HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray - Is It All in the Name? 208
Z asks: "As most of you are aware, the dawn of the nex-gen format wars is fully upon us. We have all talked about it until we are Blu in the face, but there is one simple, yet important topic I have yet to see discussed. What is in a name? Now, bear with me for a second here while I explain. As much as we geeks would like to believe it, we are not going to be the ones who decide which format wins out in the end; consumers are. Now, we all know people hate change. Users already know what DVD is, and most would like to think they understand HD. But Blu-Ray? Your average Joe only wants one thing when it comes to new technology, a feeling of comfort and understanding; something I think Blu-Ray is going to have a hard time giving them. I can't help but wonder, is HD-DVD going to win out simply because people are going to be more familiar with the name? "
I really doubt it. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:4, Insightful)
VHS vs DVD was different, because it took the entertainment industry ages to put out DVDs. For the most part, new releases had simultaneous VHS and DVD available, but all the classics, the movies we really wanted, took years before being released. The price was also not quite right, since the same movie in VHS was usually a good $5 to $8 cheaper than the DVD. Consumers might not know the intricate technical details, but they certainly aren't stupid. A movie is a movie is a movie, doesn't matter if it's VHS, DVD or High-Def, you're not getting "more". Nor does it have a significant cost difference to the producer, they're all cut from the same masters, and up until a couple years ago, most people's TV sets could hardly show a difference between good VHS and DVD.
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
Not to mention that DVDs are a lot easier to mangle. About a 1/4 of the more popular DVDs I rent are scratched so badly that they skip scenes. A lot of it probably has to do with my cheap, ancient player, but I bet a lot of early-generation players were like this and more people faced these issues...
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2, Insightful)
All they know is that the iPod thingies can play lots and lots of music.
A couple years ago I was working at Radio Shack (just as a part-time second job) and people would routinely come in for iPods. When we were out of them I'd say we have other MP3 players in stock. The response I'd always get is, "What's an MP3 player?"
Consumers aren't really as savvy as we hope they are. DVD has been out FOREVER and there are STILL people
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:5, Insightful)
The format that DVD replaced was ancient. The gap between VHS and DVD was huge, and DVD offered many features that VHS did not. And I'm not sure MP3 replaced an old technology so much as it filled a void.
There's not that much of a gap between DVD and Blu-ray/HD-DVD.
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:3, Interesting)
MP3s at 128 kpbs are a meg a minute. CD quality WAV files are 10 megs a minute. Considering how fast your hard drive would get full, people didn't rip their music. Even if you cut the quality to 22 Khz instead of 44 Khz, your file is still 5x larger than an MP3 and wouldn't sound as well. Cut it in half again (8-bit instead of 16-bit) and you're down to 2.5 megs a
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
Pffft (Score:2)
Re:Pffft (Score:2)
I think there is a small minority of DVD aficionados who really see a difference, but most people don't.
Re:Pffft (Score:2)
As to your funny story, it reminded of trying to go to sleep the other night. My girlfriend kept hearing this strange noise, which she decided to point out to me. I was perfectly happy before, but then I started to notice this noise as well, so couldn't get to sleep either.
I think that once you start watching a movie, as long as you enjoy the movie, you tend
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2, Interesting)
It amazed me that the studios got away with charging MORE for DVDs than for VHS tapes in the first place... But then, the buying public didn't know how much less expensive DVDs are to produce than VHS, and the quality was increased, so perhaps that's why that value proposition worked.
It seems to me that HD-DVDs are priced for videophiles right now and no one else. I can't see any of my neighbors replacing their (
TV Series Sales (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it has to do with the fact that TV series in current resolutions are a poor fit for DVD technology. Almost every movie fits fine in a double-sided dual-layer disc, but TV series need 5-8 DVDs per season. Vendors could save significantly on materials and packaging costs if this could be cut to one disc per season.
I think whichever format bac
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
If following your theory, the question one then need to ask is: does a bit smaller gap imply that consumers have a harder time understanding a new technology? What about 3G compared to WAP? Both let you browse th
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
I have a DLP HDTV (native resolution of 720p). The picture quality is a huge step up from SD. Perhaps not as huge asthe jump from VHS to DVD, but still quite an difference.
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
There's not that much of a gap between DVD and Blu-ray/HD-DVD.
Are you kidding? Ever see a movie in HD vs. the same movie in SD (on a TV that can show the difference)? To me it's almost as significant as the difference between (non-HD) DVD and VHS.
