BLU-RAY WIN!

[jvd]

As a quick example think about a new version of an OS. The new windows won’t have ‘xp’ in it. By your way of thinking it should. So, for example, Longhorn XP is good?
If they go that way, it gives the impression of an update and not an entirely new offering. If you got a name of a media platform with common phrases you think it has ‘extra’ features while BD is a totally new platform. Thus it needs a totally new and unused name to state that it is indeed new.
I don’t want to see such names still being used in the next decade using such mentality. Just imagine, Holo-DVD! Whippy.

No but it will be called windows whatever and you can bet your house on that .

You have hdtv , microsoft bringing in hd gaming why go to something called bluray . THe logical move would be hd-dvd .

Just like sony naming thier next console anything but ps3 very very unlikely and why they named the handheld playstation portable system . Not cool portable system by sony .

Here is another example . Average joe goes into a store to buy a new entertainment system . Knowing barely anything about tech he sees the hdtvs which are the new big thing he hears about. So he goes and buys a 40 inch hdtv . Then he goes looking for a movie player . He sees dvd ... hmm nice , i have a good player. He sees bluray... what the fangdangle is a bluray ? Then he sees hd-dvd . Hmm wow its just like the tvs . It has hd . Must be the new version of the dvd players , it will go great with my tv .


dvds weren't called cds because the public at large equated cds with music . Not with movies. Thus changing the name didn't matter as they would have to build up the same awarness either way . Mabye even need to spend more to build up awareness of cd movies . here you don't need to do that , dvd is built up tremendously and hd is being built up for the last what 8 years on tvs as the big thing . So i think its wise to go with a hd-dvd name if there is a merger

 

[PC-Engine]

Link to the article:

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/s...Y=/www/story/05-10-2005/0003592426&EDATE=

What I find interesting about all of this is not the fact Toshiba has developed a triple layer HD DVD, but the fact Hollywood is embracing it which points the costs of these disc still being within their requirements. Also the fact Hollywood has also embraced the hybrid HD DVD/DVD discs. That means consumers will have any easy upgrade path now.

Man you are really into press releases!

Just so you know, blu-ray has the same ability to put a standard DVD movie on the disc as well - and I wouldn't read too much into Universal's support, as I believe they were already on the HD-DVD bandwagon to begin with.

Link to blu-ray DVD combo tech: Link

Oh I'm quite aware of that, and I'm quite aware of the costs involved to.

Also I already know Universal was a HD DVD supporter. What I didn't know was that they would support the hybrid format. As a matter of fact WB is the only studio I expected to support HD DVD all the way. Universal announcing it's support for a triple layer HD DVD means that third layer isn't prohibitively expensive.

BR has lost all of it's major advantages now, so there's no reason for any studios to exclusively support BR. I expect Disney and Fox to support HD DVD now which leaves BR in a very disadvantages position. Why would anybody go with BR now?

 

[wco81]

Here's a description of the triple layers:

http://home.businesswire.com/portal...572&newsLang=en

Info on the 3 layer manufacturing process--it doesn't look all that bad:

The newly developed ROM disc has a single-sided, triple-layer structure (see attachment). Each layer stores 15 gigabytes of information. Triple-layer discs can be easily produced by back-to-back bonding of a 0.6mm-thick dual-layer disc and a single-layer 0.6mm disc.

In the process, a single-layer disc is first produced, using the same process as for HD DVD-ROM. Next, the second layer is formed on first layer using a one-time polycarbonate stamper, the same process used for the DVD-18 disc, the double-sided DVD disc that has dual-layers on both sides. Finally, the single-layer 0.6mm disc is bonded to the dual-layer disc, using standard technology.

HD-DVD loses its cost advantage when it goes past the first layer. Moreover, someone claimed that if they have to go beyond single layers, the replicators would have to get new lines, not just upgrade existing DVD lines.

A lot of people suspected that HD-DVD releases were mostly going to be single-layer. That means low bit rates, lossy audio, etc. Lets see what kind of bit rates or space usage the releases on both formats are. And of course, the price deltas if any at retail.

Besides the capacity advantage, BR supports higher throughput and at least 50 GB recording capability. Last I heard, HD-DVD was stuck at a single 20 GB or so layer. Unless that changes, HD-DVD remains technically inferior on more than just pure ROM capacity.

