Paramount and Dreamworks drop Blu-ray

wrote:

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 21:21:13 GMT WGD wrote:

| Good for Paramount and Dreamworks. Hurray for HD-DVD! That will give SONY
| something to think about. SONY is a follower, not a leader. Too overtly
| aggressive for their own good. What is more important is the good of the
| buyer. (Target & Blockbuster blew this one didn't they?) Regardless, see
| no reason to add either format until such time that I add a LARGE screen.

With 25 GB or 50 GB per disk instead of 15 GB or 30 GB per disk, Blu-Ray
is still the superior format _with_ a price point that is closing in on
the lesser quality format.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|
the real issue is,,

Neither format is over 1 percent of the total DVD sales market,,

wrote:

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 19:24:06 -0500, "Rich"
wrote:

I think the whole point might be moot if high speed internet can bring you
what ever movie you want with the press of a button and video on demand will
also cut into DVD of any sort? Maybe I'm missing something or the people
that don't have Video on demand etc. or live in the country and don't have
cable but here I can watch many shows in HDTV on demand with 5.1 surround
with out leaving my chair.

YMMV, Rich

I dropped Time-Warner Cable for Dish Network a few months ago. I
don't remember TWC having a very large collection of HD movies
available on demand. And the ones they did have were $4.99 a pop
IIRC. Meanwhile Netflix and Blockbuster have a fairly large
collection of HD movies (Blockbuster has 350 BR and 300 HD-DVD right
now) and they are a lot cheaper through their subscription-type
services.

The problem comes in deciding which way for the consumer to go. Not
too long ago there was a huge gulf between the cost of a BR and a
HD-DVD player; however, the gap is closing. But if I pick one, then I
know I'm eliminating the possibility of seeing some movies in HD.

In the meantime, I'm pretty happy with the way my $59 Sylvania DVD
player does 1080P uprezzing over HDMI. I'll wait awhile to see how it
shakes out.

--
Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, TX
http://davidclary.com

Agree entirely - just got a Sony $99 buck Up sampling over HDMI player
- its spectacular to say the least.

HD movies over the internet - ROTFL,,,,,

Would take days to download with the fastest connection under ideal
conditions.

Maybe some day, but not in our lifetimes.

and yes,,bring on the technode flamers.

Neither format is over 1 percent of the total DVD sales market,,

Now that tells you something about the HiDef DVD market!

The razor's price is coming down, but the blades are still a bit on the
high side.




common_ wrote in message
...
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 21:21:13 GMT WGD wrote:

| Good for Paramount and Dreamworks. Hurray for HD-DVD! That will give
SONY
| something to think about. SONY is a follower, not a leader. Too
overtly
| aggressive for their own good. What is more important is the good of
the
| buyer. (Target & Blockbuster blew this one didn't they?) Regardless,
see
| no reason to add either format until such time that I add a LARGE
screen.

With 25 GB or 50 GB per disk instead of 15 GB or 30 GB per disk, Blu-Ray
is still the superior format _with_ a price point that is closing in on
the lesser quality format.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below
|
| first name lower case at ipal.net /
|
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|
the real issue is,,

Neither format is over 1 percent of the total DVD sales market,,

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 16:58:28 GMT Joe Moore wrote:

| In the meantime, I hope Sony loses because they have no respect for
| their customers.

In the meantime, I hope Microsoft loses because they have even less respect
for their customers.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 12:07:53 -0500 Lloyd Parsons wrote:

| Potential big money is at stake, so both sides are playing hardball, but
| HDDVD just started.

I doubt that. Both sides have been at it for a while. HD-DVD just ponied
up more money because they realized they were losing. I doubt they were
actually losing because of having the lessor format, but they were losing.
So they made a desperate comeback effort. It may succeed or it may not,
considering most studios are still in the Blu-Ray camp. What it may well
do is extend the format war another 18 months.


| Again, with a 30Gb capacity, you get 3-4 hours of content, so why fuzzy?
| The fact is that almost every movie out there can be put on either
| format in excellent PQ and AQ. When it isn't, it isn't because of lack
| of space, it is because of other reasons.

With 50GB you can have more of the same, such as sequels with the original.

While movies shot at 24 fps won't benefit, some programming could be done
at 1080p60 and benefit from the high capacity.

And then there's the data use for BR recordable. Do you want to back up
30 GB of your data or 50 GB? In about 2 years both will be at the same
price where the cost of the particular technology choice is no longer a
factor and the cost of Chinese bulk labor is the primary factor.


| And in that case, they made the correct decision I think. But currently
| with hi def dvds, the picture all too often is not enough better on a
| 40-50" screen at 8-10' viewing distance to entice that majority of the
| market to switch over.

