No winner in HD-DVD/Blu-ray war

[ironlung]

With all the feet dragging and lack of interest in high res audio and video I predict that the BEST that HD/Blu can do is niche market status.

The problem is no one cares about quality. "Good enough" has taken over.
Look at SACD/DVD-A vs Itunes. VOD DVD SD quality will be more available in the years to come and for the average person this will be "good enough".

The lack of interest goes into actual HDTV owners who made the purchase to:

-Keep up with the Jones's

-massage their own ego and prove their status.."I got 1080p!!!!!!!!!!"(or willingness to use high interest credit)

-marvel at 480p DVD's in widescreen glory (Just like HD with some fancy schmancy upscalin' ya know)

-"What are you talking about everything on my TV is HD?!? It's an HDTV after all...I hate pillar boxes and love streched faces"

------------------------------------------------------------------------


HD/Blu optical storage will be the audio/videophile choice over SD-DVD like laser disc was over VHS in the 1990's. Not the mega success of DVD.


-

 

[agarwalro]

With all the feet dragging and lack of interest in high res audio and video I predict that the BEST that HD/Blu can do is niche market status.

The problem is no one cares about quality. "Good enough" has taken over.
Look at SACD/DVD-A vs Itunes. VOD DVD SD quality will be more available in the years to come and for the average person this will be "good enough".

The lack of interest goes into actual HDTV owners who made the purchase to:

-Keep up with the Jones's

-massage their own ego and prove their status.."I got 1080p!!!!!!!!!!"(or willingness to use high interest credit)

-marvel at 480p DVD's in widescreen glory (Just like HD with some fancy schmancy upscalin' ya know)

-"What are you talking about everything on my TV is HD?!? It's an HDTV after all...I hate pillar boxes and love streched faces"

------------------------------------------------------------------------


HD/Blu optical storage will be the audio/videophile choice over SD-DVD like laser disc was over VHS in the 1990's. Not the mega success of DVD.


-

IMO, the resason HD/BD has not taken the fancy of the masses is because neither of the two has come out as the clear, unequivocal winner. Some might argue that BD is a superior techonlogy, but, not in what matters to the public. For example, I dont want to invest in putting together a HD-DVD library and buy the player only to find out a year down the line that Blue Ray is the way to go.

I think the SACD/ DVD-A vs. iTunes comparison might not be the most appropriate in this case.

SACS and DVD-A (and HDCD) represent the highest quality of digitized audio. Most people dont have the equipment that will reveal the difference between these ultra high quality audio sources and a regular CD. And the promise of a more emursive sound stage is a hit or miss scenario depending on how the album is produced. Last but not the least, all audio will have to be re-purchased in these hi-def formats. Consequently, the hi-def formats have been adopted by a small section of the masses, thereby relegating them to a niche market.

iTunes on the other hand has become popular due to the ease of use, durability and portability of MP3s, combined with the players ability to carry a vast amount of music. The players themselves are tiny when compared to even the smallest portable CD players. Not to mention that now anyone can purchase one track of an album rather than being forced to purchase the whole album just of one track. Add to that the fact that if you are on public transport or in a car, the idea of critical listening is downright stupid. Again making a strong case for MP3's.

 

[GlocksRock]

Not to mention, manufacturers can't even get a blu-ray player out on the market in a reasonable time frame. Everyone seems to keep pushing back everything blu-ray related.

 

[MikeSp]

Another reason is PRICE!!! DVD's became popular after their players dropped in price competing with the price of VCR's (especially after the major price drops with Chinese loss-leaders stacked in isles at Wal Marts).

IF the companies that are marketing the new high def DVD players wanted to jump start the sales of their products, they might consider selling them at a price point that would be attractive to the average buyer (but would initially cause the units to be sold below the cost to manufacture but would be recouped after the new format caught on).

For me, I refuse to get trapped with the wrong format like I did when I decided to go with Beta in that format war, so I will wait until a clear winner has been decided by the marketplace while I figure out what to do with my laserdiscs.

