Is HD DVD Trying to Lose?

[admin]

As many of you know I have been somewhat of a critic of the high definition DVD format war. I have never understood how apparent shortsightedness and desire for short-term corporate licensing profits could have prevented so many companies from embracing a unified format. Instead, most companies are bent (I could end the sentence here) on duking it out and forcing customers to flip the bill and go through the decision-making process.

Discuss "Is HD DVD Trying to Lose?" here. Read the article.

 

[autoboy]

I just wanted to say that I LOVE dual format disks and is one of the reasons I went with HD-DVD. Not all my DVD players are HD and I enjoy being able to take the disc anywhere in the house or even over to a friends house to watch the disc. I probably won't watch 300 on a little screen in my office, but there are lots of movies I would. I DO want dual format discs.

I DON'T want to pay extra for dual format discs. Especially not $5 more when I think movies should cost $10 on DVD and HD DVD anyway.

Also, why is the mastering more expensive for a dual format disc? Yes, the disc may cost more to make, a few cents perhaps, but the DVD version is the same as the regular DVD version, costing $0 extra to master, and the HD-DVD version is the same as the HD-DVD only version would be to master. So where is this extra mastering you speak of?

If they want HD-DVD to survive. Lower the disc prices to the same as the DVD and include the HD-DVD version at no extra cost. Then there will be no stopping HD-DVD. This is their best weapon and I don't know why they don't just suck it up and use it. HD-DVD is fighting like an Athenian. They need to fight like Spartans!

 

[j_garcia]

If I were on the fence, dual format discs would absolutely not win me over and would likely have exactly the effect noted in the article. I find them a complete waste. If I am going to pay more for the disc, why not just get the HD-DVD player now? I noticed that there are some releases that you CAN buy the HD-DVD version only OR a "flipper" version, but not all.

There is no extra mastering, but the disc needs to be pressed as a flipper which I'm sure adds to the cost a little.

 

[Audioholics]

It's good to hear feedback from a consumer. I have no use for the hybrids, but it's good to hear another perspective.

 

[Leprkon]

And the marketing genuises are all at Sony, where they assumed people would be stupid enough to pay 2x DVD prices for something they could watch on their PSPs ? or who couldn't even make BluRay players work with a standard CD ?

I'm thinking your analysis is a little biased.

 

[mike c]

funny story. I know someone who bought HD DVD discs and played them on his DVD player. he said there was no difference between them and ordinary DVD's. He thought HD DVD - naturally, it was "compatible" with ordinary DVD players.

 

[no. 5]

Both format camps are in this to win, so either HD DVD is going to do a big offensive soon, or they are hoping for a slow and painful death.

funny story. I know someone who bought HD DVD discs and played them on his DVD player. he said there was no difference between them and ordinary DVD's. He thought HD DVD - naturally, it was "compatible" with ordinary DVD players.

That is funny.

 

[BMXTRIX]

I have no real issue with hybrid discs, but they shouldn't cost the consumer more. If it costs more, than there should just be HD DVD versions available for most people. Do a test run of both formats and see which actually sells more copies.

I think some of the things that have astounded me since the format war began include how people swore that HD DVD media would cost significantly less to consumers, but that not only hasn't played out, but because of these discs, it actually appears that HD DVD costs more once you own it.

As well, the HD DVD name while immediately invoking brand recognition, also confuses consumers... If I have a DVD player, why not get the HD version of the DVD? That makes perfectly rational sense to an average consumer. Most are amazed that you can even play a CD in a DVD player. But, they expect a HD DVD to play in the DVD player. Just because it's HD doesn't mean it's an entirely new format... does it?

Really, I have never believed there was a format war. On my business side I try to remain fairly neutral, but realistically, I don't think that HD DVD has ever had a chance. They have Universal. Microsoft is not seriously in their corner, but Universal is. But, should that end, then what reason is there to buy HD DVD? Yes, Blu-ray players run a couple hundred bucks more. Actually less for comparible models. The A20 to the BP301 was less than $50.00 price difference this evening when I was shopping. The A2 was 100 bucks less. If Universal were neutral, that $50 - $150 savings would give you about 40% less movies possible to be released.

I really believe that this holiday season, unless Wal-Mart goes HD DVD in a very big way, it will be fairly clear writing on the wall for HD DVD. Writing that was very predictably there well over the 14+ months ago when these formats first hit the street.

Now, cutting into the DVD format? That will be the serious format war. 300 indeed.

 

[MDS]

While I admit that this is the first time I've heard of hybrid DVD/HD-DVD, I think I'd pass anyway.

Remember DualDisc? Touted as both a CD and a DVD when in fact it was neither. In order to put both formats on one disc, it conformed to neither the CD spec nor the DVD spec and many players had a hard time playing them.

I hope the DVD/HD-DVD hybrid doesn't go the same way.

 

[hifiman]

Really glad to see this thread

I took audio and home theater way too seriously. I poured all my extra money into it. I did the constant upgrade thing because I wanted to, not because I had to. I bought into the various formats that vanished soon after they appeared. In trying to keep this short I'll simply say the DVD-Audio and SACD made me take more than a moment of pause. I was tired of getting screwed because companies wanted it all. I guess they all want to be the next Microsoft - including Apple. HD-DVD and Blu-ray made me laugh right from the start. There's too many similarities to the hi-rez audio formats that failed. I refuse to get burned again. Add to that the seemingly never ending versions of HDMI and all the ensuing issues and I want no part of it. I've downsized my equipment to nothing more than a shadow of what it once was. My iPod is my primary source for music and my Xbox 360 is my only DVD player. Soon I will get rid of my pre/pro and amp and get one of those receivers I've avoided for many years. I'm just tired of playing this endless game at the mercy of companies screwing the consumer.

