Is It My choice, Or Is It Yours?

[miller]

I think you are so focused on cost solely at this point in time that you are convinced that HD DVD has "won" because they were the first to be sold at less than $100 each.

I picked the "price" issue merely because it was the biggest apparent difference between the two formats, and I wanted to see if Dale's reasoning could account for that cost difference. I am not declaring either one the "winner", but rather just pointing out that for this consumer, it is time to buy, and I know where my money is going.

For the record, I also like the fact that it supports tons of special features that even the most up-to-date Blu-ray players are struggling with. I also (as a computer person) like the fact that every single HD DVD player can be connected to a network. And I don't have to worry about what "profile" an HD DVD player supports, because I know all HD DVD players support the same features.

I must admit though, that I am not a Sony fan. As a computer programmer, I am very pro-standard, and Sony has never been a company to go with "standard" anything. They always seem to think that they are too good to do what everyone else is doing and so they create rifts in the marketplace that the consumer ultimately has to pay for.

Cases in point:
- Betamax
- Memory Stick
- UMD
- MiniDisk
- Blu-ray
- ... need I go on?

Why can't Sony ever just put aside their ego and put their money behind a single format of ANYTHING?!?! Name me one Sony proprietary format that has ever paid off for them.

It seems to be clear that this sale price is on an older product and even at that is heavily subsidized by Toshiba, which is getting royalty payments from the DVD format to help fund their format.

Does this older, subsidized product somehow not look as good as a $400 Blu-ray player? I don't care how they got the price down to where I can rationalize the expense.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, but costs 1/4 the price of other ducks ... that's good enough for me.

Today the difference is significant, but no one expects this to continue forever.

But will it continue long enough for the HD DVD camp to get so far ahead that Sony's pockets aren't deep enough to catch up?

Besides capacity, there is also the media itself, which for Blu-ray is clearly superior to HD DVD. I don't think too many folks want to invest in a high definition library that is so sensitive to scratching and provides no mechanism for archiving.

Please explain what you mean here. Both HD DVD and Blu-ray support Managed Copy, as it's part of the AACS. Or are you talking about something else? And how is HD DVD more sensitive to scratching than Bu-ray ... I've seen no such reports.

If you can ever get over this short term "price" thing with HD DVD, you should be able to see that an open standard with higher capacity and better media has to be better in the long run.

Higher capacity I'll give you, but open standard? better media? I've not been successfully convinced of that ... but talk to me.

... when non technical folks make a choice regarding technology with little to no input, other than a price tag. I think that is also one of the key points Dale was trying to make, that apparently you may have over looked.

As I think I have proven above, I am far from "non technocal folk". I also think I've proven that I'm looking at more than price. Dale raises some interesting points, but weighing one against the other I just don't see how Blu-ray is better than HD DVD. Even if price were the same, I think I'd go with HD DVD just because they seem more interested in improving the technology and providing consumers with the features they want than Blu-ray, which just seems focused on out-marketing the HD DVD camp.

- Miller

[pmalter0]

Actually, DTS 1.5Mbps was and still is for many years a "legacy" multichannel lossy audio, as Dolby Digital is at much lower resolution (384Kbps), both used even for DVD.

DTS 1.5Mbps is not a new format for either blue-laser format, but both new blu-laser players have to have those legacy audio decoders as backward compatibility.

If you have a quality audio equipment it has been and still is very obvious the superior quality of DTS over Dolby Digital (both legacy) specially when playing DVD concerts. The overall clarity and the tight bass were always better on DTS.

You might be refering to the newer hi-bit audio codecs DTS-HD and DTS Master Audio with resolutions many times over the 1.5Mbps of legacy DTS.

Both blu-laser formats have those codec capabilities, regardless if the audio formats are mandated or optional in the specs for manufacturing either player. And it has always been the option of the content provider to include any of those on the discs, of either blu-laser format.

This is what I mean about doing research first. DTS 1.5 mbps is perceptually transparent to the original. It is far superior to the legacy DTS or DD contained on DVDs. HD-DVD players and ONLY HD-DVDs players, encode DTS 1.5 mbps directly from the lossless soundtrack on the HD-DVD, and output it to non HDMI receivers--producing a clearly superior audio to Blu-ray.

[pmalter0]

Let me simply add this to the preceding. Encoding 1.5 mbps DTS in a player requires costly DSPs, that even Toshiba is eliminating as HDMI receivers are becoming more common. The legacy DTS included on DVDs was downgraded because 1.5 DTS uses more space than even 1.5 DD+. There would have been no reason to incur the expense of encoding, if 1.5 DTS was the legacy codec included on HD disks already.

