Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
MetalAlien said:
And who says you have to rebuy anything....
Continue buying the DVDs you want and buy the Blu-rays you wish..
The players play them both anyway....
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Blu Ray and HD-DVD Could Both Fail
- Thread starter Stinkles
- Start date
- Status
And who says you have to rebuy anything....
Continue buying the DVDs you want and buy the Blu-rays you wish..
The players play them both anyway....
hukasmokincaterpillar
Member
Kleegamefan said:
I honestly cant figure out why this keeps going over peoples heads. Every BR thread on any forum without fail..."No way am I going to re-purchase my old DVDs!". As if new movies on the new format wont be coming out or something. If you dont want to rebuy that HD version of Footloose then free will motherfucker.
I just spent the last week and a half researching HDTV sets on the internet and I'd say the vast majority of HD sets still don't even have an HDMI input. Of the 3 HD connections HDMI has the smallest penetration of them all. Component is still by far the standard for HD connections. Not supporting HD output over component = death for the format.
It's really not going to matter how many PS3's are sold because a PS3 owner has no incentive to purchase the BD version of a movie if their tv set doesn't have HDMI. Through component or DVI connections a BD movie is going to look exactly the same as a DVD. The only difference is that the BD version is going to be more expensive like a Laser Disc. Considering how weak the penetration of HDMI is it doesn't seem like there is really any market for HD video formats in the immediate future. By the time most people in America have HDMI tv sets there will be a much better technology than HD-DVD or BD.
When the PS2 came out it didn't require you to buy a new TV set to enjoy DVDs. Whether you watched your DVDs through composite, s-video, or component the benefits of a DVD over VHS were obvious and significant. If you think everyone or even the majority of people who buy a PS3 are going to buy a new TV you're just being silly. The market for BD and HD-DVD movies is going to be incredibly niche compared to DVD unless new HDTV sets start suddenly falling from the sky.
It's really not going to matter how many PS3's are sold because a PS3 owner has no incentive to purchase the BD version of a movie if their tv set doesn't have HDMI. Through component or DVI connections a BD movie is going to look exactly the same as a DVD. The only difference is that the BD version is going to be more expensive like a Laser Disc. Considering how weak the penetration of HDMI is it doesn't seem like there is really any market for HD video formats in the immediate future. By the time most people in America have HDMI tv sets there will be a much better technology than HD-DVD or BD.
When the PS2 came out it didn't require you to buy a new TV set to enjoy DVDs. Whether you watched your DVDs through composite, s-video, or component the benefits of a DVD over VHS were obvious and significant. If you think everyone or even the majority of people who buy a PS3 are going to buy a new TV you're just being silly. The market for BD and HD-DVD movies is going to be incredibly niche compared to DVD unless new HDTV sets start suddenly falling from the sky.
It isn't that expensive. Certainly no more than keeping up with the computer race was for years. I have an older HDTV that's an RPTV with DVI inputs. I recently retired it to the basement for strictly watching movies and HD sports with friends, and replaced it with a 1080p Samsung DLP. The replacement TV rocks, was quite a bit less than a $5K or more plasma, and takes up less room than my Sony RPTV did.
In the next few years or so, I will probably get a 1080p LCD/Plasma for the bedroom when the technology matures sufficiently. Anyway, I have two HDTV's and quit on the computer race. Couldn't be happier, either with my decision.
It's not like they are THAT expensive if you don't have to have the latest LCD or plasma TV. The DLP's are actually priced very well, and give excellent bang for the buck.
In the next few years or so, I will probably get a 1080p LCD/Plasma for the bedroom when the technology matures sufficiently. Anyway, I have two HDTV's and quit on the computer race. Couldn't be happier, either with my decision.