 

[j_garcia]

or who couldn't even make BluRay players work with a standard CD ?

CDs work just fine in my PS3...

 

[davo]

Maybe the format war will be decided, not on what is the best format, but which company is the stupidest and dragging their respective format down with them.

Either way I just wish it would happen quicker.

 

[davidtwotrees]

Remember DualDisc? ...In order to put both formats on one disc, it conformed to neither the CD spec nor the DVD spec and many players had a hard time playing them. I hope the DVD/HD-DVD hybrid doesn't go the same way.

I purchased a dualdisc.....John Mayer. One side was hirez, that's why I bought it. I put it in my Denon 3910, and the whole player started to wobble and shake something fierce. Hmmmm. Took it back and got another........same thing. Turns out Denon would not list the dualdisc as a format that worked in its players.
I am not caught up in the format wars. Like the last poster, the hirez audio left me with a bad taste in my mouth. My big screen puts out a fine picture and I am not that interested in making it "better"....

 

[Audioholics]

And the marketing genuises are all at Sony, where they assumed people would be stupid enough to pay 2x DVD prices for something they could watch on their PSPs ? or who couldn't even make BluRay players work with a standard CD ?

I'm thinking your analysis is a little biased.

You misinterpret - this is NOT a pro Blu-ray or Sony article. It's about how a few companies who supposedly support "both" formats are possibly working to subvert HD DVD by making consistently bad marketing decisions.

PS. Nobody commented on my Photoshop'ed DVD cover... and here I thought I was being clever...

 

[Johnd]

PS. Nobody commented on my Photoshop'ed DVD cover... and here I thought I was being clever...

I will. Beautiful work. Hara kiri...that's a clever title. Is that peaceful, handsome old man with the beard and smock you? I can't enlarge the photo so it's hard to tell.

 

[fmw]

I don't buy movies at all. I never have. I rent them. Rentals are about $1 each at Netflix. Rarely am I interested in seeing a movie more than once. If I am, I can rent it many, many times for less than the purchase price. I'm not poor. I can afford to buy all the movies if I want to. I just don't want to. I'm not a movie hobbyist. I just watch them for entertainment. I think I might be fairly typical of the mainstream home movie watcher.

I don't pay the price even for SD DVD's. I certainly won't pay the prices for HD DVD's, even though I own players in both HD formats.

The CD business is putting itself out of business. Selling a product that costs about 25 cents to produce for $13 or $14 so that everyone can have amazing amounts of royalties and profits was the cause of the growth of internet music downloads. But does the industry see this or care? Apparently not. The CD stores of yesteryear are gone and the CD departments at big box stores are a shadow of their former selves. The industry is content to milk it as it sinks into the depths. I can't even find the CD's that interest me in the stores.

The DVD business is probably headed in the same direction eventually. I'm willing to bet that faster internet speeds will make DVD downloads the preferred way to get content in the future.

Personally, I don't think it has anything to do with formats. At the prices they charge for recorded movies, they aren't going to address the mainstream. Or, at least they aren't going to address me if I represent the mainstream. They are going to settle for hard-core movie enthusiasts and movie rental companies. If it were my industry, I would sell DVD's for $5 or $6. They might actually sell enough to improve the overall profits at the studios.

 

[Johnd]

But does the industry see this or care? Apparently not. The CD stores of yesteryear are gone and the CD departments at big box stores are a shadow of their former selves. The industry is content to milk it as it sinks into the depths. I can't even find the CD's that interest me in the stores.

I detect a hint of malcontention. I hear what you're saying, but with so many titles available, how do you really expect the "cd stores of yesteryear" to compete? I'll admit, it may be nice to take an evening stroll to the store and pickup a fabulous cd, but just about anything can be had on the internet. Let your fingers do the walking.

 

[fmw]

I detect a hint of malcontention. I hear what you're saying, but with so many titles available, how do you really expect the "cd stores of yesteryear" to compete? I'll admit, it may be nice to take an evening stroll to the store and pickup a fabulous cd, but just about anything can be had on the internet. Let your fingers do the walking.

Not really. I'm not only a strong internet shopper, I make my living selling products on the internet so I truly believe in it. I buy all my CD's on line. My point was that internet music downloads are replacing CD's because they are cheaper. CD's have always been overpriced and, in the face of the competition from dowloads, they still are. I think that's an accurate description of the situation.

I can't say for sure that the same thing will happen with DVD's but I'd put money on it if things don't change in the pricing structure.

 

[avaserfi]

My point was that internet music downloads are replacing CD's because they are cheaper.

Really? Last I saw iTunes, the most popular download service, sold songs that aren't of equal quality to a cd for 99 cents each and if you want the whole cd it costs 10 dollars from what I hear. I will gladly pay an extra 3 dollars for far less compressed version or just wait and buy used.

The real reason is probably convenience you don't have to go to the store its just there as soon as you want it...

 

[fmw]

Really? Last I saw iTunes, the most popular download service, sold songs that aren't of equal quality to a cd for 99 cents each and if you want the whole cd it costs 10 dollars from what I hear. I will gladly pay an extra 3 dollars for far less compressed version or just wait and buy used.

The real reason is probably convenience you don't have to go to the store its just there as soon as you want it...

There are services that provide unlimited downloads for a monthly fee equal to the retail price of a single CD. I don't use them either. I buy CD's because, like you, I'm not fond of highly compressed MP3's. But internet downloads are what is causing the decline of CD sales just the same. CD sales are way down and declining each year both in stores and on line. Most people are content with the sound of highly compressed MP3's it seems.