FWIW, I will predict (without my crystal ball being fully charged up) that BOTH formats will hang around and the movie studios will eventually release their high def movies in both formats. The demand for high def DVDs will come from us HT nuts but more than that, from people that like their HDTVs.

IMHO, we have been let down by the entertainment industry by them not establishing a single high def format that would have lead to greater numbers of sales of players, rapidly declining prices of the players and greater numbers of high def DVDs that would play in the players since there would have been only one choice in formats.

MikeSp

 

[ironlung]

IMO, the resason HD/BD has not taken the fancy of the masses is because neither of the two has come out as the clear, unequivocal winner. Some might argue that BD is a superior techonlogy, but, not in what matters to the public. For example, I dont want to invest in putting together a HD-DVD library and buy the player only to find out a year down the line that Blue Ray is the way to go.

If there was only one format it would be the same I'm afraid. In mosts opinion DVD-SD is good enough.

I think the SACD/ DVD-A vs. iTunes comparison might not be the most appropriate in this case.

I'm going to quote you but only change a few words

SACS and DVD-A (and HDCD) represent the highest quality of digitized audio. Most people dont have the equipment that will reveal the difference between these ultra high quality audio sources and a regular CD. And the promise of a more emursive sound stage is a hit or miss scenario depending on how the album is produced. Last but not the least, all audio will have to be re-purchased in these hi-def formats. Consequently, the hi-def formats have been adopted by a small section of the masses, thereby relegating them to a niche market.

my reply:

HD-DVD and Blu-ray represent the highest quality of digitized video. Most people dont have the equipment that will reveal the difference between these ultra high quality video sources and a regular DVD. And the promise of a more emursive visuals are a hit or miss scenario depending on how the video is produced. Last but not the least, all video will have to be re-purchased in these hi-def formats. Consequently, the hi-def formats have been adopted by a small section of the masses, thereby relegating them to a niche market.

iTunes on the other hand has become popular due to the ease of use, durability and portability of MP3s, combined with the players ability to carry a vast amount of music. The players themselves are tiny when compared to even the smallest portable CD players. Not to mention that now anyone can purchase one track of an album rather than being forced to purchase the whole album just of one track. Add to that the fact that if you are on public transport or in a car, the idea of critical listening is downright stupid. Again making a strong case for MP3's.

DVD's/VOD/Cable/Dish(SD in general) on the other hand has become popular due to the ease of use, durability and portability of these various SD sources, and displays combined with the DVR's/DVD-R's ability to carry a vast amount of content. Not to mention that now anyone can purchase the same video for less cost than the HD counterpart and the only thing missing is a few pixels. Add to that the fact that if you are talking about the general public the idea of critical listening/viewing is downright stupid. Again making a strong case for SD-DVD's.



The same crowd that is head over heels for SACD/DVD-A are the only ones SLIGHTLY interested in any HD format.

 

[agarwalro]

If there was only one format it would be the same I'm afraid.

Maybe, may not be. There was no problem when CDs were introduced. It stood out as the clearly superior technology and provided considerable improvement over the popular medium then (tape).

In mosts opinion DVD-SD is good enough.

If the DVD-SD is reference quality material, the player can upscale and process well, then yes. Like I said before, there is improvement, but you need the electronics to reveal them. Best of luck finding the added detail on a 30 inch 1080p display while sitting 10 feet away, because most would rather have the 50 inch 1080i display for the same price.

I'm going to quote you but only change a few words

With some clever paraphrasing you have made my arguments work to further your agenda, but it does not make sense to me. I feel its a matter of diminishing returns. Like the difference between buying a DVD-SD player costing $50.00 vs $500.00 vs $5000.00. To some a $5000.00 reference player is the only way to go, to others it is a waste of money if you objectively compare whats not available in the $500.00 player.

Consequently, the hi-def formats have been adopted by a small section of the masses, thereby relegating them to a niche market.

