A Battle Won, War In Question...Blu-ray vs. HD DVD

I agree that the war is far from "over", but I still predict that Blu-ray will win, or there will be no "winner"...

AaronS

I think Blu-Ray continues to have an advantage because it is the choice of Disney. As betamax taught us, just having the best specs is not enough to win a format war. Since there are players that can use both formats, in the end, these factors will have an impact:

-- Most new titles.

-- The most titles that people are likely to re-buy. Find out what LORD OF THE RINGS and STAR WARS will be in, and there's a clue.
Titles that sold well in VHS AND DVD would be a good predictor, too.

-- The format favored by porn. If a clear leader emerges in the world of porn, there's your odds-on fave for the rest of the world.

-- A wild card factor -- which one is easier to spell and say? With fewer syllables and nothing that sounds like stuttering (try saying HD-DVD five times fast), I give the edge to Blu-Ray on that one, if only by a nose.

-- Something even weirder and more obscure that I can't think of.

Interesting observations.

But I've always maintained that there will be no "winner".

Each "camp" is so far invested in their respective format that there is no turning back. They each have enough players and titles out on the market to support themselves regardless of what the other format does. They will keep duking it out and declaring themselves "winner" until something comes along to replace them, quite likely video download. I'm not saying that's going to be this year, or even in the next 3 years ... but I think that's the only technology that has enough added value to push high-def packaged media (i.e. HD DVD & Blu-ray) out of the way.

Having said that, here is my take on the pro's/con's of each. And remember, the "average consumer" will decide which way this one goes, not we enthusiasts:

- The Name: HD DVD gets my vote here. Rather than a pronunciation hindrance as you suggest, I believe this is one of their greatest strengths. The average consumer knows exactly what "HD DVD" is without doing a Google search.

- The Titles: This is highly subjective. I've seen "must-have" titles from both sides, so I'll call this one a draw for my part. Regarding the two you mentioned, Star Wars does "lean" toward being a Blu-ray release (even though Lucasfilm has not announced officially which way they will go), since they are in bed with Fox as a distribution partner, but Lord of the Rings is from New Line Cinema (part of Time Warner), so this will likely be a dual-format release.

- The Tech: Blu-ray definitely gets this category ... today, but HD DVD is catching up. Will it be enough? I don't think the "average consumer" will make their decision based on the technology.

- The Manufacturers: Again, Blu-ray. The additional manufacturers seem to be helping keep the technological features on the cutting edge, but even with more competition within it's own format, they can't seem to keep up with HD DVD on pricing. Hopefully by this fall.

- The Price: Duh, HD DVD. This is the single most important factor in "average consumer" adoption. If Blu-ray is not at price parity with HD DVD by this holiday season, it could take a HUGE swing the way of HD DVD. BTW, expect $199 players this fall from the HD DVD side (not necessarily Toshiba units, wink-wink nudge-nudge).

Just a few quick, un-researched observations and opinions.

- Shane

Shane, I disagree with you on the tech part.

Blu-Ray is only advantageous technology wise on the computer because it holds up to 50GB (dual-layer) rather than 30GB (DL HD DVD).

I'm format neutral. However, I'm annoyed that the set-top Blu-Ray players and discs which are supposed to be superior lack interactivity and are unupgradable to the newer Java standard.

Capacity is not just an advantage on the PC side. It also allows for more content on the disc, more bonus features (yes, those sell discs), better audio, etc.

Blu-ray has better throughput (Mbps) as well, allowing for higher bitrates.

Blu-ray has additional encryption options in BD+ also, which may become useful from "Hollywood's" view if AACS keeps having problems.

And given the physical makeup of the disc, Bluray is more resistant to scratching than HD DVD.

Blu-ray has had 24 frame output and 1080p longer than HD DVD, and until last week was all alone in its 24 frame capability.

I will agree that HD DVD made the right decision requiring internet connectivity as part of the standard, vs Blu-ray making it optional ... but that will not have an immediate advantage.

For the record, I am an HD DVD owner.

