Legal Step
Member
But intel is helping Apple. I am confused?
The WinTel empire chooses to support HD DVD
- Thread starter UbiSoftologist
- Start date
- Status
HomerSimpson-Man
Member
Legal Step said:
Toshiba is helping Sony with the PS3, but is standing for HD-DVD, it's funny how the business world works.
The OS will support the drives. You will just need a driver. This just sounds like it's for default windows drivers. Whoopee. Who doesn't install custom drivers with their PC? And I'm assuming they'll be Service Packing Vista out the wazzoo, along with daily patches too. So if BD ever takes off, there'll be patches for that to give default Windows support. MS and Intel don't make drives. End of story. PEACE.jedimike said:
KeithFranklin
Banned
A great deal of you will not want to believe this, but the truth of the matter is most of MS success is because the competitors made just plain stupid mistakes.
Let start in the 1985-1986 with Apple. Mac vs PC. Mac should have kicked the living @#$% out of the PC, but Apple was nothing but super greedy. They kept the price incredibly high and locked out peripheral manufacturers. PC's with DOS subsequently became the standard simply due to cost.
Come early 1990's and Windows 3.0 (Really Windows 3.1)- MS finally puts out a somewhat usable Windows based OS add-on. MS pushes all PC productivity Application investment to Windows based versions. MS Office is born. At this time Word, Excel, Powerpoint all are 2nd-3rd fiddle to rivals (Access doesnt even exist). Lotus 1-2-3, WordPerfect, Harvard Graphics, Dbase ruled the roost. Lotus, WordPerfect, Harvard Graphics and Borland all focus on DOS based application market and belive Windows wont ever take off. Subsequently each and every one of those applications loses and loses big to MS based products simply because the other were to late to the Windows game and very inferior to the MS products. Borland in fact doesnt even release a version of Dbase until Windows 95 is released.
Late 1980's and early 1990's IBM and MS jointly develop OS/2. In the early to mid 90's MS jumps off this ship. Taking with the only Office Productivity applications for OS/2. IBM has the superior product to Windows with OS/2. Yet they never build Office Productivity applications or do much for developer support. At this time I was moving from Mainframe based development to Client/Server based development and much preferred OS2. MS showered developers with support and new tools time and time again (Still do) and IBM did next to nothing for us except giving us free tools to screen scrape Mainframe applications. Needless to say developers built Windows applications, users used Windows applications and the superior product at the time basically died and it was simply because IBM was stupid. When they purchased Lotus it was to little to late.
Let start in the 1985-1986 with Apple. Mac vs PC. Mac should have kicked the living @#$% out of the PC, but Apple was nothing but super greedy. They kept the price incredibly high and locked out peripheral manufacturers. PC's with DOS subsequently became the standard simply due to cost.
Come early 1990's and Windows 3.0 (Really Windows 3.1)- MS finally puts out a somewhat usable Windows based OS add-on. MS pushes all PC productivity Application investment to Windows based versions. MS Office is born. At this time Word, Excel, Powerpoint all are 2nd-3rd fiddle to rivals (Access doesnt even exist). Lotus 1-2-3, WordPerfect, Harvard Graphics, Dbase ruled the roost. Lotus, WordPerfect, Harvard Graphics and Borland all focus on DOS based application market and belive Windows wont ever take off. Subsequently each and every one of those applications loses and loses big to MS based products simply because the other were to late to the Windows game and very inferior to the MS products. Borland in fact doesnt even release a version of Dbase until Windows 95 is released.
Late 1980's and early 1990's IBM and MS jointly develop OS/2. In the early to mid 90's MS jumps off this ship. Taking with the only Office Productivity applications for OS/2. IBM has the superior product to Windows with OS/2. Yet they never build Office Productivity applications or do much for developer support. At this time I was moving from Mainframe based development to Client/Server based development and much preferred OS2. MS showered developers with support and new tools time and time again (Still do) and IBM did next to nothing for us except giving us free tools to screen scrape Mainframe applications. Needless to say developers built Windows applications, users used Windows applications and the superior product at the time basically died and it was simply because IBM was stupid. When they purchased Lotus it was to little to late.