It's not like they are THAT expensive if you don't have to have the latest LCD or plasma TV. The DLP's are actually priced very well, and give excellent bang for the buck.
hukasmokincaterpillar
Member
---- said:
At the same price? And will it offer enough difference to justify its invariably larger cost? HDV might be good for long documenteries or something, but I dont see the larger storage offering anything to the home movie business that BR wont be able to accomodate. Or have nearly the support BR will likely build up by the time it arrives. They'll probably be past 200gb discs by the time HDV hits anyway. BR is going to scale with the proliferation of HDTV as a whole. Its coming out at the right time IMO.
DCharlie
And even i am moderately surprised
Kaching, i see what you are getting at, but do you expect the companies to place , say , the star wars trilogy on one disk?
financially, i'd expect the companies to stick to 1 disk per film.
Personally, i don't expect the content to change, and for me personally (as a projector owner) it's all about HD.
Well the future of movies or the actual successor to DVD could follow the music industry and end up just being downloadable files. In which case not only would it be the same price, but probably considerably cheaper. That's just one possibility to consider.hukasmokincaterpillar said:
In terms of movies there isn't any need for 200GB of storage. You can fit 8 hours of 1080p video on an HD-DVD. Do you really think people are going to see the need to have their movies sold on a 200GB disc?
hukasmokincaterpillar
Member
---- said:
Well that is one I'd like to consider. That amount of bandwith being mainstream in the States by the end of the decade would rock. I seriously doubt it though.
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
The desire to have a physical copy of a movie or game will always be there....
Virtual copies of movies?
No thanks....
Virtual copies of movies?
No thanks....
If you really saw what I was getting at, you wouldn't be asking that questionDCharlie said:
Not every piece of film/tv/video is going to benefit from the boost to full spec widecreen HD (1920x1080). I'm not talking about Star Wars, I'm talking about something like Family Guy.
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
But video sales *is* big business as well.......
VOD will have it niche, but I think movie/game sales will mostly be physical rather than electronic for quite some time....
VOD will have it niche, but I think movie/game sales will mostly be physical rather than electronic for quite some time....
With the rising prices of games and movies, people are likely to turn even more towards rentals and piracy. This is what happened to the music industry. People didn't run out and end up buying Super Audio CDs or DVD-Audio just because the quality was better, they went with MP3s even though the audio quality was worse.
Either way the future of movies is really in the codec not in the storage medium.
http://www.cinemanow.com/High-Def/8,1,5,,0,0,0/
With a Windows Media Center device or extender device you can already watch these HD movies on your TV through the "Online Spotlight" option. (HDMI not required)
Hooks for video downloads have already been found in the latest version of iTunes. iTunes is already required to watch many movie trailers in HD. Perhaps Apple's next iPod or the future of the Mac-mini is a movie playback device for your tv.
Who says you're going to need gobs of bandwidth. mp3's aren't actually superior to CD audio and yet people seem to like them just fine. A codec that improves upon Xvid or an open standard alternative for H.264 and Video Codec 1 could end up gaining mainstream appeal. This could force the MPAA to really get behind online download services which connect directly to consumer electronics devices. I think there's going to be a widespread bandwidth explosion over the next couple of years as well. I'm already experiencing it here in the North East. Over the last couple of years my consumer broadband speed went from 4Mbits to 8Mbits to 10Mbits to 15Mbits (currently) and we may see 50Mbits by next year.hukasmokincaterpillar said:Well that is one I'd like to consider. That amount of bandwith being mainstream in the States by the end of the decade would rock. I seriously doubt it though.
Either way the future of movies is really in the codec not in the storage medium.
http://www.cinemanow.com/High-Def/8,1,5,,0,0,0/
With a Windows Media Center device or extender device you can already watch these HD movies on your TV through the "Online Spotlight" option. (HDMI not required)
Hooks for video downloads have already been found in the latest version of iTunes. iTunes is already required to watch many movie trailers in HD. Perhaps Apple's next iPod or the future of the Mac-mini is a movie playback device for your tv.
