Hd-dvd

JohnLocke88 · January 2009

No No No! I don't care what all you say. HD-DVD didn't lose because Blu-Ray had better support, greater size on disk, or more successful marketing... It's because HD-DVD is just too many frickin' syllables. Say HD-DVD out loud, and then say Blu-Ray....

See?

On a more serious note (although that is my theory on the format war), I've been finding used/new HD-DVDs online for about 1/6 to 1/10th the price of their corresponding Blurays. The picture quality is as good, if not better in some cases, and the sound quality difference is negligible at best (DD+ vs. D TruHD or DTS-HD).

If you live near a Fry's Eletronics, especially the Anahiem store, they still stock a bunch of HD-DVD titles; craigslist is also a great place to look

PSOVLSK · January 2009

AndyGwis wrote: »

What's the best place to get cheap HD-DVDs?

Fry's has them for usually about $7-8, but they sometimes have some on sale for $5. The last time I was there (at the Irving store) I would estimate that they had about 50 titles available.

marker · January 2009

I just found a whole slew of HD DVDs in a Kroger of all places, both older classics as well as more recent releases. They were marketing them as regular DVDs though since they were all of the dual format variety. Prices ranged from $3.99 to $7.99, and I bought like 50 of them or so.

Question - I have a Toshiba HD-A35's 5.1 analog outputs hooked up the 5.1 inputs on a Polk DS7200's pre-pro:

http://www.polkaudio.com/homeaudio/products/ds7200/

I leave all bass management to the pre-pro since it's pre-set anyway for the speakers and sub that came with the system. Can someone please tell me once and for all if I am actually hearing the DD+, Dolby True HD, etc. formats? The player indicates that is in fact what it's outputting, but I've heard and read both that it does and doesn't send them out via the analog outputs. If so, there really isn't a dramatic night and difference between them and the plain old SD DVD legacy formats like DD & DTS, even on the Dolby True HD.

Here's an interesting article on that BTW on a far more revealing system/room than most of us here have:

http://www.hemagazine.com/node/Dolby_TrueHD_DTS-MA_versus_Uncompressed_PCM

millerman 3732 · January 2009

Ron-P wrote: »

I remember comparing Transformers, PQ looked identical between both HD-DVD and Blu-ray. Of course, the TrueHD track on the Blu-ray put to shame the DD track on the HD-DVD.

Now Ron, come on, the improvement from the DD+ track to the TrueHD track was minimal at best.

bigred7078 · January 2009

timlitton wrote: »

It would absolutely have sold millions of units. The PS3 (ingeniously) bundled a bluray player with every unit. The sales of the PS3 DWARFED set top boxes on either side. In November of 07, HD-DVD bragged about having sold 750,000 players up to that point. At the same time, more than 5 MILLION PS3 bluray players had been brought into homes around the world. When the 07 Christmas season hit, it paid in spades for Sony as bluray disc sales destroyed HD-DVD sales.

Now think about this: XBOX360 had a HUGE lead over the PS3 at that time. It was released a year earlier than the Playstation and it's install base was around 10 MILLION units worldwide. IF every 360 was packaged with an HD-DVD player, the HD-DVD player would have made the bluray sales look silly. HD-DVD's mistake was making the player optional on the 360.

I bought the PS3 close to its launch. I wanted bluray to win. But if Microsoft had allowed its partner, Toshiba, to bundle HD-DVD players with the 360, I'd be trying to sell old blurays on ebay right now and buying HD-DVD.

eh i still dont agree, but points definately taken.

But obviously Microsoft didnt bundle it for a reason. They had every opportunity to, but did not.

bigred7078 · January 2009

AndyGwis wrote: »

I agree that it had more to do with Studio support than anything else. I jumped on the HD-DVD bandwagon because the cost of its players was cheaper, the format looked incredible, all the players upconverted GREAT, little to no bugs, etc. I was hoping for it to win, but when the studios continued to back BR over HD-DVD even with all these factors in play, you knew it was probably a lost cause.

I wish both would've stayed around for a bit longer. The war caused there to be tons of price competition for players and discs. As soon as HD-DVD really started to die off, Bluray player prices seemed to shoot back up to MSRP after being heavily discounted for many months to compete with HD-DVD player prices.