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
empanada said:
This is not part of the official HD-DVD spec yet...
KeithFranklin
Banned
trmas said:
BS, I work with MS in Software Development (Heading to Redmond tomorrow) and have 200+ other developers that work in my organization and throughtout the organization the developers and network engineers think MS treats us great. I also work with MS Infrastructure partners as well and they feel the same way with few exceptions.
The surprise entry in Microsoft's and Intel's list of failures is disc storage capacity. On paper, Blu-ray appears to have the advantage. But the two companies looked beneath the paper: Capacity, said Ribas, "used to be the biggest advantage of Blu-ray, and we believed it. We thought, they'll get 50 GByte BD-ROM discs working, but it's not happening, and it's nowhere in sight. There are not even pilots. It's only in the lab that they are building these discs." With regard to demonstrated capacity, he told us, HD DVD-ROM actually leads BD-ROM by a score of 30 GByte to 25 GByte.
fortified_concept
Banned
SHOCKIE said:
If any of this is proved true I'm with HD-DVD. Till then, I consider this typical microsoft bullshit.
Tenacious-V
Thinks his PR is better than yours.
Posted this in the other thread in gaming section, but I guess this is where it's at. So here it is again.
I think people are overlooking/underestimating a few points here. MS/Intel wouldn't just go with HD-DVD to spite Sony and PS3, that's the dumbest reason/rationale anyone could possibly make, it may have a slight slight impact, but not a defining reason to back/reject a format designed to replace dvd for the foreseeable future. If you look at things from an unbiased perspective, you'd see why both MS and Intel (both behemoths of companies) chose this route.
1) The ability to legally make copies of content you've purchased. This is one of the biggest reasons here. Consumers have the right to duplicate content if they own the material. HD-DVD allows this, BD is still uncommitted. That's a huge factor, you should be able to do what you wish with content you own. Just because of piracy issues, BD does NOT have the right to just prevent the consumer from doing this. MS knows it, Intel needs it, HD-DVD provides it. BD should look at what the consumer who is actually purchasing the material wants, not what Hollywood and the Industry dictates to them. This is an important factor I think people are underestimating.
2) It's not smart to ASSUME that BD will have hybrid DVD/BD. HD-DVD has it, and it's proven and reliable and will be in mass production. This creates a feeling of "safety" for the consumer. Nobody wants to get burned again with another BetaMax incident, and having that feeling of backwards compatibility and a good transition from DVD to HD-DVD would greately help the consumer in easing them to HD. BD on the other hand has yet to officially implement it into spec, they've stated it's going to be implemented in the future, but as of right now it's not happening and it's all only promises. With the uncertainty of how this market will actually go who's to say if they will actually implement it, don't assume it will be.
3) Upgrading facilities is important as well. It takes something like 1.5 - 1.7 Million dollars to upgrade existing DVD facilities to produce BD, and 2 Million for each new mastering system for BD. HD-DVD on the other hand only takes something like 150 Thousand to be able to press HD-DVD discs. A lot of companies won't take the plunge of millions of dollars to upgrade when they operate on a 10-15% margin. That's just way to big of a risk with no guarantee of return or with the success of the format. HD-DVD on the other hand is a somewhat less risky venture with backwards compatibility and hybrid ability at a much much lesser cost of upgrading. It's a smarter move from a business standpoint.
4) I think many of you guys are really underestimating the impact of China's backing of HD-DVD. Formats don't just revolve around US and Japan as many of you may be thinking, that's such a narrow scope and somewhat ignorant viewpoint. I think a lot of you are underestimating just how much China does these days. 75% of DVD players out there are from China, that's a MASSIVE MASSIVE amount, that's worldwide domination!! The widespread acceptance of DVD players was due to China's pushing to reduce the cost of the format to mainstream budgets. DVD really took off when 50-150 buck players hit the market, and who made this happen?? You guessed it, China did. We'd be way behind the progression/acceptance of the format if China hadn't pushed so hard, hell VHS may still have been the dominating format. So if HD-DVD is backed by China, that's HUGE. The first format to get the prices low enough for widespread acceptance will be most likely the winner, and more likely than not, HD-DVD has that better chance.