As for hybrid discs, yes it would be great if studios gave you an SD and HD version of a movie for the price of a single DVD. Will that happen? It would cost them more so why would they do that? Plus a lot of their business is based on making you re-purchase the same titles over and over again. Not just new formats of the same movies but new editions, like the "collector's edition" of some schlocky crap.

So hybrid discs doesn't mean anything unless the studios make it a practice to widely release SD and HD titles for one low price. Not bloody likely.

 

[Legend]

I understand you logic behind that, yet I see that ‘playing along’ with the understanding of the average consumer for such a new product is short sighted. These new formats are supposedly here to stay.
Personally, if I have a brand new product, I want a brand new name-just like DVD, HDTV, BD, PS, etc. if you add an extension it gives the impression it is only another version.

In any case, as long as I get my 50G dual layer disks I don’t care if they called the things “Yawzaâ€￾. As they say, “a rose by any other name smells just as sweetâ€￾

 

[rabidrabbit]

Average Joe's can read too, and they learn fast.
It didn't take long for AJ to learn what a CD is, he learned quick what DVD's can do and what equipment he needs for them.
He'll learn what Blu-ray is,

It's all about marketing, AJ's are not that simple (well some are, but they are likely to buy into the new tech late, at which point he'd have to be an idiot not to know what the standard is), and they rarely go equipment shopping without the basic knowledge. If they do they'll bring a propellerhead friend, wife, boyfriend, grandma, son... with them... or ask the sales person (not jvd I hope)!

Name has little to de whether a format succeeds or not, as long as they are not called something plain silly.

Besides, one could argue the AJ might think of HD-DVD as just something like "Superbit" or some "Special Edition DVD", it (especially hybrid discs) being more expensive than DVD doesn't help either.

Name, brand, technology... on that order, they matter little. It's the available content (be it films, games, music...) what eventually becomes standard and adopted by consumers.

What content becomes available at which format, that depends on the strength of the technology and company's negotiatin skills.

Let's imagine PS3 comes with non HDDVD compatible Blu Ray that also plays back BluRay movies.
There's also HDDVD players at market at the same time, as there is HDDVD movies.
There are slightly more HDDVD discs at market.

PS3 is as or more succesful than PS2, meaning it's in more homes than HDDVD players that are single format, the more expensive dual format (BR+HDDVD) players are also available but mostly HT enthusiasts buy them.
Many homes upgrade their displays (or have already upgraded, maybe as they bought the HD Era starting xbox360) to support high definition.

People enjoy the high definition games on xbox360 and hd games and movies on BluRay PS3. They buy BluRay movies and also "old" standard DVD's because not all films come on BR, but on HDDVD.
It sucks, but they aren't very willing to put money on yet another disc spinner just so they can hd-watch the latest Warner Bros hit that is only available on HDDVD (and DVD). They buy the DVD and think "it must come on BluRay disc someday, I'll just wait and watch it on DVD for now"

 

[Lazy8s]

one:

What's the point? Blu-ray already realized 2-layer 50GB disc and aims to release 4-layer 100GB disc in 2007.

The point is balancing the disc space afforded by the costs in retooling the industry's manufacturing infrastructure to get it. If the manufacturing lines are going to be overhauled so much, the storage gains should represent something significant enough to enable studios to do something important with their movie releases that they wouldn't have been able to do with just an upgrade.

 

[Ty]

I'm fine with calling it HD-DVD, like London-Boy mentioned, we have HDTV. There is an issue of consumer confusion but I think it's a fine name. Blu-Ray, though it appeals to my techy side, may be too pulled-outta-the-air. /shrug, who knows, maybe consumers would love it because it sounds so high-tech?

Color me surprised that Hollywood studios would actually embrace/publish movies on hybrid discs. That means they'd only sell you ONE version of a movie and I somehow doubt they'd find that attractive. Again, who knows but when money is involved I doubt they'd want to do the consumer any favors.

 

[PC-Engine]

HD-DVD loses its cost advantage when it goes past the first layer. Moreover, someone claimed that if they have to go beyond single layers, the replicators would have to get new lines, not just upgrade existing DVD lines.

You have links to back this up? If Universal has endorsed support for triple layer HD DVD then the cost is neglible.