Let's make the switch now to 3840x2160p120 !!


| HD-DVD does look good. Blu-Ray looks good, too. If Blu-Ray had never
| come about and HD-DVD was it, I'm sure we'd all be happy with it. But
| we do have the choice, and the better choice in my opinion is Blu-Ray.
|
| From a tech standpoint, I won't really argue. BD seems to have more
| potential. From a practical, how to sell it to the masses standpoint,
| that potential means almost zilch.

If HD-DVD is the choice of _consumers_ I can go along with it. But it
seems the manufacturers don't want consumers to make that choice.


| But BD is about more control of the content over any other
| consideration. Hell, it is even about bringing unfinished tech to the
| market before it was ready. So not only are we doing the beta testing
| for the BD camp, we are paying a premium to do it.

Both create a data space that anything can be put in. The movie producers
will use whatever DRM they want to use on either.


| I don't know about you, but last time I did beta testing for a company,
| I got something from them. Either the product after release, or money.

They _should_ just go ahead and drop the price down to what we know it
will be in a couple years, take the loss, and make up for it when their
format wins ... both sides!


| Blu-Ray will also make 1080p60 content viable more easily than HD-DVD
| can.
|
| Doing 1080p60 now on HDDVD too, in case you hadn't noticed.

But you can get 66% more on BR-DVD.


| Whichever is chosen will end up at a pricing level that does not matter
| what the technology is. Either will end up in a few years at where DVD
| is now ... unless the market decides to say "screw HD" (I doubt it, but
| I'm not certain).
|
| It will get to that pricepoint quicker with the 'war' in full swing, or
| if HDDVD wins, imo.

True.


| Well, there are plenty of underhanded deals to go around, on both sides.

No doubt.


| HD-DVD could be there, too. Either way, as soon as the market gets big
| enough to attract the mass production in China, then the prices of either
| will plummet.
|
| Toshiba has really done great in bringing down the cost of the HDDVD
| players, much better than the BD side of things to this point. I
| suspect we'll see a less than $200 HDDVD player this holiday season
| while the best pricing on BD will most likely be $400.

Yet, we'll have to buy both to be able to play any movie on an HD disc.


| In the mean time, we either have to do without some movies, or we have to
| buy two players, just because of these corporate deals. What _should_
| happen is that the manufacturers promoting _their_ format should host the
| disk manufacturing for the studios, who should remain agnostic about which
| format (aside from being able to add extra features to the BR format).
|
| Or we can have dual players. LG, even though they screwed the pooch on
| the first one, has shown it is possible. Heck they've even announced
| the next version that will be better, although at a crappy pricepoint.
| Samsung has also announced a dual player for this holiday season and
| speculation is that it will be around the $600 mark.

About the price of 2 separate players?


| Or you could do as you suggest, buy both players. That's what I did.
| At this stage of the game, the additional cost of entry in both isn't
| all that huge to the minute market they are selling into.

Yup.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

It was Microsoft that actually paid the money so they can make this drag on
as they want you to download HD media instead.

Stupid Toshiba and stupid Sony. Microsoft will be the winner, lol



"Matthew L. Martin" wrote in message
.. .
Check it out.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/20/technology/dreamworks_paramount.reut/?postversion=2007082015

I am a bit surprised that this information hasn't been posted here, yet.
It's been around for more than 8 hours.

Does anyone here care about HD on DVD?

Matthew

--
I'm a consultant. If you want an opinion I'll sell you one.
Which one do you want?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article ,
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 12:07:53 -0500 Lloyd Parsons wrote:


| Again, with a 30Gb capacity, you get 3-4 hours of content, so why fuzzy?
| The fact is that almost every movie out there can be put on either
| format in excellent PQ and AQ. When it isn't, it isn't because of lack
| of space, it is because of other reasons.

With 50GB you can have more of the same, such as sequels with the original.

I don't see that happening, although I could be wrong.

While movies shot at 24 fps won't benefit, some programming could be done
at 1080p60 and benefit from the high capacity.

And then there's the data use for BR recordable. Do you want to back up
30 GB of your data or 50 GB? In about 2 years both will be at the same
price where the cost of the particular technology choice is no longer a
factor and the cost of Chinese bulk labor is the primary factor.

I'm retired and I can back up all my critical data to a cdr with plenty
of space left over. But that is a good point. BTW, the 51(?)Gb HDDVD
format is somewhere in the works.


| And in that case, they made the correct decision I think. But currently
| with hi def dvds, the picture all too often is not enough better on a
| 40-50" screen at 8-10' viewing distance to entice that majority of the
| market to switch over.

Let's make the switch now to 3840x2160p120 !!

NO!!!