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2, Interesting)
I'd say MP3 took a long time to catch on.
Not that I'm blaming that lag on it's name... I'd say the format had to wait for commodoty computer hardware, and consumer knowledge to catch up with it. But still, this doesn't apply to the point you're trying to make.
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
Here we are just a few years later, and how many people have stopped buying CD music in favor of mp3/aac/wma/something incompatible with their old CD players?
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
but yes, the clueless masses did not know about mp3s until circa 97 and wasn't common until 99-2000. however, saying it wasn't widely used is a bit of an understatement. it served its napster-like purposes very well, computers just weren't at the point where apps (read: games) could take much advantage of it. every try playing an mp3 on a 486 or low end pentium? 30-40% of your cpu time was spent decoding
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
X is to DVD as MP3 is to CD (Score:2, Insightful)
MP3's seperated music from the media it was stored on, and was adopted widely as a result. There was significant movement towards the new format because it solved several real annoyances with the then dominant format (CD's), and hasn't been replaced by technically superior formats because none of them do anything other than incrementally upgrade the improvements brought to the table by MP3's. Som
Re:X is to DVD as MP3 is to CD (Score:2)
A story in yesterday's New York Times put HDTV in 19% of American households. Early Salvos in the High-Definition DVD Format War [nytimes.com]
HD in one in five homes in under five years. That's an astonishing rate of adoption. Not just for HD, but for very large wide-screen projection and multichannel digital sound. $1000-$2000 at entry level.
Amazon.com is shipping Phantom of the Opera on HD-DVD for $20, Serenity for $25. Apollo 13 for $25. You do not pay a premium for HD content if
Re:X is to DVD as MP3 is to CD (Score:2)
What fraction of that 19% will be able to watch movies in HD, with all the confusion surrounding HDMI or whatever it is called? Also, I'm not sure about that 19%. No one in my family has an HDTV. Perhaps we're just too cheap to spend more than $400 on a TV.
Yes but... (Score:2)
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
Goodbye Blu-ray, and Cliff. RIP
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
Remember that DVDs replaced VHS after the VHS format had been around for over twenty years. That's enough time for a new generation of movie collectors to come along.
Re:I really doubt it. (Score:2)
A name is important, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's also possible that having a name tied into an existing standard (namely DVD in this case) could have a negative effect, especially if Blu-Ray (or its supports) spin things that way. ("Why would you want to stick with something as old as DVDs when Blu-Ray is all-new, all-improved?")
The obvious thing about Blu-Ray (Score:3, Interesting)
You know how some salespeople will essentially make stuff up to push a sale through? Blue Lasers will be their main explanation.
I doubt HD-DVD is going to get their advertising campain kicked off by associating their technology with the color blue. The HD-DVD people will obviously talk up the HD aspect.
Meanwhile in the Blu-Ray camp
Why is it called Blu-Ray: blue laser
High resolution: blue laser
More disc space: blue l
Re:A name is important, but... (Score:2)
The all-new, all-improved line of argumentation typically only convinces one type of person to separate from their hard-earned dollars: Early adopters.
Then again early adopters are known to buy anything as long as it's new and almost nobody else has one.
I expect that Joe Common will need some stronger arguments that "it's new" or "it's an improvement on DVD", just look at how DVD-Audio (both "new" and "an improve
Re:A name is important, but... (Score:2)
Modulo 2 factors:
Both of these seems to swing the probability towards BluRay (the 2nd assuming the PS3 is a hit), and then there's the inertia in the studios - Sony, Fox, MGM and Disney were initially in the BluRay camp, which is a large slice of Hollywood right there...
Maybe novelty can help differentiate? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Maybe novelty can help differentiate? (Score:2)
I find that unlikely. Imagine a dude who upgraded to HD. He watches HD. He loves HD. Then he puts a standard DVD in his player and
Re:Maybe novelty can help differentiate? (Score:2)
Can you honestly tell me that somebody who's watching 1080p on his 40+" screen isn't going to notice that his DVDs are significantly softer?
I've heard this complaint a few times. That's why HD-DVR + HBO == goodness for HD owners.
Consider also... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Consider also... (Score:2)
Re:Consider also... (Score:2)
Re:Consider also... (Score:2)
Re:Consider also... (Score:2)
Maybe. But we're talking about a next-generation DVD that works with HD. HD-DVD. What Average Joe that has recently purchased an HDTV would instantly thing Blu-Ray has anything to do with his home theater?