Eel O'Brian
Member
---- said:
This isn't exactly true. My Westinghouse LCD has a DVI connection that is HDCP compliant, and lots of other HDTVs have DVI/HDCP. All you need is a HDMI-to-DVI adapter or converter cable, and you're set. Some LCD monitors have DVI inputs that are only PC connections, though, so you have to be careful and research before purchasing.
Damn, some people just like to agrue I guess.
This is SIMPLE folks!!!
There are about 15 MILLION HDTV's in America NOW... and ALL of them support Component, 100%. Something like 5% support HDMI. A smart CE company would go for the large installed market; and would REALLY want to sell to those HD early adopters... some of which, like me, have multiple HDTV sets, and hundreds of DVD's. Shit, I have 6 DVD players counting PC's... fuck, make it 10 counting 2 Xbox's and 2 PS2's.
Supporting HDMI means that uptake will be DRAMATICALLY less than if these systems also supported component. There are stories of component from an HD dvd player not even supporting 480p.
I stopped buying a lot of DVD's last year... as I bought my 10k kick ass, best available Sony HDTV... WITHOUT hdmi... figured I would start again with Bluray/HDDVD based on which format "won" the early battle...
Then I heard about HDMI.
Sorry, no more 10k tv's in my near future. And after seeing Monday night football and Discovery HD, I can hardly watch shit ass upscaled dvd's...
FIX THIS HOLLYWOOD/Sony. DUH!!!
Sure, a few years from now, the format will settle on HDMI. For now, it's the underdog of installed base, by millions. Nothing to ignore.
As for the 45% idiots that don't understand HD... I blame a huge part of that on the cable companies wanting to charge more for a "digital" cable box that will work on an analog tv just fine. The FCC should fix that.
This is SIMPLE folks!!!
There are about 15 MILLION HDTV's in America NOW... and ALL of them support Component, 100%. Something like 5% support HDMI. A smart CE company would go for the large installed market; and would REALLY want to sell to those HD early adopters... some of which, like me, have multiple HDTV sets, and hundreds of DVD's. Shit, I have 6 DVD players counting PC's... fuck, make it 10 counting 2 Xbox's and 2 PS2's.
Supporting HDMI means that uptake will be DRAMATICALLY less than if these systems also supported component. There are stories of component from an HD dvd player not even supporting 480p.
I stopped buying a lot of DVD's last year... as I bought my 10k kick ass, best available Sony HDTV... WITHOUT hdmi... figured I would start again with Bluray/HDDVD based on which format "won" the early battle...
Then I heard about HDMI.
Sorry, no more 10k tv's in my near future. And after seeing Monday night football and Discovery HD, I can hardly watch shit ass upscaled dvd's...
FIX THIS HOLLYWOOD/Sony. DUH!!!
Sure, a few years from now, the format will settle on HDMI. For now, it's the underdog of installed base, by millions. Nothing to ignore.
As for the 45% idiots that don't understand HD... I blame a huge part of that on the cable companies wanting to charge more for a "digital" cable box that will work on an analog tv just fine. The FCC should fix that.
DCharlie
And even i am moderately surprised
yes, i just used star wars as the first example that came to mind.
Personally, i think in this case convenience is overplayed. So you can have the whole Family guy collection on one disk - or 5....
i dunno, i personally think that if that's all that's going to be offered to the non-HD consumer (and i'm not suggesting you are saying that - they could do much much more with the extra space) then i can't see them taking it up.
this HAS to be about HD as far as i'm concerned - if not, then there is little point in switching.
Did you specifically set out to respond to me with the intent to ignore more than half of what I said in the first place? I mean, you're responding to me, but doing so by putting together a strawman to beat up on that has little to do with what I said originally. You're talking at me but I have no idea why.DCharlie said:
Yeah, sure, for you. And Stinkles. I got it. For me, it's about the true HD replacement for a VCR, finally: HD + recordability + easily expandable, conveniently archivable, copious space.