Enjoy,

- Shane

I own both players and have a substantial investment in the
discs. HD discs can be imported from Europe and play in US players.
For example, "The Graduate" is available in the UK and Germany. I don't
think classic films are a priority with either camp in domestic pressiongs. The last Harry Potter film is also out in most of Western Europe on HD.
What's holding it up here, with the latest film coming out this summer?
Toshiba just sent me a free firmware update disc. I was hoping it would
improve the response time of the controls on the remote, but that hasn't
been the case. I often wonder if all the buttons are just for show! Changing
audio tracks, subtitles, etc., is a real challenge with Toshiba!

On the other hand, the Sony Blu-Ray machine is much more responsive
to its remote controls. There is a type of region encoding, so European
discs may or may not play here, depending on content. Titles available
on both formats are often several dollars cheaper on Blu-Ray.

It baffles me why such classics, which beg to have high definition
release, are not forthcoming: i.e. "Dr. Zhivago" or "Lawrence Of Arabia"
How about a Blu-Ray box of the 20th Century Fox Rodgers & Hammerstein
musicals? They have yet to show up in HD on pay tv.

So many of the releases in both formats are no-brainers and films
which I would never look at in the first place, let alone pay for in any
format!

I don't get where you believe that the BR disc is less apt to be damaged than the HD-DVD. The info on the BR is much closer to the surface and has a thin blue coating that I think will not be as the thick coating on the HD DVD. I presonally hope that Sony bites it again. They have this way of trying to force people into using their product especially in the broadcast industry. If they didn't learn the lesson of convenience of use and features from the beta days they will most likely lose out again. As far as the size of disc 30 vs 50 I'm not sure that it will make that much difference. The bonus features IMHO are better if they are on a 2nd disc anyway. It makes for a less cluttered menu set up on the main disc. Right now the porn industry has not gone one way or the other although it looks like they will have to go with HD DVD. This is due to the fact that Disney went with BR disc. It is my understanding that Disney has pushed a clause in it's contract that it would not allow it's product to be put out on a the product that allows pron to be sold on the format. So if like in the past the deciding factor is porn then HD DVD will win. It also PO's me that the BR people are sticking us with more of the DRM crap that screws everyone when they want to archive their own purchases. DRM is something that is really going to hurt all of us and should be dumped. Give people the product at the right price and they won't feel the need for piracy of the product. When they get the prices of the HD disc down to the pricing of standard DVD's and that's when we will start seeing who will win this format war. Get recorders out for the public to use at a reasonable price will also be a major deciding factor too.

I didn't say less resistant to damage (i.e. data layer), I said less resistant to scratching. The coating on a Blu-ray disc is much more durable than that of HD DVD. It had to be for the very reasons you describe.

- S

Hopefully, the various high definition DVD manufacturers read your blog, because to this "average consumer" who has been waiting since October, 2006 to buy one or the other formats...I WON"T buy either until something definitive is decided. Count me as one of the "unwashed masses"...but there's millions of us just waiting...and waiting...and...

You'll continue waiting for at least a year.

Shane, you mentioned bit rates. However, the software publishers aren't taking advantage of Blu-Ray's bit rates. They're putting in lower sound samplings on the Blu-Ray discs than the HD discs.

This is my major Blu-Ray complaint--other than 1080p/24 (and slightly better studio support), I haven't seen anything in IMPLEMENTATION where Blu-Ray beats HD-DVD.

I get it...how many pixels can dance on the head of a pin...

I haven't seen anything in IMPLEMENTATION where Blu-Ray beats HD-DVD.

A very good point.

- S

pun intended?

I'm one of those who are waiting and waiting for a clear "winner." If it takes a year or more, that's okay. But the player is not the point -- it's one's disk library that is the biggest investment risk. If one guesses wrongly, it will be like a Beta user sitting on a worthless library of tapes that cost him multiple $K.

I'm also concerned about the posting that shows that Blue Ray is not using their superior capacity to do a better job on sound. My regular DVDs that have DTS sound far better than those that only have Dolby 5.1 on my surround-sound system. I've been assuming that publishers only squeeze in a DTS track when they have extra room on the disk. I would think that those who invest in a library of any kind of premium DVD format would not only want HD video but also a good choice of audio (especially DTS).

My regular DVDs that have DTS sound far better than those that only have Dolby 5.1

And the same may hold true with HD disc but there is simply no comparison for audio quality when comparing SD DVD to either HD disc format since the SD DVD version is highly compressed by comparison. It is the compression codec that has given DTS the upper hand and with less compression there are less artifacts to compare.