As for hybrid discs, yes it would be great if studios gave you an SD and HD version of a movie for the price of a single DVD. Will that happen? It would cost them more so why would they do that? Plus a lot of their business is based on making you re-purchase the same titles over and over again. Not just new formats of the same movies but new editions, like the "collector's edition" of some schlocky crap.

So hybrid discs doesn't mean anything unless the studios make it a practice to widely release SD and HD titles for one low price. Not bloody likely.

Better to have that easy upgrade path than nothing at all (BR).

 

[Carl B]

Better to have that easy upgrade path than nothing at all (BR).

And just like that, you dismiss the point from just a few posts up.

 

[Ty]

Better to have that easy upgrade path than nothing at all (BR).

Do you really think studios will sell a hybrid disc? What benefit is it for them? If they jack up the price beyond normal DVD prices then they're stiffling adoption of the format. If they include both versions then they've cut off their own legs. It's only an easy upgrade path (for software, not hardware - you'd still need to buy a new player like with BR) if studios actually pursue this.

Should be interesting to see if it gets widespread support or not.

 

[jvd]

Average Joe's can read too, and they learn fast.
It didn't take long for AJ to learn what a CD is, he learned quick what DVD's can do and what equipment he needs for them.
He'll learn what Blu-ray is,

actually it did take them a long time to adopt cds . It took about 4 years . Cds came out in the late 80s but took untill the early 90s to take off . I would say 91 is the year they took off . Dvds took a shorter amount of time . Though i would say cds took a long time to take off because of not being able to record like you could on cassete

It's all about marketing, AJ's are not that simple (well some are, but they are likely to buy into the new tech late, at which point he'd have to be an idiot not to know what the standard is), and they rarely go equipment shopping without the basic knowledge. If they do they'll bring a propellerhead friend, wife, boyfriend, grandma, son... with them... or ask the sales person (not jvd I hope)!

Heh a personal dig against me huh , nice. cute .

Anyway . It is all about marketing and why fight to make the masses learn something new when you can have them follow and extension ?

Its alot easier for them to go from dvd - hd-dvd or from tv to hd-tv than bluray or another odd name instead of something tv . Why split your marketing . Why should sony market hd-tvs and bluray instead of just a line up of hd capable devices ?

Just look at the fiasco that is sound . Ask your average consumer what type of sound reporduction they have and i bet they don't know the diffrence between thx , dts , doby pro logic and the rest of the standards out there . There is just to much for the average consumer to sit in a store and read about and understand .

Which is exactly my case in point . Dos was a command prompt os . They kept dos through i believe 6 versions and when they went to a gui they renamed it . But notice that they are still with the windows name . Sure the second part has changed. WIndows 3.1 , windows xp , windows server or what have you , but they know its stupid to build a new brand name when they have a succesfull brandname already

Besides, one could argue the AJ might think of HD-DVD as just something like "Superbit" or some "Special Edition DVD", it (especially hybrid discs) being more expensive than DVD doesn't help either.

that is the diffrence you don't wnat ot connect . There is no super bit tv . There is hd-tv . The consumer is already being taught what the hd in hd-tv stands for . Thus they are already being taught what the hd in hd-dvd stands for .

Why teach them what bluray means when you already have a name built up .

Name, brand, technology... on that order, they matter little. It's the available content (be it films, games, music...) what eventually becomes standard and adopted by consumers.

your right but we are talking about what they should call the merged standard if it happens and hd-dvd is by far the better choice . Both hd and dvd are built up brands . The consumer knows as they now have been taught with hd-tv that the hd means high definition . It will be easier for them to learn that hd-tv goes with hd-dvd than for them to learn that hd-tv goes with bluray .

 

[hugo]

Going for more layers to make way for more space has never been a good decision for consumers.It means that the laser intensity would have to be increased in order to penetrate the multi layers for reading.Disc readibility would decrease and the drive would be very sensitive with the media itself even with slight scratches.

Therefore Blue Ray structure is a better choice IMHO.

 

[rabidrabbit]

I too have doubts of the hybrid discs. They might be good for the consumer, but I'm sure George Lucas would rather release the Star Wars Sixology first on Standard DVD's for $60, and later on three layer 45GB HDDVD's for $80 with redone scenes and a lot of redundand extra content that is not available on DVD.

