consumers see more value in two disc sets over one discs, so it's beneficial to consumers. Everyone here seems to love two disc sets and despite 50GB on Blu-ray, most big releases like Spider-Man 3 and POTC3 require two discs. So I guess it's not so bad.
Widdi wrote:This is exactly why I'm staying as far away from HD/Blu Ray as possible. The war is far from ever and anybody who thinks otherwise is nutso. Consumers supporting and investing money in either format at this point is just stupid. Why throw hundreds of dollars away on a player and discs that may be completely obsolete in a year or two? It's just bad spending.
Entry and initial costs for HD DVD are substantially lower, with players as low as $99 although more commonly $199 range. Currently Amazon.com is offering 10 free movies with an HD DVD Player for $224. Seems like a minimal cost and investment to experience HD 1080p movies rather than waiting for what analyst predict would be years of a co-existence.
deathie mouse wrote:Blu-ray (a format that's selling nearing 3:1 against HD DVD in the US and 8:1 in the rest of the planet)
Actually it’s 2:1 in US and 8:1 in Australia and I believe 6:1 in Europe. These ratios sound amazing, don’t they? Ever wonder why Sony doesn’t reveal the figures. It’s because the numbers are horribly low. For example the best selling Blu-ray disc is 300 and sold 250,000 copies to date whereas the HD DVD version sold 146,000. Compared that to 2.7 million Blu-ray capable players (includes PS3) to 750,000 dedicated HD DVD players and the numbers seem strange and outlandishly out of place. That’s because PS3 has a terrible attach rate (the number of movies sold on average per player), as Warner Bros VP Dan Silverberg stated “relying on gamers is dangerous” and it’s true. Blu-ray is banking the format on PS3, which is a game console that’s #3 in a three place race. It’s a total failure, despite repeated price drops including the new $399 SKU, it’s still not meeting predictions. PS3 is underperforming and Sony is losing billions each quarter as a result of the several hundred dollar subsidy they are providing per unit. HD DVD is focused on dedicated players, players solely intended for HD DVD movie playback and PS3 is a game machine and a Blu-ray player. However most PS3 owners don’t buy movies and the sales are indicative of this.
The entire, European market has sold 1M discs between both formats. Blu-ray has sold 630,000 more discs. Is this really that big of a deal? No, consumers have not chosen despite what some want you to believe. Far from it. In Australia just 2,200 Blu-ray players sold versus 609 HD DVD players. Total discs were 102,000 sold in Australia. Again is this truly massive? We’re not seeing big numbers here, it’s still too early.
To give more perspective, Spider-Man sold a little over 100,000 copies on Blu-ray, Die Hard 100,000 copies, Ratatouille 65,000 copies, Close Encounters 35,000, etc. Transformers on HD DVD sold 190,000 in one week, Shrek sold 70,000, and I don't have all of the numbers. The sadest example is Return to House on Haunted Hill that sold roughly 3,000 copies between both formats, giving Blu-ray the edge by just 340 discs sold more.
As you can see these numbers pale in comparison to DVD sales, and mind you the high def market encompassing both formats is just a paultry 1% of the home video market. So let's not get ahead of ourselves and pretend Blu-ray is this superior format selling millions of discs. Far from it, it is!
deathie mouse wrote:Blu-ray is supported by Disney, Lionsgate, MGM, Sony/Columbia/Tri-Star, Starz/Anchor Bay, and 20th Century Fox.
New Line/Warner are neutral and they release on both formats.
New Line just released Hairspray last week on Blu-ray first.
HD DVD is supported by Universal, and now Paramount/DreamWorks after the payoff. More than 75% of the Paramount/Dreamwork High Definition titles were released on Blu-ray. Their Spielberg titles have to be released on Blu-ray too.
Actually Blu-ray is supported by three of the Big Six which are Disney, Sony and Fox. HD DVD has two with Paramount and Universal. Warner Bros which includes New Line is neutral and currently supports both. Hairspray was released first on Blu-ray due to lack of region encoding on HD DVD, New Line is the only studio that has contractual obligations with foreign distributors to release their titles abroad and thus cannot release a region free disc that could play on players locally.
Actually Spielberg titles do not have to be released on Blu-ray. When Universal Studios went HD DVD exclusive, they did not make any exclusions unlike Paramount which stated titles directed by him were excluded but did not indicate they had to be released on Blu-ray. Spielberg has control over some of his films, but ultimately Paramount owns distribution rights and they are currently HD DVD exclusive.
deathie mouse wrote:Pirates Of The Caribbean 3 is released on Blu-ray Disc next Tuesday.
The Bourne Ultimatum is next Tuesday too. I'll be enjoying that on HD DVD.
Spottedfeather wrote:Blu-Ray is the far superior format. Why else would it be selling far, far better than HD-DVD ? Better picture, better....everything.
How is 1080p on Blu-ray better than 1080p on HD DVD? What else is better? HD DVD does things Blu-ray cannot.
2099net wrote:The whole "obsolete" argument doesn't really wash. Blu-ray will never be obsolete because its supported by the PS3.
It already is. All Blu-ray standalones sold to date are Profile 1.0, and as of 11/1/07, the new standard for Blu-ray hardware is Profile 1.1 which means a second video and audio codec. So when Resident Evil, Narnia, Finding Nemo and Sleeping Beauty come out next year, your old obsolete players won’t be able to enjoy next-gen interactive features like Picture in Picture that Disney and Sony are both boasting about that currently ALL HD DVD players can do, even the inexpensive $99 machines.
Then when Sony finally mandates Profile 2.0, which requires an Ethernet port, your 1.1 or 1.0 players won’t be able to do any of the web features. Such as the announced National Treasure web features, the Sleeping Beauty chats - you won't be able to participate using 1.1 or 1.0 hardware that is currently being sold. You will need to upgrade, 1.0 old players are $499 imagine 2.0 players, a few have been announced. Both above $899, very expensive.
Then when Profile 3.0 comes out, your 2.0 players are obsolete. So in essence you’re wrong 2099, Blu-ray is already behind and trying to catch up to features HD DVD has been delivering since day one. So yes they are already obsolete, all of these new cheap $399 Blu-ray players are a wash because they won’t and can’t support the future features planned.
Finally HD DVD offers compelling new interactive features, web content, extras and others thanks to Microsoft’s HDi technology. For more information about the amazing extras found only on HD DVD that Blu-ray is trying to replicate, visit this site:
http://www.universalhidef.com/features.aspx
deathie mouse wrote:Region coding and AACS make studios feel confident in protecting their revenue so they release more. That's one good reason Disney, MGM and Fox are Blu-ray only, and there are already independent releases on Blu-ray
So now you’re advocating for companies? Since when do consumers care how a studio protects their content? Region coding is anti-consumer, why should we be bound to movies in a specific territory or region? Who besides studios, would ever praise such a closed system? As consumers we want more freedoms. Do you really want studios dictating how we use our movies, that we purchased? Let them worry about protection and safety. And FYI, Blu-ray security system is so screwed up, people couldn’t even watch Fantastic Four or Day After due to the security layer. See here
http://www.crunchgear.com/2007/10/04/bd ... y-players/
HD DVD is the more pro-consumer choice, it’s region free so all of your movies play in any player anywhere. You can import foreign films and buy them abroad, etc. It also has a mandatory back-up, which legally allows you to make a back-up of the film should it become damaged, etc. Blu-ray does not. How is that pro-consumer?