[dadden]

I am not actually arguing with your previous post but...

Sony's Beta Digital Video Format was and still is valid and used by most professionals.
Beta Decks are still ubiquitous in my line of work, the professional video production side of things.
At least until they work the kinks out of the memory based video camera storage systems.
Most of the new ones are still a bit clumsy or run very hot. Not good for deserts or tropical rainforests.

I have one observation about the technology side of the format wars, even though I prefer BluRay for the superior capacity and like the idea of a format that doesn't drag antiquated technique from DVD days. Although I applaud BluRay for it's from the ground up format I am happier with HD DVD and their region encoding scheme. I mean give me a break. BluRay is still going to make me buy multiple copies of movies I want to watch just so I can watch them in different countries? What a load of crap. I read the HD DVDs don't have this sort of intellectual Gerrymandering encoded in them. This one "feature"? will cause me and my wife to buy and HD DVD player even thought we are otherwise pro BluRay. Why this is important is simply that she is from the UK and the Oppo players and our modified Pioneer DV 578A will play Region 2 DVDs/HD as well. There is no excuse for this violation of Fair Use any more. Are we or are we not citizens of our respective countries?

Finally, no one has mentioned the "800 pound gorilla in the room", which I believe is the Pornography Industry. I am fairly reliably informed that this is the reason that BetaMax lost out to VHS. It was one of the most consulted groups during the development of the DVD formats built in functions. It now appears that even though said industry wants to use BluRay (maybe for capacity reasons) Sony won't let them manufacture their products for any money. This is supposed to be, more or less, what happened last time.

Before any flame wars start let's not forget that this is a multi Billion dollar a year industry. Mind boggling and just a little scary isn't it? I just keep hearing about this and yet no one wants to look at a market force with this kind of sheer power simply because of its nature.

Any comments about this? I personally find it annoying that Beta lost out last time around because of these market forces because I really loved the quality available on SuperBeta material. If you don't remember back then it made VHS of the time look like mush. And unlike SVHS, it was stable and repeatable. I'd hate to see another mess because of naughty movies.


Thanks,
Brian

[Rodolfo]

pmalter0,

Then it would have been ideal for your first post to be written as specific as your

[Dale]

...as a writer seeking to communicate with bigger markets the value of a common, historically appreciated, and precise language is indispensable. I see from your comment that you knew what I meant. Everyone knows what a cycle is and far fewer know what Hertz means. I hope this explains why I might choose a more commonly understood word to extend the understanding of my article beyond the much smaller legions of technical sophisticates.

[pmalter0]

I apologize, my snarky " research" comment was inappropriate; you've probably have forgotten more about this subject than I've ever learned.

[aaronstout]

Miller,

Blu-ray discs incorporate a scratch resistant surface similar to what is available for eyeglasses that dramatically reduce surface softness and therefore scratches. This is not the case with HD DVD which uses the same surface as regular DVD.

Since I don't actually have either product yet, I can only go by reports that I have read, and folks have written that Blu-ray discs that they received from Netflix are always perfect looking, while HD DVD discs run the full gamut that is typical for DVD discs. With the increased data density of the HD formats, surface defects/scratches become a much greater problem.

What I stated about archiving was simply referring to the increased need to protect/backup the HD DVD discs, since they are more easily damaged to begin with. I am aware that no copy mechanism is "allowed" with either format at this point in time.

Maybe open standard is not the best term to use regarding Blu-ray, but what I am talking about is the different profiles of Blu-ray and the fact that the profiles are "open" to the extent that they can be further upgraded to offer more features. It would probably be more accurate to say "open ended" standard. I am certainly disappointed that so far we have only seen the first profile, which as you stated does not offer all the features that HD DVD has had since inception. However, HD DVD is a "final" spec and there appears to be no mechanism in place to offer future feature adds. I do agree that all high end consumer electronic products should have an Ethernet port, if for no other reason than to support easy firmware upgrades.

My statement regarding non technical people "voting" in this format battle was no reference to yourself. I was simply stating what I think Dale meant when he questioned why "he" the consumer should be making such a decision.

Obviously Dale is a very informed consumer, but I believe his point was that all of us as consumers are being asked to make this choice and few have Dale's experience and knowledge levels.