HD-video is in its infancy. Only in America is it available in broadcast. HD-DVD players hit the market this quarter. So calling it a niche market today is absurd. Its like asking a baby to construct and speak a cogent sentence when the linguistic centers and speach patterns have barely developed.

Add to that the fact that if you are talking about the general public the idea of critical listening/viewing is downright stupid. Again making a strong case for SD-DVD's.

Yes, but I would not call it stupid. The general public likes Ferrari's and Lamborgini's but just because they dont own one does not mean they cant drive. Its a matter of priorities. Maybe someone wants a 60 inch display more than they want 1080p capability. Who died and made you king? Where do you get off making that judgement.

The same crowd that is head over heels for SACD/DVD-A are the only ones SLIGHTLY interested in any HD format.

Maybe because they were disillusioned with the promises made when SACD and DVD-A were announced, but fell short on. There are a few discs that stand out for being good, but the technologies in general failed to deliver. Historically, the early adopters stand the highest probability of being gilted and the late adopters get the best deals.

 

[JES14]

Might be a little early for any declaration...

 

[ironlung]

We are here on a forum of like minded individuals. People who claim to be into image and sound quality. I have been reading here for years even before I signed up.

There are audioholics that have HDTV displays and have NO source for HD and seemingly don't care. Head out into the general population and anything more than a shoulder shrug and a head nod is a big reaction the first time Joe Average sees a HD picture.

Joe is not reaching for his wallet yet.


I wish we could see % TV sales that are HD and % of HDTV owners that have ANY source for HD.

I am thinking that any one looking for a TV over 35 inch will end up with a HD set because SD-RPTV's don't exist any longer. They hook up the NTSC tuner and a DVD player and are set for the next decade. Not exactly an early adoption if they don't intend to do anything but 480p widescreen. Still that TV gets counted as HD sets sold.


Having two formats hurts them both. Most people that do not have money to burn will not buy either until its sorted. Witch only gives more time to the network delivery of content on the horizion.

Time will tell me I'm wrong.....I HOPE. Because I want the best picture and sound. I want perfection. SD-DVD's and 128bit MP3's are not "good enough".

I've been told that next year is gonna be sweet for HD for the last three years. The first HD broadcast(to the public) was in 1998. That's a mighty old infant. Look at DVD's that were born to the public way, way back in 1997.

What do you think Joe Average will buy?


I still expect that:

LD is to VHS
what
HD/Blu is to DVD​

and will be no better situation June 14 2007 than it is today. I hope you all can throw it in my face next year when we are rolling naked in HD content.

 

[MikeSp]

With all the feet dragging and lack of interest in high res audio and video I predict that the BEST that HD/Blu can do is niche market status.

-

Just read today where the Samsung BD-P1000 Blu-ray Player is NOT Delayed and thousands are already on their way to vendors.

BUT IMHO it would be gambling to shell out $1000 for a first generation piece with a format that may or may not be the winner.

I want one and a new 1080P HDTV display -- but have to wait this out a while.

MikeSp

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

This is just a hunch, but I have my doubts that either format will "make it." Meaning, neither format will see the success SD DVD enjoys. The majority of people (not you or I) rent dvd's (as opposed to purchase them). Most don't want to pay more than $4.29 to rent a movie. Many subscribe to Netflix or Blockbuster online. Others order movies via pay per view.

If the industry and market can get these players in people's hands for under $200, and sell the discs for under $20 (or rent for under $5), then I think the formats would have a chance. We know that's not going to happen anytime soon.

I think HD discs are just a bit premature. The majority of folks don't even have a HD set, let alone the need for a HD player. Full digital programming won't happen until after 2009, and at that point, the government will need to figure out how to get boxes in everyones houses to play on all the existing sets. What a nightmare.

When you start seeing HD-DVDs and Blu-ray titles next to SD dvd's in your local Blockbuster/Walmart/Best Buy, then you'll know the formats have "made it." I think we have a long time to go before we see that.