Re:Consider also... (Score:2)
Re:SLP mode (Score:2)
VHS beat Beta because it was cheaper, even though it was the better product.
A Mac is better, but people still by clones because they're cheaper.
People vote with their wallets. WalMart understands this,
Re:That's why everyone starts web addresses (Score:2)
dave
yes and no (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:yes and no (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd argue the opposite (Score:4, Insightful)
Seriously. This is what you'll hear from the droid at Best Buy.
"HD-DVD" sounds old and busted, a hack to make DVD "HD".
"Blu-Ray" is an entirely new technology, and as everyone knows, unless you have the latest trinket, you're a dinosaur, obsolete, gay, etc.
I may sound flip, but you get the idea. People buy spin, and marketing crap. They don't buy technology, or purchase on any rational basis.
Re:I'd argue the opposite (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, most definitely. That's why I think Laserdisc made such huge waves, all but replacing VHS for precorded movies. I mean, damn, discs were high-tech and lasers have always been awesome.
Listen, if you want to know what the general public will buy, I'll tell you: They'll buy the HD format that a) has the most movies, b) gets the best demos over the next year while they're wandering around Circuit City/Best Buy/etc., c) is supported by their friends and family (my parents, for example, would go for whatever format I recommended to them), and most importantly d) is the cheapest.
Of course, it's all moot if combo players reach decent prices. At that point, nobody but the A/V geeks will care about the differences...
The difference has to be significant. (Score:2)
The general public will buy whatever has the best balance of being cheap, popular/hyped, and actually good tech. If I could figure out what I meant by "best balance", then the ONLY next-gen format would be SanityInAnarchy-HD. But those consumers are so darned unpredictable...
Re:I'd argue the opposite (Score:2)
That's why Betamax failed, they didn't want to open their platform for porn industry.
Re:I'd argue the opposite (Score:2)
That's why Betamax failed, they didn't want to open their platform for porn industry.
Yeah, that's the reason. The fact that Betamax couldn't record a whole movie on a single tape without reducing picture quality, or record anything longer than two hours, had nothing to do with it. Neither did the much lower price of VHS equipment, thanks to JVC's decision to allow other manufacturers to compete with them. And Sony's reluctance to add new features, like remote pause and recording timers was also comple
Re:I'd argue the opposite (Score:2)
I am pretty sure it is a different person each time, so I wan't to know where did you get this little tid-bit of information?? At least you aren't getting modded to 5, as has happened in the past.
Perhaps the post comment
Re:I'd argue the opposite (Score:2)
You Joe Sixpack is a geek and/or somebody with a higher education in sciences/technology.
In my experience many people don't know that light has a wavelength, most people don't know that the wavelength of blue is shorter than the one of red and the vast majority of people has no idea whatsovever of how the wavelength of the reading laser affects the amount of data that can be stored in CD-like media.
Actually i suspe
Yeah, right. (Score:2, Insightful)
Nevermind that absolutely obscure music format, MP3.
At the risk of being modded offtopic... (Score:3, Interesting)
Did HP decide to use their corporate corpse to produce Blu-ray or HD-DVD players?
Re:At the risk of being modded offtopic... (Score:2)
Re:At the risk of being modded offtopic... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:At the risk of being modded offtopic... (Score:2)
*I learned BASIC logging into a PDP-11 using a DECwriter line printing terminal in high s
Re:At the risk of being modded offtopic... (Score:2)
AMD licenced the same bus used by the ev7 alphas, and then suddenly the Athlon slingshotted into the stratosphere.
ahh the Alpha... *pats his steel plated 6U quad proccessor DEC AlphaServer*
good memories
DVD+HD **plus is better than minus!** (Score:2)
Then encourage the BluRay player builders to add a $5 DVD pickup laser and a $2 MPEG2 decoder chip so the BluRay players can also play back old fashioned DVD too.
Re:DVD+HD **plus is better than minus!** (Score:3, Interesting)
This is already going to be automatic. Nobody is going to release a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player that doesn't play back DVDs. As for a "$2 MPEG2 decoder chip," you really don't need anything extra in that area since both formats support MPEG-2 encoded data by default (FYI, broadcast HD is already MPEG-2).
As for the marketing, that's not bad but
Re:DVD+HD **plus is better than minus!** (Score:2)
When I first heard of Blu-Ray... (Score:2)
Then I found out Sony was making Blu-Ray and had a good laugh.