Oh well. We have a good format, and I have a PS3 which I really like. Still use the HD-A2 in the bedroom as my only source and XA1 as my HD-DVD and SD player in the big room. Need to pick up some more cheap HD-DVD discs while they are still around.

What's the best place to get cheap HD-DVDs?

Blu-Ray player prices have become pretty cheap recently. Also there are lots of good deals on media ya just have to look around.

But the two formats were only the begining of "price wars". Now that only one remains there will be manufacturer competition for the best/lowest price players

manman · January 2009

bigred7078 wrote: »

eh i still dont agree, but points definately taken.

But obviously Microsoft didnt bundle it for a reason. They had every opportunity to, but did not.

I think one of the main reasons (which I also forgot to mention in my last post) is price. They would have had to price the 360 significantly higher, AND delay the release until near the release of the ps3 for that to occur- so the big lead/install base the 360 had over PS3 simply would not have been there if they had waited and bundled it in. That was one of the big reasons the ps3 took off so slowly (besides no good games at first...), people were complaining about how expensive it was.

It definitely would have made for a much more competitive fight, but I don't think it would have given HD-DVD the hands down win.

Ron-P · January 2009

millerman 3732 wrote: »

Now Ron, come on, the improvement from the DD+ track to the TrueHD track was minimal at best.

More then minimal my friend. Heck, the spaciousness of the TrueHD track alone was quite a significant improvement.

timlitton · January 2009

manman wrote: »

Bigred is right- in the situation that was given, you can't say that HD-DVD definitely would have won. If I'm getting your scenario right, there is also one major flaw... you are counting in Microsoft's lead saying if every xbox sold had an hd-dvd player. But that lead wouldn't have come into play as much as you're saying.

The 360 was released in November of 2005. The first toshiba hd-dvd player in Japan was not released until march of 06. It only came to market a few months before Blu-Ray. Now- /Microsoft's/ hd-dvd player wasn't even released until November of that year, only about a WEEK before PS3...

So if you're talking bundling in from the very beginning, MS would have had to delay their launch until about a week before the PS3, blowing that huge lead you're talking about. Even if they had gotten development started early, Sony would have known about it and could have made some business decisions to push their release up to. Happens all the time...that's the main reason blu-ray was incomplete when released- they rushed to market to compete.

Basically it would have just been a whole different scenario with different business moves, so you can't just say flat out HD-DVD would have won. You're ignoring marketing, and many other factors too. Also- PS3 sales did not dwarf set top box numbers for blu-ray. Around the months surrounding the end of the 'war', it was reported that ps3 accounted for about 50% of blu-ray players sold. So it dwarfed any one model maybe, but not blu-ray set top boxes in general. Blu-ray disc sales have pretty much almost always been higher than hd-dvd due to the greater studio support too- long before christmas of 07. If you look back, I believe there wasn't even one week from the start of 2007 on where hd-dvd disc sales exceeded blu-ray disc sales.

You're correct that I can't say for sure HD-DVD definitely would have won. The ebay quip was more a bit of humor. I also wholeheartedly agree Microsoft's lead would have looked radically different if they waited too close to the ps3 launch to release it. The problem is, I don't buy that it would have delayed production by much if Microsoft had chosen to include HD DVD.

Toshiba unveiled its first prototype HD DVD player at CES in January 2004 ... 22 months before the XBOX360 launch. As we all know HD DVD plays DVDs, so the games being developed could still run from DVD. the XBOX360 would simply have had HD DVD playback ability built in. HD DVD also had a huge price advantage over bluray thanks to being built from existing standards, so any price increase would have been far less than Sony saw with bluray.

Marketing was another factor for bluray, but honestly, it was pretty lackluster on both sides. Who, besides forum dwellers, saw any of the barrage of press releases issued from both camps? Did you see a flurry of television ads? Because I didn't. It was big news when HD DVD bought a superbowl spot in its closing days. Other than that, the average consumer never saw the twists and turns we all watched with fascination on forums and electronics sites.