 

[Sheep]

iTunes on the other hand has become popular due to the ease of use, durability and portability of MP3s, combined with the players ability to carry a vast amount of music. The players themselves are tiny when compared to even the smallest portable CD players. Not to mention that now anyone can purchase one track of an album rather than being forced to purchase the whole album just of one track. Add to that the fact that if you are on public transport or in a car, the idea of critical listening is downright stupid. Again making a strong case for MP3's.

This right here is whats bugging me. People downloading just 1(!) song. THis is why bands often turn into 1 hit wonders. The poor everything they have into a single becuase its the only song people will listen to.

Buy a CD, support the band, and learn to like them more.

Itunes can go to hell for all I care.

Back on track,

I wouldn't judge this situation until BOTH players are on the market(AND after demoing both[only seen HDDVD]).

SheepStar

 

[MikeSp]

This right here is whats bugging me. People downloading just 1(!) song. THis is why bands often turn into 1 hit wonders. The poor everything they have into a single becuase its the only song people will listen to.
SheepStar

You are looking at this situation from the band's standpoint, but from the consumer's standpoint, it does not make economic sense to purchase a CD which contains just one or two good songs nor does it make much sense for the purchaser to have to keep swapping CD's in and out of the player just for the one or two good songs that are often on a CD. OTOH, I have quite a few older CD's that contain mostly good songs...

MikeSp

 

[BMXTRIX]

J6P could care less about HD-DVD or Blu-ray. The cost is simply to high. As with DVD when it hit the market at prices in the $1K range, it is simply unfathomable that any impact whatsoever could possilbly take place for J6P.

This is where the PS3 comes along in a way that no other format has had - ever. Like or hate it, PS3 will sell, and the number one purchaser of the gaming system is the J6P crowd. These same Netflix loving people will then have their first opportunity to rent videos from Blockbuster or Netflix and play them back in full HD glory. Really - don't want to hear any comments about the player in the PS3 until YOU see it yourself. I'm reserving judgement.

This format war hasn't even begun other than in a battle of words. There is no Blu-ray for another 10 days, then it will be early adopters.

WILL IT BE A SUCCESS?

Well, comparisons to SACD or DVD-A are a joke. Music is a on-the-go thing. Video is not. The video portion of the iPod is far weaker than the music side. People just aren't interested in video to go. But, plasmas and HD displays continue to gain momentum and popularity. Now, more than ever before, people finally have the opportunity to maximize their TV viewing experience with one single disc player.

It doesn't guarantee success of either format... But, IMO Blu-ray is set up nicely to be the next generation format of choice. They have the industry support with the top names in consumer electronics and they have the movie studio support with 7 of the 8 major studios.

HD-DVD has an early lead and a serious price advantage. But, both of those can be overcome rather easily. Reports are that Toshiba is actually subsidizing their players which I don't think does anything to encourage any other manufacturers to join into the HD-DVD fray. M$ seems like a passing ship with HD-DVD as they are far more a software company than a hardware company and have aligned themselves with online content providers... Think HD directly to your X-Box 360. They simply have no serious vested interest as far as I can tell.

But, making any statements as fact right now is just impossible to do in this format war. It is WAY to early on to really know anything of how the two formats will really be doing in a year. As well, nobody seems to know for sure the impact that PS3 will have on this... if it even ships on schedule. If 40% of PS3 purchasers intend to use it for Blu-ray movie playback and numbers are accurate for sales, then about 10 times as many PS3s will be used as Blu-ray players compared to TOTAL combined sales of stand alone BLu-ray and HD-DVD players.

Yep, it'll be an interesting year!

 

[Sheep]

You are looking at this situation from the band's standpoint, but from the consumer's standpoint, it does not make economic sense to purchase a CD which contains just one or two good songs nor does it make much sense for the purchaser to have to keep swapping CD's in and out of the player just for the one or two good songs that are often on a CD. OTOH, I have quite a few older CD's that contain mostly good songs...