Then I read "HD-DVD" and fell on the floor laughing.
HD DVD Will Win for More Reasons Than That (Score:2, Interesting)
Remember, many don't have much faith in Sony anymore. They've had numerous delays with their PS3, which is their main way to market Blu-Ray. The PS3 is expected to be $599 or possibly more. Not only that, but their last format, UMD, failed miserably and is being pulled off Wal-Mart's shelves. Combine that with their previous failures with formats like Mini-Disc and Sony doesn't have much of a tr
Re:HD DVD Will Win for More Reasons Than That (Score:2, Insightful)
Since when are geeks not consumers? (Score:2, Insightful)
Apparently geekdom does not have ANY say in whether a format is accepted. This statement has given me a headache. OOOOhhh, my head!
silly question (Score:2)
Consumers think they already have "HD-DVD" (Score:5, Interesting)
Funny enough, most of the folks thinking that they had something that hadn't shipped yet owned Sony units. Perhaps this is not a coincidence. But people are going to be pitched DVD players with HD resolution - the confusion that this will breed will probably kill HD-DVD.
jh
Problem is even worse than that (Score:3, Interesting)
So what happens when they take the discs home and find they will not play? A very, very high return rate and a lot of pissed of customers. I don't want to be the poor returns desk clerk who has to explain for the eight billionth time "You need a HD-DVD player, not a DVD player". You know that's g
Re:Problem is even worse than that (Score:2)
This is going to be even tougher for the rental fo
Re:Problem is even worse than that (Score:2)
Interesting idea. It might be a good stopgap solution before we find out which format will win. But in the long-term why should we replace one standard with two? I'm sorry, but I want one to win and the other to lose. I don't care which one. But it benefits noone to have two competing but equivalent (to the consumer) standards that require two different players t
Re:Problem is even worse than that (Score:2)
HD-DVD will win (Score:2)
Alright, some of them weren't really battles, but there aren't many "battles" where a named format beat out an acronymed format*.
* and now dozens of people are going to come up with counter-examples. I urge moderators to mod them down as trolls.
Re:HD-DVD will win (Score:2, Insightful)
Those Aren't even valid comparisons (Score:2)
The rest aren't even CLOSE to being a battle of any form.
CD's versus Minidisk? Both were created by and championed by sony. The MD units were designed to be mroe high end and expensive (plus it was recordable before cd burners became popular). Add this to the fact that there is a huge ti
Re:Those Aren't even valid comparisons (Score:2)
Want some advice? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want to know what I think -- rather than expending energy worrying which DVD format wins out, you'd do better learning to stop talking like that.
For heaven's sake, you're not Claude freaking Shannon; you're some guy buying a device to play Spiderman 2. (You also may or not be the guy who thought "Digital" was the appropriate category for this topic but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one...) Could you possibly dial the condescension back a bit?
I think the opposite (Score:2)
Just like people are more likely to purchase a "Roomba" than they are a "robotic vacuum cleaner." Well, that is it robotic doesn't have the cool buzz factor that it did when I was a kid.
Why won't this HD-DVD work in my DVD player? (Score:2)
Many HD DVD buyers will be upset and have a slightly negative opinion of HD-DVD. Then, when the consumer goes and gets edjukated, he'll go with blu-ray, because it holds more data (because 50 is bigger than 30, just like the 7800 is almost 6000 points better than the X1900).
JMO
But Blu-Ray ray sounds cooler... (Score:2)
HD-DVD has advantage I think (Score:2)
Of course, with the PS3 having Blu-ray built in, that's a HUGE advantage... I'm really anxious to see how this plays out to tell the truth.
Re:HD-DVD has advantage I think (Score:2)
Easy prediction here - HD-DVD wins:
Yes (Score:2)
Unique names don't sell? Ipod? (Score:2)
Blu-Ray Sanitary Wash - "Kills germs dead" (Score:2)
They got their timing right on this one... (Score:2, Insightful)
Ultimately it depends on when people are ready and willing to ditch the hundreds of DVD players they bought in the last 3-4 years. Over the last 3-4 years, HD sets started getting cheap, DVD players got ultra cheap, people got over the fact that they can't record on their video media anymore (though, that's changing), and all-in-one surround systems became popular because the media is now all the same size.