I'm one of those who are waiting and waiting for a clear "winner." If it takes a year or more, that's okay. But the player is not the point -- it's one's disk library that is the biggest investment risk. If one guesses wrongly, it will be like a Beta user sitting on a worthless library of tapes that cost him multiple $K.



It's only worthless if players cease to exist (highly unlikely). I still own thosands of vinyl records, thousands of LDs and, yes, even a large number of BetaMax tapes. The least likely to survive are the tapes because of the laws of entropy (unless one considers LaserRot to be a factor due to improper manufacturing and/or storage.)

In other words, don't worry about your HD-DVD suddenly not being valuable to you if the format "fails." Besides, with many "combo" (HD/SD) titles (which Blu-ray lacks) HD-DVD lets you hedge your bets a bit as well as making your discs a lot more portable to other players in your possession.

While it would appear that Blu-ray has the upper hand (even cutting through all the Sony publicity) this race is far from over. The Blu-ray camp has shown itself to be, as someone else eloquently stated, woefully lacking in the area of implementation.

Stay tuned....

My personel feeling is the company that gets their machines for sale and the format that Wal Mart adapts will be the winner. According to a friend of mine that works for Wal Mart they sell over 40% of all dvds now. If they stock a format and sell that type of hd dvd, I would say that would me the most used format of the two.
Toshiba is already selling its A2 for 299.00 and nothing in the blu ray camp is even near that.
Sony had the superior format with beta video tape but farted around long enough with high prices and no long play like 6 hours and vhs won out.
Picture wise beta was better, but sony just blew it and it looks like the same way now. If the toshiba format gets mega sales, the other movie picture companies will have to change if they want to sell.

Certain Wal-Mart stores are already selling Blu-Ray titles in
upscale communities. Their pricing of them is not any better
than Best Buy or Target. The selection is also minimal, appealing
more to the typical Wal-Mart customer, rather than the serious
movie fan.

I would guess when all walmarts offer the dvds and players and have them instock is when the public will decide which format they will go after. Prestently net flix offers both formats and has a very large supply of hddvd which is what I am getting. Not interested in buying them but the player for 299 post paid from jandr.com sold me.

I'm one of those who are waiting and waiting for a clear "winner." If it takes a year or more, that's okay. But the player is not the point -- it's one's disk library that is the biggest investment risk. If one guesses wrongly, it will be like a Beta user sitting on a worthless library of tapes that cost him multiple $K.


This won't be like VHS/Beta. You guys are going back too far. At best I will be like DVD+/-R. At worst it will be like SACD/DVD-A. Short of Toshiba (not just Universal) making a Blu-Ray player or Sony (and all of their studios) making a HD-DVD player I don't see a clear victor in this one.

HDTV's have only a 30% penetration. Most people think cable/satellite/OTA/SD DVD is enough. Hell, most people think DVD on a HDTV *is* HDTV. Moreover, most people don't have 1080i/1080P displays. It's the cheap 720P LCD (a few plasma) displays that people are buying! They don't have to worry about a bad upconversion, etc. since even the cheapest 720P upconverts 480p just fine. It still looks better than their 480i CRT.

This format war will be a marathon. CD will continue (or worse, be replaced by *gross* AAC/MP3). SD DVD will continue (or be replaced by online downloads--doubtful--computers are still too complicated--even Apple TV).

Yesterday I stopped by our local best buy and to my surprise they had twice as many HDDVD"s for sale as Blu Ray. I didn;t see a single blu ray player for sale there and only one blu ray player on demonstration.
They were selling the Toshiba HDDVD players.
Sony will have to do better than that to compete.

Capacity is not just an advantage on the PC side. It also allows for more content on the disc, more bonus features (yes, those sell discs), better audio, etc.

So far this has not panned out for Blue-Ray. Often when movies are released on both Blue-Ray and HD-DVD the HD-DVD version has more bonus features. This is due to two problems. 1) The audio on Blue-Ray takes up more space. This is because multiple audio tracks are required due to optional audio codec requirements. 2) Most Blue-Ray disks are only 25GB to date. The 50GB disks are going to be much more expensive and therefore it is not clear whether people will choose to use them.