Anyway, my main point was that without the PS3, bluray would have sold considerably less product. I believe this would have led to eventually losing Warner Bros. and the "war." In fact, in July 08 the most comprehensive survey of the entertainment business in the US (by the The Entertainment Merchants Association) concluded that "PS3 owners were the saviours of the Blu-ray HD format." The EMA went on to say, "Blu-ray was the losing format in 2006, but thanks to the PS3, it rebounded in 2007 to become the de facto winner." Also, in a February 08 retrospective on the "war", the BBC reported, "Where Sony had the killer edge is that its Playstation 3 (PS3) computer games console comes pre-fitted with a Blu-ray player. "

AndyGwis and ManMan are correct about studio support being important. Sony had a major advantage dealing with movie studios - being a major studio itself. The "war" effectively ended in Jan. 07 when the biggest player in the game, Warner Bros, went bluray. But It was sales numbers that lured Warner Bros off the fence to give bluray an insurmountable advantage. Warners flat out stated it would wait to see how both formats fared during the crucial holiday sales period before backing one format exclusively.

According to the HD DVD Promotional Group HD DVD had sold 750,000 units by November 07. According to Video Business, Bluray had fared about the same at 700,000 set tops. It went on to report that the Ps3, meanwhile, had sold roughly 2 million units in North America alone. This meant 74 percent of all Blu-ray Disc players in North America were in the form of the PlayStation 3 rather than the 50% stated earlier. 3 out of every 4 bluray players were a ps3. That's how bluray sold more, leading to Warner Bros commitment.

But I respect all your opinions. It's all conjecture past the sales numbers, and this is just my opinion... about a dead video player on a speaker manufacturer's forum...one year after the fact.:o

manman · January 2009

timlitton wrote: »

You're correct that I can't say for sure HD-DVD definitely would have won. The ebay quip was more a bit of humor. I also wholeheartedly agree Microsoft's lead would have looked radically different if they waited too close to the ps3 launch to release it. The problem is, I don't buy that it would have delayed production by much if Microsoft had chosen to include HD DVD.

Toshiba unveiled its first prototype HD DVD player at CES in January 2004 ... 22 months before the XBOX360 launch. As we all know HD DVD plays DVDs, so the games being developed could still run from DVD. the XBOX360 would simply have had HD DVD playback ability built in. HD DVD also had a huge price advantage over bluray thanks to being built from existing standards, so any price increase would have been far less than Sony saw with bluray.

Marketing was another factor for bluray, but honestly, it was pretty lackluster on both sides. Who, besides forum dwellers, saw any of the barrage of press releases issued from both camps? Did you see a flurry of television ads? Because I didn't. It was big news when HD DVD bought a superbowl spot in its closing days. Other than that, the average consumer never saw the twists and turns we all watched with fascination on forums and electronics sites.

Anyway, my main point was that without the PS3, bluray would have sold considerably less product. I believe this would have led to eventually losing Warner Bros. and the "war." In fact, in July 08 the most comprehensive survey of the entertainment business in the US (by the The Entertainment Merchants Association) concluded that "PS3 owners were the saviours of the Blu-ray HD format." The EMA went on to say, "Blu-ray was the losing format in 2006, but thanks to the PS3, it rebounded in 2007 to become the de facto winner." Also, in a February 08 retrospective on the "war", the BBC reported, "Where Sony had the killer edge is that its Playstation 3 (PS3) computer games console comes pre-fitted with a Blu-ray player. "

AndyGwis and ManMan are correct about studio support being important. Sony had a major advantage dealing with movie studios - being a major studio itself. The "war" effectively ended in Jan. 07 when the biggest player in the game, Warner Bros, went bluray. But It was sales numbers that lured Warner Bros off the fence to give bluray an insurmountable advantage. Warners flat out stated it would wait to see how both formats fared during the crucial holiday sales period before backing one format exclusively.

According to the HD DVD Promotional Group HD DVD had sold 750,000 units by November 07. According to Video Business, Bluray had fared about the same at 700,000 set tops. It went on to report that the Ps3, meanwhile, had sold roughly 2 million units in North America alone. This meant 74 percent of all Blu-ray Disc players in North America were in the form of the PlayStation 3 rather than the 50% stated earlier. 3 out of every 4 bluray players were a ps3. That's how bluray sold more, leading to Warner Bros commitment.

