Another nail hangs over HD-DVD's coffin

"Neill Massello" wrote in message
.. .
Eddie G wrote:

I never read/trust ANYTHING from theinquirer.net although I may read
it for a good laugh.

Except that in this case The Inquirer is quoting Financial Times, as is
Reuters.

The interesting question is why Warner switched and why now.


620 million dollars plus incentives. It's all over the Net.

I'd kiss sony ass for that much as well

Mars wrote:

It's all over the Net.

So are alien abduction stories. Do you have any links to reputable
sources?

Eddie G wrote:
On Jan 8, 11:59 am, Winfield wrote:

"Paramount poised to jump ship"

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...hd-dvd-declare...

also just in -
draft-dodgers give Dereck J a HUGE definition wedgie! :P

- Winfield


I never read/trust ANYTHING from theinquirer.net although I may read
it for a good laugh.

The original source every other article was parroting was an "insider"
source to Financial Times, although it helps to disclaimer
that...anything past that, FT was guessing. -_-

Derek Janssen

"Mark A" wrote in message
. ..
"XPickel" wrote in message
...
If Paramount dumps HD-DVD it's all over.

Then they will, because the studios are desperately trying to end the
format war.


Just like everyone else, they whish there'd never been one.

On Jan 8, 3:08*pm, (Neill Massello) wrote:
Eddie G wrote:
I never read/trust ANYTHING from theinquirer.net although I may read
it for a good laugh.

Except that in this case The Inquirer is quoting Financial Times, as is
Reuters.

Then the OP should have cited:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dc409afa-b...0779fd2ac.html

Trusting a 3rd party internet source is like trusting a whore that
says you don't need a rubber!

Neill Massello wrote:
md wrote:

This is the more expensive of the two ... correct?

The discs are usually about the same price at retail. If anything,
Blu-ray discs are often a little cheaper, despite their being
(supposedly) more expensive to manufacture. Blu-ray players are still
more expensive than HD, but the relative gap has been shrinking and the
absolute prices of both formats have been declining, as is typical with
new technology.


Any advantages worth paying for?

Blu-ray has twice the capacity of HD. Not a big deal for movies, but an
important consideration in picking the next generation of optical data
storage.


An important consideration, yes - but price might be even more
important. I can do standard rewritable DVD double-layer burns, but
don't because single-layer discs are much more economical. Even putting
up with a bit of hassle to split files/organize to get all the
nutritional data goodness.

Inexpensive HD-DVD recordable discs and burners may be where the format
survives.

winfield

Tarkus wrote:
Winfield wrote:
"Paramount poised to jump ship"

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...-declared-dead


If that's true, how long before Toshiba just pulls the plug and cuts
their losses?


Good question. I wonder how much input Microsoft and other partners
might have on this decision. It would certainly be a major announcement.

- winf

In article ,
"XPickel" wrote:

"Mark A" wrote in message
. ..
"XPickel" wrote in message
...
If Paramount dumps HD-DVD it's all over.

Then they will, because the studios are desperately trying to end the
format war.


Just like everyone else, they whish there'd never been one.

As a consumer, you should have loved the war. What do you think forced
those prices down so fast? It sure as hell wasn't either side's mfgs
wanting to.

Winfield wrote:

Inexpensive HD-DVD recordable discs and burners may be where the format
survives.

I don't think so, any more than DVD-RAM survived. There's really only
room in the market for one next-gen optical storage format. DVD-R media
was also quite expensive initially but got much cheaper as the format
took off. Something similar will happen with Blu-ray.

Lloyd Parsons wrote:
In article ,
"XPickel" wrote:


"Mark A" wrote in message
t...

"XPickel" wrote in message
...

If Paramount dumps HD-DVD it's all over.

Then they will, because the studios are desperately trying to end the
format war.


Just like everyone else, they whish there'd never been one.

As a consumer, you should have loved the war. What do you think forced
those prices down so fast? It sure as hell wasn't either side's mfgs
wanting to.

If memory serves correctly, it was companies wanting to move great
stocks of UNSOLD products.

Which the public wasn't buying.

Because they wanted a winner first.

Which they weren't getting.

Because there was a format war on.

(Now, as to what KEEPS prices down, now that companies can make a
greater sales margin on less expensively produced products in safe mass
quantities, for a larger customer base then their previously "niche" one...)

Derek Janssen