DCharlie
And even i am moderately surprised
hey, i'm ill at the moment!"Did you specifically set out to respond to me with the intent to ignore more than half of what I said in the first place? I mean, you're responding to me, but doing so by putting together a strawman to beat up on that has little to do with what I said originally. You're talking at me but I have no idea why.
i went back and i have no idea how i missed the several other points you raised. Apologies.Still, i still think that the increased image fidelity is the no. 1 factor here but that's by the by. Saying all that, the actual content of interest (the movie itself) isn't going to change from format to format (as it didn't from VHS to DVD) so i believe it's going to be hard to sell no matter what happens, but hey.
well, convenitently archivable may be up for debate if the content providers get their way.
Hope you feel better soon, DC.
And I'm certainly not trying to downplay HD video fidelity as anything other than a primary factor, but all too often these conversations fail to acknowledge anything else. Before you can sell the HD movies, you have to sell the consumer on the hardware. If you can say that a device will play their existing library of CDs and DVDs, record content like a VCR and, when they're ready, allow them to partake in High Def movies with more advanced interactive features and the possibility for downloadable extras, that's a better sell than just saying it plays HD movies.
And I'm certainly not trying to downplay HD video fidelity as anything other than a primary factor, but all too often these conversations fail to acknowledge anything else. Before you can sell the HD movies, you have to sell the consumer on the hardware. If you can say that a device will play their existing library of CDs and DVDs, record content like a VCR and, when they're ready, allow them to partake in High Def movies with more advanced interactive features and the possibility for downloadable extras, that's a better sell than just saying it plays HD movies.
From what I understand, providers aren't likely to prevent the archive of content but the fidelity at which it can be archived.well, convenitently archivable may be up for debate if the content providers get their way.
Something that people haven't mentioned in this thread is that not only are consoles going to require HDMI with HDCP for hi-def content, but so is Windows Vista, with its Protected Video Path, and there doesn't even exist any video cards capable of outputting it yet.
Also, I note that with the European HDTV standard, EICTA mandated support for HDMI and HDCP, so all officially-approved "HD Ready" sets sold in Europe will be able to support it, thus avoiding most of the problems you guys in the US are having now with your TVs not having the connector. Course, in the UK there's not actually going to be any HD service until next year, and the TVs are still too damn expensive, so there's not a whole lot of point buying one yet. I think Microsoft are kind of silly for releasing the 360 over here this year, when there's precisely zero installed base of HDTVs.
Also, I note that with the European HDTV standard, EICTA mandated support for HDMI and HDCP, so all officially-approved "HD Ready" sets sold in Europe will be able to support it, thus avoiding most of the problems you guys in the US are having now with your TVs not having the connector. Course, in the UK there's not actually going to be any HD service until next year, and the TVs are still too damn expensive, so there's not a whole lot of point buying one yet. I think Microsoft are kind of silly for releasing the 360 over here this year, when there's precisely zero installed base of HDTVs.
I think the problem with HDCP support being a requirement for HD is overrated. Yeah, you have a bunch of analog HD sets in the US but the US is switching to digital as well and you can be pretty sure that TV networks will require HDCP (or even some other type of copy protection) as well. That's the danger of being an early adopter, that you end up with a overpriced product that's useless. I agree with jett, these people probably can afford to buy a new set once all the standards are in place. And there are still lots of people who haven't upgraded yet.
In Europe this really isn't much of a problem at all. You have very few CRT based HD TVs and most new flat screens are HD Ready (which means that, amongst other things, they have at least one HDMI/DVI w. HDCP input).
In Europe this really isn't much of a problem at all. You have very few CRT based HD TVs and most new flat screens are HD Ready (which means that, amongst other things, they have at least one HDMI/DVI w. HDCP input).
HDMI is already required for DVD players to upscale to 720p/1080i. Thats with DVD resolution stuff. So it will be required for HD movies.
In some ways, its simpler. In the UK/Europe, there is a 'HD Ready' badge that manufacturers can apply to their TVs. That means you have HDMI, component, 720p, 1080i etc.