But I respect all your opinions. It's all conjecture past the sales numbers, and this is just my opinion... about a dead video player on a speaker manufacturer's forum...one year after the fact.:o

Oh, I totally agree with your main point there that if the ps3 didn't have a blu-ray player, at all HD-DVD would have won. The PS3 was crucial to blu-ray's success. But the ps3 not having blu-ray at all vs. Microsoft having had hd-dvd built-in are two totally different scenarios. I was just responding to that one.

Regarding that- I still have to say the situation would be pretty much as I described before. Having a prototype at CES is waaay different from being ready to release to market. I mean- Toshiba is a huge company with lots of resources, if they had a prototype in early 2004 and didn't come to market with it until 2006, you can bet they had a good reason for that. We don't know all their reasoning- but to come to market a year earlier than they did I'm guessing they would have been making some big compromises they didn't want to make. If they weren't ready to come to market with their own player by then, I can't see a partnership with another huge company for bundled in components moving much faster... Of course, blu-ray came to market before they were fully ready, and with clever ps3 placement, (rumored) payoffs, and advertising they came out ahead- so you could be right that HD-DVD could have moved faster than they did. I still think in that scenario, Sony would have had their own answer as well though.

About the pricing thing- again, you might be right. But as I'm sure you know, all consoles these days are subsidized and sold at a loss. I guess it just depends how much of a loss either company would have been willing to take. If you look at the price of the HD-DVD add-on, adding that price to the 360's at the time gets you at (or I think above) the price of the ps3 when launched. They could have made it cheaper, but I'm not sure how willing they would have been to go cheap enough to make a significant difference.

So, I don't know- any scenario I can imagine where both the 360 and PS3 had integrated players- I don't see one or the other spelling clear victory for either format, I just see more fierce competition.

I'm not sure about either of our numbers for how large a percentage of the blu-ray player market PS3 represented. Back when those wars were going on- especially toward the end, there were groups all over the place releasing reports with conflicting numbers for all aspects of 'the war'. Still, one thing I find interesting was that you made a comment that there was a study showing that 60% of ps3 owners didn't even know the ps3 could play blu-rays. If that's true, then the idea of PS3 being the driving force behind disc sales that year of 2007 doesn't really make sense. Like you, I suspect that number is high, but even so- that seems strange to me.

Oh well, like you said it's all conjecture on both sides. What's done is done- and I'm just happy I can buy all my discs in one format now. At the time I always felt that HD-DVD had the better spec (more manditory features, better fleshed out), and BD had the better physical media implementation (more densely packed data for more space)- but I think whichever one won, they would have continued adding features to the players that weren't originally spec'd. The big question to most now is whether blu-ray will make it out of the niche market to replace DVD. I sure hope so, cuz there are a lot of good movies I'm looking forward to seeing on blu-ray!:D

timlitton · January 2009

manman wrote: »

But as I'm sure you know, all consoles these days are subsidized and sold at a loss. I guess it just depends how much of a loss either company would have been willing to take.

Except those crazy guys at Nintendo. I still haven't got one so I guess I can't comment on it's gameplay. I just never really wanted one for the two or three games I'd buy.

manman wrote: »

The big question to most now is whether blu-ray will make it out of the niche market to replace DVD. I sure hope so, cuz there are a lot of good movies I'm looking forward to seeing on blu-ray!:D

Agreed!

manman · January 2009

timlitton wrote: »

Except those crazy guys at Nintendo. I still haven't got one so I guess I can't comment on it's gameplay. I just never really wanted one for the two or three games I'd buy.

True- i forgo about that. I have a wii, and I have to say it's actually pretty fun. It's definitely not the system I play the majority of the time, but it's a blast when people come over. Especially if I'm having a party or something, the wii is always in full use by guests, haha. That's when I noticed the part about wii that's almost as fun as playing it- watching OTHER people play it. Looks pretty ridiculous.

SEH · January 2009

timlitton wrote: »

Toshiba unveiled its first prototype HD DVD player at CES in January 2004 ... 22 months before the XBOX360 launch.

But HDMI 1.3 wasn't finalized until spring 2006, which held a lot of things up. When the 360 finally did get HDMI, look what version it had. And even that was crippled and couldn't do multichannel PCM. It's pretty clear they never designed it with much intention of doing digital audio (beyond the optical output) or video, so there would've been a lot more involved than just slapping a new drive in there.

Hd-dvd

Comments