I've spent too much money on all these toys as it is! :-)


| HD-DVD does look good. Blu-Ray looks good, too. If Blu-Ray had never
| come about and HD-DVD was it, I'm sure we'd all be happy with it. But
| we do have the choice, and the better choice in my opinion is Blu-Ray.
|
| From a tech standpoint, I won't really argue. BD seems to have more
| potential. From a practical, how to sell it to the masses standpoint,
| that potential means almost zilch.

If HD-DVD is the choice of _consumers_ I can go along with it. But it
seems the manufacturers don't want consumers to make that choice.

In today's CE world, it isn't about us consumers it is really all about
the corps. Hence HDMI 1.whatever and counting, DRM out the wazoo and
owner's manuals and marketing crap that should start with 'once upon a
time'!


| But BD is about more control of the content over any other
| consideration. Hell, it is even about bringing unfinished tech to the
| market before it was ready. So not only are we doing the beta testing
| for the BD camp, we are paying a premium to do it.

Both create a data space that anything can be put in. The movie producers
will use whatever DRM they want to use on either.


| I don't know about you, but last time I did beta testing for a company,
| I got something from them. Either the product after release, or money.

They _should_ just go ahead and drop the price down to what we know it
will be in a couple years, take the loss, and make up for it when their
format wins ... both sides!

That would be the smartest move, but I don't see it happening. I think
the corps on both sides are ****ed 'cause they didn't get to milk this
cow long enough.


| Blu-Ray will also make 1080p60 content viable more easily than HD-DVD
| can.
|
| Doing 1080p60 now on HDDVD too, in case you hadn't noticed.

But you can get 66% more on BR-DVD.

Doesn't matter in movies until we get much longer ones.


| Whichever is chosen will end up at a pricing level that does not matter
| what the technology is. Either will end up in a few years at where DVD
| is now ... unless the market decides to say "screw HD" (I doubt it, but
| I'm not certain).
|
| It will get to that pricepoint quicker with the 'war' in full swing, or
| if HDDVD wins, imo.

True.


| Well, there are plenty of underhanded deals to go around, on both sides.

No doubt.


| HD-DVD could be there, too. Either way, as soon as the market gets big
| enough to attract the mass production in China, then the prices of either
| will plummet.
|
| Toshiba has really done great in bringing down the cost of the HDDVD
| players, much better than the BD side of things to this point. I
| suspect we'll see a less than $200 HDDVD player this holiday season
| while the best pricing on BD will most likely be $400.

Yet, we'll have to buy both to be able to play any movie on an HD disc.


| In the mean time, we either have to do without some movies, or we have to
| buy two players, just because of these corporate deals. What _should_
| happen is that the manufacturers promoting _their_ format should host the
| disk manufacturing for the studios, who should remain agnostic about which
| format (aside from being able to add extra features to the BR format).
|
| Or we can have dual players. LG, even though they screwed the pooch on
| the first one, has shown it is possible. Heck they've even announced
| the next version that will be better, although at a crappy pricepoint.
| Samsung has also announced a dual player for this holiday season and
| speculation is that it will be around the $600 mark.

About the price of 2 separate players?

Right now the entry point for 2 players is :

HDD2 (Costco and some others) about $249
PS3 or BDP-S300 about $499

Both retail prices, total about $748. If the Samsung dually comes in at
$600 that would be a great deal, even if not cheap enough to attract the
masses. The new LG is supposedly going to hit the street at $1200, I
suspect it will be DOA.


| Or you could do as you suggest, buy both players. That's what I did.
| At this stage of the game, the additional cost of entry in both isn't
| all that huge to the minute market they are selling into.

Yup.

Ugly ~ please breakout what you mean and play that back again. Microsoft's
real goal is downloadable movies?


"Ugly" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
It was Microsoft that actually paid the money so they can make this drag
on as they want you to download HD media instead.

Stupid Toshiba and stupid Sony. Microsoft will be the winner, lol



"Matthew L. Martin" wrote in message
.. .
Check it out.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/20/technology/dreamworks_paramount.reut/?postversion=2007082015

I am a bit surprised that this information hasn't been posted here, yet.
It's been around for more than 8 hours.

Does anyone here care about HD on DVD?