MikeSp

Uh hi,

How do you know if there is only 1 or 2 good songs without listening to them all?

Check and mate.

SheepStar

 

[MikeSp]

Uh hi,

How do you know if there is only 1 or 2 good songs without listening to them all?

Check and mate.

SheepStar

Good Point -- THAT IS a problem -- whether or not to gamble on a new CD having a substantial number of good songs (there can be a few losers on a CD IMHO, but not the majority in order to make a CD worthwhile). One way is to listen to over the air sources and pick out the songs that are wanted from their play lists (that just shows songs that are desired and does not eliminate any). Another method is to go to any of several places that sell CD's which have many to listen to via headphones and by listening to them, decisions can be made as to which songs are desired and which are not and if the CD is worthwhile. Then there is borrowing CD's from friends which DOES show which songs are wanted and which are losers, AND there are some other methods that I shall not mention here lest I corrupt our youth;-)

MikeSp

 

[agarwalro]

This right here is whats bugging me. People downloading just 1(!) song. THis is why bands often turn into 1 hit wonders.

No, the consumer has no control on what a band/ musician creates. In most cases, the second song/ album is trash because the band/ musician made millions on the first hit and lost focus/ inspiration/ need to make good music. That is why there are so many one hit wonders.

The poor everything they have into a single becuase its the only song people will listen to.

No. Because todays "bands" concentrate more on the track rather than the song. I call an album a collection of songs only when one track has any baring on the others and the album has a theme. If not, its just a collection of tracks. One track is good, the others might not be.

Buy a CD, support the band, and learn to like them more.SheepStar

Abolutely. Not all bands/ musicians/ artists fall into the catagory I describe above.

 

[agarwalro]

Uh hi,

How do you know if there is only 1 or 2 good songs without listening to them all?

Check and mate.

SheepStar

So you mean that people should buy the album if they like a track. Are you a record lable spokes person.

IMHO, spending $10 - 15 per CD, while hoping that all other tracks on the album will be equally good, just does not make sense.

There are many ways to find out if an album it worth buying,
1) Band/ artist/ musician's history
2) Reviews
3) Word of mouth (friends, co-workers, stranger on the bus, etc)
4) Borrowing someone's copy to get a preview
5) Preview on iTunes and buy CD if you feel you might like it

 

[ivseenbetter]

I don't know. I haven't seen any of these musicians having to move out of their mansions that we watch on MTV cribs because we are downloading just one song instead of buying 10 and only enjoying 2 of them. I think the industry is full of spoiled brats. They want to stick to the same business structure while the rest of the world changes. Not a smart thing to do. Business structures change and adapt and I think the music industry needs to do this in a major way. They are starting to come along though. Meanwhile, I sleep just fine at night paying for one song I know I like instead of springing for the whole record and I know the artists are still riding around in limo's and trashing expensive hotels.

But I thought this was a discussion about HD-DVD/Blu-ray?

 

[ironlung]

I know it's to early to call a winner. But I predict what I do because of what I have seen with brodcast TV interest in HDTV.

SD-DVD were released 1 year before HDTV public broadcast. People here claim HD to be in it's infancy. 1 whole year younger than SD-DVD. Compare penetration of the two. HDTV (broadcast or storage media) has a long way to catch up in only 12 months.

Only a small % care about image quality. Do you think J6P is digging throught the rack for even a superbit DVD? He would miss all that "bonus" content. I think he's hunting for the fullscreen pan and scan to keep thoes black bars from bugging him.

The few previous post were about Itunes and peoples problems with it. I don't think anyone mentioned less quality as a problem. I wonder why, maybe they don't care.

Only a niche cares. That is the best HD can do.

 

[ironlung]

P.S. Comcast Chicago just added ESPN2HD to the lineup. First HD channel added since I signed up 2 years ago if I remember correctly. I think I have 11 HD channels. 11/300ths of the dial At that rate it's only 578 years to get to 100%.



The 2006 HD deluge must be right around the corner.