 

[jvd]

Eh i'm sure they will get used . Sell a dvd / hd-dvd version of the movie for 30$ , a hd-dvd version for like 23 and a dvd version for 15$ . most would pick up the hybrid since i'm sure not all tvs in everyones house hould will be hd-tv and hd-dvd .



Also as for the manufacturing lines i don't think the third layer disc would need a retooling of the lines . I also believe that while it will cost more than a single layer bluray disc it will cost less than a dual layer bluray disc.

 

[London Geezer]

Eh i'm sure they will get used . Sell a dvd / hd-dvd version of the movie for 30$ , a hd-dvd version for like 23 and a dvd version for 15$ . most would pick up the hybrid since i'm sure not all tvs in everyones house hould will be hd-tv and hd-dvd .



Also as for the manufacturing lines i don't think the third layer disc would need a retooling of the lines . I also believe that while it will cost more than a single layer bluray disc it will cost less than a dual layer bluray disc.

Why?? If someone doesn't have an HDTV+HDDVD, they'll just get the normal version, if they have HDTV+HDDVD, they'll get the HD only version.
The people who will buy the hybrid will be the ones who still don't have HD equipment but will in the short term, and not many Joe Average's have that kind of vision for the future.
Not many will get the hybrid, just for the sake of "future purchases", especially if the hybrid costs more.
Or that's my opinion anyway.

 

[jvd]

Why?? If someone doesn't have an HDTV+HDDVD, they'll just get the normal version, if they have HDTV+HDDVD, they'll get the HD only version.

in my hosue we have 5 tvs that are constantly used. The only two tvs that have hdtv are mine and the living room . So if i bought the hd-dvd version i could only watch it in two rooms . But if my sister wnats to watch it in her room she would need to buy a dvd version . Why not just get them both together . Sure it might not make sense in 5 years , but right now it does make sense as not everyone has that many hd-tvs .

Not many will get the hybrid, just for the sake of "future purchases", especially if the hybrid costs more.
Or that's my opinion anyway.

As shown above more for current limitations or situations than for future purchases .

IF you upgrade one tv to hd-tv / hd-dvd and still have 1 or 2 other tvs that u use to watch movies on tv / dvd its smart to buy the hybrid over the hd-dvd version or the dvd version . So you can enjoy both .

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Why?? If someone doesn't have an HDTV+HDDVD, they'll just get the normal version, if they have HDTV+HDDVD, they'll get the HD only version.

Um, I have several DVD+TVs in my house, Two of the TVs are HD, and two are not.

It would be nice to be able to buy one copy of a movie (hybrid) and play it on BOTH my non HDTV rigs and the standard rigs.

edit: OK, JVD beat me to it.

 

[jvd]

edit: OK, JVD beat me to it.

gotta stop wasting time in everquest 2 hehe

 

[London Geezer]

That's a plausible scenario... It all remains to be seen how many are in your same situation...

So now instead of 2 versions (SD and HD), we now have 3 versions. Plus BlueRay. Plus UMD. So much for making it easy for consumers...

 

[wco81]

Why?? If someone doesn't have an HDTV+HDDVD, they'll just get the normal version, if they have HDTV+HDDVD, they'll get the HD only version.

Um, I have several DVD+TVs in my house, Two of the TVs are HD, and two are not.

It would be nice to be able to buy one copy of a movie (hybrid) and play it on BOTH my non HDTV rigs and the standard rigs.

edit: OK, JVD beat me to it.

Once you go HD, you never go back. 8)

If the pricing is as jvd outlined, that is the HD and SD versions are cheaper than the hybrid version, people will just buy the lower priced ones. Most households with at least one HDTV will just save money and buy the HD version.

The only way a hybrid disc makes sense for studios and retailers is if it's the ONLY SKU they make and stock on the shelves. Most stores won't be interested in carry 3 different SKUs of the same movie except maybe in the case of a handful of blockbusters. And studios don't want to manage inventories of 3 different SKUs for each title or worry about which ones to replicate more of.

So the only way hybrid discs works is if it's the only version out there. That means they would have to sell it at current DVD prices. If they price it higher, that just hurts sales volumes of what they would have moved at SD prices. And if they include the HD version at no extra cost to consumers (or at very minimal premium), then they are foregoing a chance to make money on sales of the HD-only version. In fact, there would be no economic incentive for them to prepare an HD release.