Many of us are very technical folks, especially the early adopters of technology, but unfortunately in the mass market place the majority of consumers are woefully non technical. There is probably no product where this is more painfully apparent than the HDTV/home entertainment field. Despite my technical background (I've been involved with computer hardware going back to discrete components and even vacuum tube days and have worked in the computer field for over 30 years) I still struggle with some of the aspects of the home entertainment world. I even considered a change in careers to become a consultant in this field. The bottom line is that the average consumer has little hope currently of getting a quality system and getting it set up properly without hiring someone to do the work for them. Unfortunately I've seen many of my friends pay someone to do just that, and they still have their progressive scan DVD player connected to their TV with a composite connection and a stereo connection to their AVR!

Please understand that I'm not trying to say HD DVD is a bad product. I agree that Sony many times has gone off in a different direction when it wasn't really necessary, but in this particular case I think that if Sony and the BDA didn't exist, we would have HD DVD based on red lasers with much inferior specifications. I'm extremely upset that a common "solution" did not come out of work in this area and the main reason for this appears to be greed on behalf of many more companies than just Sony. I think Toshiba is just as guilty as others for wanting to keep royalties from DVDs going into their control with a new HD format, just as Sony was insistent on getting into the "game" for the next generation.

So, the bottom line is that both solutions are good products. They each have their bonuses and shortcomings, but overall I feel that Blu-ray had a little more going for it, but like I wrote previously a lot of that was in studio support (which apparently was mostly due to even tighter copy protection capability where we the consumer are again left with the short stick). Now that Paramount/DreamWorks has gone "red", I don't see that compelling difference. So at this point in time it is a real toss up as to which format will prevail. My fear is that this will be another SACD vs. DVD-A format battle where neither will ever achieve financial success due to no clear standard for that media/format. I dearly want HD media to be a success, and that is why I was hoping that Blu-ray would put HD DVD to rest this coming year. With things the way they stand now, I don't see that happening though. Maybe that is Toshiba's goal after all. That way DVD remains the only significant product for the foreseeable future and those royalty checks just keep on coming in...

[miller]

Thank you for the reply Aaron ... here are my responses.

Blu-ray discs incorporate a scratch resistant surface...I can only go by reports that I have read...

I should have been a bit more specific. I am well aware of the added protection that Blu-ray has. As you are probably aware (but didn't say), this was needed because the format of a Blu-ray disc leaves the data layer far too close to the surface to go without it, as HD DVD does.

What I was asking for were articles, studies or research indicating how much of an advantage this was. An ideal figure to have would be the number of Blu-ray discs returned to Netflix due to excessive damage compared to HD DVD and Standard DVD.

So I like the sound of it, but I'd need to see some research that indicates it is, in fact, superior.

All that aside ... I, as a consumer, have never had any of my DVDs scratch to an extent that they are unplayable. And I've not seen any wide-spread reports where this is an issue for either next-gen format.

Maybe open standard is not the best term to use regarding Blu-ray, but what I am talking about is the different profiles of Blu-ray and the fact that the profiles are "open" to the extent that they can be further upgraded to offer more features.

I see this as a disadvantage. From both a consumer and producer point of view, I want to know that every title I buy/produce will play in every player on the market. You will start to see articles in the coming months about people needing to "upgrade" their Blu-ray hardware (not firmware) in order to take advantage of the new features that will be coming out on the new titles. I'm sure Sony, et. al. loves this because they get to sell the hardware again to the same consumer 2 and 3 times over.

Obviously Dale is a very informed consumer, but I believe his point was that all of us as consumers are being asked to make this choice and few have Dale's experience and knowledge levels.

I have followed Dale's work for many years, and there is no doubt in my mind that he knows more about the HDTV battle than anyone on the planet, save perhaps Joe Flaherty. This is exactly why I am pushing him to provide more information about his decision, because I am not used to him standing behind something with as little proof as he has shown here. It is very uncharacteristic of Dale.

- Miller

[Rodolfo]

I apologize, my snarky " research" comment was inappropriate; you've probably have forgotten more about this subject than I've ever learned.

pmarlter0

I accept you apology.

This is not about forgetting.

Only the audio side is a very complex subject on both blue-laser formats (HD DVD and Blu-ray) and using both audio formats (Dolby and DTS), and the various levels within them, and they affect each other.

That is why I suggested the reading of the material we have already published in the magazine, although the one source that covers it all is only available thru Display Search, the Industry Edition, I wrote one full chapter dedicated to it, but 600 pages at $1000 would be a bit overkill for a regular consumer.

However, since you mentioned the word