What most people see is just BD capacity is > HD-DVD capacity BD IS BETTAR!!! They don't realize that there are a lot more aspects to this war that aren't so black and white. I'm not saying that BD is doomed by any means, I'm just saying some of you guys are dismissing HD-DVD prematurely and really underestimating it's ability to gain widespread appeal. It's not so doom and gloom, there's many factors that can come into play here. BD isn't as dominating as you many think.
I think people are overlooking/underestimating a few points here. MS/Intel wouldn't just go with HD-DVD to spite Sony and PS3, that's the dumbest reason/rationale anyone could possibly make, it may have a slight slight impact, but not a defining reason to back/reject a format designed to replace dvd for the foreseeable future. If you look at things from an unbiased perspective, you'd see why both MS and Intel (both behemoths of companies) chose this route.
1) The ability to legally make copies of content you've purchased. This is one of the biggest reasons here. Consumers have the right to duplicate content if they own the material. HD-DVD allows this, BD is still uncommitted. That's a huge factor, you should be able to do what you wish with content you own. Just because of piracy issues, BD does NOT have the right to just prevent the consumer from doing this. MS knows it, Intel needs it, HD-DVD provides it. BD should look at what the consumer who is actually purchasing the material wants, not what Hollywood and the Industry dictates to them. This is an important factor I think people are underestimating.
2) It's not smart to ASSUME that BD will have hybrid DVD/BD. HD-DVD has it, and it's proven and reliable and will be in mass production. This creates a feeling of "safety" for the consumer. Nobody wants to get burned again with another BetaMax incident, and having that feeling of backwards compatibility and a good transition from DVD to HD-DVD would greately help the consumer in easing them to HD. BD on the other hand has yet to officially implement it into spec, they've stated it's going to be implemented in the future, but as of right now it's not happening and it's all only promises. With the uncertainty of how this market will actually go who's to say if they will actually implement it, don't assume it will be.
3) Upgrading facilities is important as well. It takes something like 1.5 - 1.7 Million dollars to upgrade existing DVD facilities to produce BD, and 2 Million for each new mastering system for BD. HD-DVD on the other hand only takes something like 150 Thousand to be able to press HD-DVD discs. A lot of companies won't take the plunge of millions of dollars to upgrade when they operate on a 10-15% margin. That's just way to big of a risk with no guarantee of return or with the success of the format. HD-DVD on the other hand is a somewhat less risky venture with backwards compatibility and hybrid ability at a much much lesser cost of upgrading. It's a smarter move from a business standpoint.
4) I think many of you guys are really underestimating the impact of China's backing of HD-DVD. Formats don't just revolve around US and Japan as many of you may be thinking, that's such a narrow scope and somewhat ignorant viewpoint. I think a lot of you are underestimating just how much China does these days. 75% of DVD players out there are from China, that's a MASSIVE MASSIVE amount, that's worldwide domination!! The widespread acceptance of DVD players was due to China's pushing to reduce the cost of the format to mainstream budgets. DVD really took off when 50-150 buck players hit the market, and who made this happen?? You guessed it, China did. We'd be way behind the progression/acceptance of the format if China hadn't pushed so hard, hell VHS may still have been the dominating format. So if HD-DVD is backed by China, that's HUGE. The first format to get the prices low enough for widespread acceptance will be most likely the winner, and more likely than not, HD-DVD has that better chance.
What most people see is just BD capacity is > HD-DVD capacity BD IS BETTAR!!! They don't realize that there are a lot more aspects to this war that aren't so black and white. I'm not saying that BD is doomed by any means, I'm just saying some of you guys are dismissing HD-DVD prematurely and really underestimating it's ability to gain widespread appeal. It's not so doom and gloom, there's many factors that can come into play here. BD isn't as dominating as you many think.
- Status