So from a 'normal' consumer point of view, you just make sure you buy HD ready, and you're set. HDMI is already being talked about as 'the new SCART' (standard RGB cable in Europe). If that works, its a great thing, as people really aren't talking about DRM, they are talking about HD and digital.
The people screwed are people like me who paid £2k on a TV 2 years ago before the scheme was launched. But I'm an early adopter and thems the breaks.
In some ways, its simpler. In the UK/Europe, there is a 'HD Ready' badge that manufacturers can apply to their TVs. That means you have HDMI, component, 720p, 1080i etc.
So from a 'normal' consumer point of view, you just make sure you buy HD ready, and you're set. HDMI is already being talked about as 'the new SCART' (standard RGB cable in Europe). If that works, its a great thing, as people really aren't talking about DRM, they are talking about HD and digital.
The people screwed are people like me who paid £2k on a TV 2 years ago before the scheme was launched. But I'm an early adopter and thems the breaks.
Danj:
> Course, in the UK there's not actually going to be any HD service until next year
Canal Digital is launching a HD channel this year in some countries. I would think UK as well?
> and the TVs are still too damn expensive
I disagree. You can get a HD Ready set for a reasonable amount of money these days. Besides, people have proven willing to pay lots of money just to get a flat screen.
> I think Microsoft are kind of silly for releasing the 360 over here this year, when there's
> precisely zero installed base of HDTVs.
That depends on what you consider a HDTV to be. The HD Ready certification is rubbish because it is too lenient when it comes to resolution and aspect ratio. A 1024x768 plasma screen can be HD Ready eventhough it can't even display a 720p signal in its native resolution.
There are lots of flat screens with component and/or VGA inputs and Xbox 360 supports those.
> Course, in the UK there's not actually going to be any HD service until next year
Canal Digital is launching a HD channel this year in some countries. I would think UK as well?
> and the TVs are still too damn expensive
I disagree. You can get a HD Ready set for a reasonable amount of money these days. Besides, people have proven willing to pay lots of money just to get a flat screen.
> I think Microsoft are kind of silly for releasing the 360 over here this year, when there's
> precisely zero installed base of HDTVs.
That depends on what you consider a HDTV to be. The HD Ready certification is rubbish because it is too lenient when it comes to resolution and aspect ratio. A 1024x768 plasma screen can be HD Ready eventhough it can't even display a 720p signal in its native resolution.
There are lots of flat screens with component and/or VGA inputs and Xbox 360 supports those.
It will. The actual connector isn't relevant. It's whether or not the set supports HDCP.gofreak said:What about DVI with HDCP? It had better allow for HD movies too, I was told it would
Now I've read about TV stations looking at other encryption schemes. That should be fun.
cybamerc said:
Maybe they are, but it won't be on satellite (Sky) or cable (Telewest/NTL) since as far as I'm aware neither of them have an HDTV service yet. Sky's HDTV service launches next year, and that will represent the major push towards HDTV over here since Sky are the major non-broadcast television service provider.
cybamerc said:
It depends what you call a "reasonable amount of money". I've not seen any for less than £1000 (other than ridiculously small ones like 17" LCD monitor/TV hybrids).
cybamerc said:
I thought that in Europe, they weren't bundling it with the component cable? Or is that the Tard Pack I'm thinking of?
So let me get this straight...the problem here isn't the HDMI connection in itself, but rather the HDCP protection. I just recently bought a HDTV with DVI only for digital connections. Oh well...if this becomes reality I'm sure a solution will show up sooner or later.
Danj:
> It depends what you call a "reasonable amount of money". I've not seen any for less than
> £1000 (other than ridiculously small ones like 17" LCD monitor/TV hybrids).
26" HD Ready screens are nowhere near that. You can probably also get a 32" HD Ready screen for less if you look around.
> I thought that in Europe, they weren't bundling it with the component cable? Or is that the
> Tard Pack I'm thinking of?