Also, you didn't talk about the cost of producing Blue-Ray vs HD-DVD disks. Blue-Ray disk duplication requires a whole new line and millions of dollars in investment. Most DVD lines that have been put in place in the last two years can support HD-DVD disk duplication with minimal upgrade costs.

From a technology point of view it remains to be seen how sucessful interactivity is going to work on Blue-Ray disks. It has the potential to be better, but I believe it will have a lot more problems then the interactivity with HD-DVD.

I don't believe anyone has mentioned the fact that many HD discs
are manufactured with one side being HD and the other side SD, for the same film title. Thus many HD discs can be played on any equipment. I can't recall seeing this feature among Blu-Ray titles. I am disappointed that Time-Warner has not seen fit to issue many classic films in either format, however. Titles in their library, such as "Wizard Of Oz", "Gone With The Wind", etc. have failed to appear and also don't seem to be on the horizon. Why the two camps continue to issue such dreck which I would not spend a cent on, baffles me. Less than 2% of all announced domestic titles hold any interest for me whatsoever! Look to Europe for older US films
such as "Serpico" or "Three Days Of The Condor"from the HD camp.

We all have our subject view of what's good and bad ( I happen to like a lot more of the HD over BR releases)...but I want to comment, whenever I can, that the HD Dual disc sound good, but they are senseless. The combo price (except for brand new releases) is more than you will pay for a regular HD DVD and separate SD DVD. I hear some people have trouble playing the disc as well. I (as a market perspective) want ONLY HD DVD, and I mostly will not pay the premium for a SD DVD that I will never play. (any SD DVD's I buy now are the $4.99 ones). I'd be curious if the Dual discs are helping the market at all.

Why do we need ANY disk at all? CD's are riding off into the sunset (well except at K-mart and Starbucks of course)- how long will it be until we're all downloading HD movies unto a digital storage device? With 500G drives selling at a little over 150 bucks and 1 terabyte at 400 bucks. Let's just get it over with now. It's long overdue to merge the PC with the entertainment system.

I've already got WAY to much plastic on my shelves as it is.,, And now we get to sort standard DVD's, Blu-Ray DVD's and HD DVD's. When will it ever end? A couple of years down the road and they'll all be in the high tech museum.

Why do we need the discs...well for CD audio, while not as pure as a vinyl LP, they are head and shoulders above the non-plastic format, MP3. Personally I can not listen to an MP3 on anything but ear buds. Anything else it just sounds bad. I mean horrible even on mediocre systems. Then there is only one medium for DVD-A and SACD.

For movies, so far, nothing delivers the quality and range of extras that the Discs can. Nothing else can give commentary, trailers, etc. not to mention, NO formats other than plastic have and for the reasonable future, can (or will) deliver anything but Basic Dolby Digital.

So...yeah, I'd love to lose the plastic, the toxins, the delivery, storage, landfill space...but I don't think I'm alone in not wanting to give up the full set of plastic features.

So, in a word, audio quality and breath of information (content).

And let's not forget that while it is easy for us internet-types to imagine a completely downloaded entertainment world, that is simply not practical for the vast majority of the world population.

If every DVD (and high-def DVD) rented or purchased was downloaded instead, I would venture a guess that the current internet infrastructure could not handle it. And how many people do you know that buy or rent music or movies that have no internet connection at all? What are they to do if DVDs and/or CDs are no longer produced?

Will it be here someday? Sure.

Will it be here in the next 5 years? Not likely.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to don my personal jet-pack for my evening commute (my flying car is in the shop)

- Shane

They said the same thing about records too and now you can only find them in used, recycled (ie Goodwill) or DJ specialty stores. Who would have thought that Wherehouse and Tower would be out of business? At the rate the technonlogy is moving we'll just have to wait and see who's right.

I agree with Steve about the CD audio quality we definitely need better or lossless compression algorithms - 20-24 bit depth would be a nice (super CD?!?)

You now they use a form of compression on phonograph records commonly called RIAA compensation. If the wasn't compressed it would throw the needle out of the groove. That's why you can't take your turntable and plug into an aux input - it has to be decompressed to sound right..

You don't have internet access - just bring your portable drive to the download store (or kiosk at the mall) Thats what all of the old folks are doing with their digital cameras now anyway.

A New DVD Format War

Author: Roger Faraway
http://www.mfdigital.com/2006_06_01_lib ... chive.html