Matthew

--
I'm a consultant. If you want an opinion I'll sell you one.
Which one do you want?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 14:51:21 -0400 FDR wrote:
|
| wrote in message
| ...
| On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 19:37:18 -0400 Matthew L. Martin
| wrote:
| | wrote:
| | On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 19:49:59 -0400 Matthew L. Martin
| wrote:
| | | Check it out.
| | |
| | |
| http://money.cnn.com/2007/08/20/technology/dreamworks_paramount.reut/?postversion=2007082015
| | |
| | | I am a bit surprised that this information hasn't been posted here,
| yet.
| | | It's been around for more than 8 hours.
| | |
| | | Does anyone here care about HD on DVD?
| |
| | Not me. HD on DVD will be way too short for me. I'd go with HD on
| Blu-Ray.
| | Then at least you can get a whole HD movie on one disk.
| |
| |
| | Either you are bent on proving how ignorant you are or you are trolling.
| | Given that you are well known as an ignorant, self centered,
| | hypocritical blow hard, I doubt that you are trolling.
|
| You just can't admit that you misspoke ... err ... misstyped. I'll give
| you a little hint:
|
| DVD ---- 4.7 GB in single layer
| HD-DVD -- 15 GB in single layer
| BR-DVD -- 25 GB in single layer
|
| I don't understand your point. The Departed, at 151 minutes (2 hours 31
| minutes) fits on one HD DVD disk. It's nice that BR has more capcaity but
| will it be used? It's like how CD's only use one third of the space on a
| disk for music.

How much did they compress it to make it fit? If they used less compression
then it might not have fit at all, and only a Blu-Ray would do it.

Windows might hide this from you, but another OS could show the details of
just what size it really is, if you have an HD-DVD player for your computer.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:10:31 -0500 Lloyd Parsons wrote:
| In article ,
| wrote:
|
| On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 12:07:53 -0500 Lloyd Parsons wrote:
|
|
| | Again, with a 30Gb capacity, you get 3-4 hours of content, so why fuzzy?
| | The fact is that almost every movie out there can be put on either
| | format in excellent PQ and AQ. When it isn't, it isn't because of lack
| | of space, it is because of other reasons.
|
| With 50GB you can have more of the same, such as sequels with the original.
|
| I don't see that happening, although I could be wrong.
|
| While movies shot at 24 fps won't benefit, some programming could be done
| at 1080p60 and benefit from the high capacity.
|
| And then there's the data use for BR recordable. Do you want to back up
| 30 GB of your data or 50 GB? In about 2 years both will be at the same
| price where the cost of the particular technology choice is no longer a
| factor and the cost of Chinese bulk labor is the primary factor.
|
| I'm retired and I can back up all my critical data to a cdr with plenty
| of space left over. But that is a good point. BTW, the 51(?)Gb HDDVD
| format is somewhere in the works.

I'm working my way into the last stretch before retirement, and I have
nealy filled my 2TB of USB drives (4x500GB) with backups from several
other disks on 4 computers. I'll need another one soon, but I'm hoping
to hold that off until I finish a couple new SATA-based computers.


| | And in that case, they made the correct decision I think. But currently
| | with hi def dvds, the picture all too often is not enough better on a
| | 40-50" screen at 8-10' viewing distance to entice that majority of the
| | market to switch over.
|
| Let's make the switch now to 3840x2160p120 !!
|
| NO!!!
|
| I've spent too much money on all these toys as it is! :-)

But America's Top 100 corporations need all your money desperately :-)
(As do many in Japan, Korea, China)

So what's next after HD? Total immersion experience?


| In today's CE world, it isn't about us consumers it is really all about
| the corps. Hence HDMI 1.whatever and counting, DRM out the wazoo and
| owner's manuals and marketing crap that should start with 'once upon a
| time'!

And we buy this stuff.


| | I don't know about you, but last time I did beta testing for a company,
| | I got something from them. Either the product after release, or money.
|
| They _should_ just go ahead and drop the price down to what we know it
| will be in a couple years, take the loss, and make up for it when their
| format wins ... both sides!
|
| That would be the smartest move, but I don't see it happening. I think
| the corps on both sides are ****ed 'cause they didn't get to milk this
| cow long enough.

Or more likely because the cow hasn't come home (consumers are staying
with DVD because they don't really need anything better than their old
multi-dubbed VHS).


| | Blu-Ray will also make 1080p60 content viable more easily than HD-DVD
| | can.
| |
| | Doing 1080p60 now on HDDVD too, in case you hadn't noticed.
|
| But you can get 66% more on BR-DVD.
|
| Doesn't matter in movies until we get much longer ones.

I like longer movies, personally.


| Both retail prices, total about $748. If the Samsung dually comes in at
| $600 that would be a great deal, even if not cheap enough to attract the
| masses. The new LG is supposedly going to hit the street at $1200, I
| suspect it will be DOA.

At that price, it better make coffee in the morning, too. Oh wait, that's
only $30. Never mind. It's doomed.

--
|---------------------------------------/----------------------------------|
| Phil Howard KA9WGN (ka9wgn.ham.org) / Do not send to the address below |
| first name lower case at ipal.net / |
|------------------------------------/-------------------------------------|