I don't know. Surely you will be able to buy it seperately then?
> It depends what you call a "reasonable amount of money". I've not seen any for less than
> £1000 (other than ridiculously small ones like 17" LCD monitor/TV hybrids).
26" HD Ready screens are nowhere near that. You can probably also get a 32" HD Ready screen for less if you look around.
> I thought that in Europe, they weren't bundling it with the component cable? Or is that the
> Tard Pack I'm thinking of?
I don't know. Surely you will be able to buy it seperately then?
DVI with HDCP support will be fine. You may need a cheap HDMI-DVI adapter depending on the source equipment.
Danj, the HD Ready 32" samsung is about £800 in the UK. Not cheap, but less than half what an equivalent would have cost you a year or two ago. Also cheaper than a top end CRT set was last year. Its also getting rave reviews.
Xbox 360 full pack comes with an AV cable with composite AND component cables on the end. Also an optical out for connecting to your AV Amp.
There are already some solutions that you can use to 'pretend' to be a HDCP compatible device, letting you connect with DVI/component. But these have mixed fortunes depending on the equipment connected to them.
Danj, the HD Ready 32" samsung is about £800 in the UK. Not cheap, but less than half what an equivalent would have cost you a year or two ago. Also cheaper than a top end CRT set was last year. Its also getting rave reviews.
Xbox 360 full pack comes with an AV cable with composite AND component cables on the end. Also an optical out for connecting to your AV Amp.
There are already some solutions that you can use to 'pretend' to be a HDCP compatible device, letting you connect with DVI/component. But these have mixed fortunes depending on the equipment connected to them.
cybamerc said:
Hmm... do you mean like this one? But it says the resolution is 1366x768, isn't HDTV supposed to be either 1280x720 or 1920x1080? Surely that means that either format will look like ass because of having to be scaled to the native resolution?
Still, your point is taken, I can see that these things have indeed come down in price quite a lot since I last looked.
cybamerc said:
Easily, you can get 32" LCD-TV for £800-£900.
http://uk.shopping.com/xPP-flat_panel_televisions-HD_ready-28___33_in_~S-213~OR-0
Danj said:
yep, like that one.
HD Ready just means it supports 720p and 1080i inputs, at both 50 and 60fps. It also has to have HDCP compatible digital input (HDMI or DVI with HDCP) and component inputs. It also needs to have at least a 720 pixel vertical resolution (thats how the 1024x768 HD plasmas get away with it)
Yes, 1366x768 is an odd size, but considering things like overscan it comes out in the wash.
mrklaw said:
Are you sure? The cheapest price I can find it for is £860 at DigiUK, however you're right in that that's a lot cheaper than I expected it to be.
EDIT: Okay, you mention that the 768 vertical lines thing isn't a problem because of overscan... but surely "overscan" is something that only happens on CRTs? So does it just mean that there'll be a small 48-pixel border around 720p content, or what?
Danj:
> But it says the resolution is 1366x768, isn't HDTV supposed to be either 1280x720 or
> 1920x1080?
Yes.
> Surely that means that either format will look like ass because of having to be scaled to the
> native resolution?
It's certainly not ideal but there aren't many panels with a native resolution of 1280x720. Why that is I don't know. It's better to have a higher resolution at least.
mrklaw:
> Yes, 1366x768 is an odd size, but considering things like overscan it comes out in the wash.
Overscan on digital signals?
> But it says the resolution is 1366x768, isn't HDTV supposed to be either 1280x720 or
> 1920x1080?
Yes.
> Surely that means that either format will look like ass because of having to be scaled to the
> native resolution?
It's certainly not ideal but there aren't many panels with a native resolution of 1280x720. Why that is I don't know. It's better to have a higher resolution at least.
mrklaw:
> Yes, 1366x768 is an odd size, but considering things like overscan it comes out in the wash.
Overscan on digital signals?
- Status