A 3 month release head
A 3rd option (Score:4, Insightful)
Recent digital formats have snowed the market because they offered obvious advantages over existing technologies that had been around for years. CDs and DVDs overtook magnetic tapes because they were more durable, had better resolution, (generally) offered more storage space, and gave you the option of skipping directly to a specific song or movie scene. Plus, magnetic tape media had been on the market for several years, so most consumers felt they had gotten their money's worth out of their old hardware. Many of the discussions surrounding HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray seem to assume that consumers will necessarily pick one. But why should they pick either? The only advantages these formats offer over current DVDs is slightly better video resolution (no novel access features or rugged construction) and more storage space for.....10 extra director's commentaries? I suppose certain video games would enjoy having a 50GB media, but honestly, who's going to make a game that takes up fifty gigabytes?
Whether or not Blu-Ray's horizontal line count is superior to HD-DVD's is irrelevant. What's relevant is how superior it is to the current standard - 480i on DVD. I think that the difference is negligible, unless you have equipment costing thousands of dollars. Even on old televisions DVDs were an obvious improvement over VHS tapes, which were literally wearing out from time and use. HD-CDs sound wonderful, but only on the right hardware. And very few people are willing to spend an extra $5000 on speakers just to hear greater clarity of the 10khz frequency. The costs far outweigh the benefits.
Plus, I just bought a DVD player three years ago! Suddenly it's obsolete? I don't think so - the T-1000 still looks pretty sweet on DVD, and my discs are in great shape. Asking me to pay an extra $300 for a player, plus $30 for a new movie, plus $2000 for a new tv, plus $100 for the cables needed to even hook up HD components, just doesn't justify a really nice solar flare.
Does anyone else remember that one of the early, great selling points of DVDs was that you didn't have to rewind them? Wasn't that awesome? And now we take it for granted.
Re:A 3rd option (Score:2)
hehe, you forgot the $500 for my home entertainment center. The width for the TV is limited, if i get a new HD-widescreen it would have to be much shorter than my current TV to fit. I can't get any bigger diagonal TV in the hole
Oops, if i do that i need a stereo rack as i havent seen a center that wo
BluRay is much more personable... (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, I wrote about this before, but I think you've got it backwards.
Try this, say "H. D. D. V. D" three times fast, and you'll see a problem: it's long, it's cryptic, and it's hard to use in conversation. It becomes very "techy" sounding, and has no charm, it conjures no imagery what-so-ever. "Blue Ray", on the other hand, is two simple words that are already used in everyday conversation. When put together, they create wild space age imagery, not of the "techy" kind, but of the "wow" factor. It's two sylables compared to it's competitor's five. Blue is a color commonly associated with the calm and understated, and synergizes with the more aggressive imagry of its "Ray" counterpart. After all, "RedRay" immediately conjures up images of fire, blood, and bad 70s B sci-fi flicks.
As a graphic designer, I'll votche for BluRay having much more possibilities for aesthetically pleasing logos. It's use of lower-case letters (which give it a more personable feeling), combined with it's cute spelling make it endeering. It has symmetry, and varried "skyline" (the shape the tops of the letters make).
HD-DVD, on the other hand, is made of mostly sharp edged letters, all upper-case, very impersonal, intimidating, and institutional in nature. Accronyms are not comforting to people. FBI, CIA, IRS, WTF... all negative connotations. People tend to make accryonms of subjects that are undesirable or discomforting, since shortenning the name gets it over and done with being said more quickly. I assure you that if the FBI really stood for "the Friends of Birds and Igloos", people would much less rarely refer to it as "The F.B.I"... and when they did, they would call it "Feebee". A product with an accronym in its name has a harder time endeering itself
Yes, all these perceptions are going to be subconscious, yet, most of the innitial judgements about the product are going to stem from the subconcious "feeling" you get when you first see or hear about it. Thus, a name and a logo can litterally shape and define a product for the consumer before they even see it. Steve Jobs and his staff were geniouses when they shortened the cryptic "Performa 7300/200" to "iMac", there's no coincidence that the relative success of the iMac was shaped by it's more personable and less intimidating portrayal... and that all starts with a name.
Yea.. it's working real well for bluetooh (Score:3, Insightful)
https://www.bluetooth.org/admin/bluetooth2/news/st ory.php?storyid=629 [bluetooth.org]
Awareness rose most significantly in the US, where for the first time over 50 percent of the respondents recognized the Bluetooth brand: over the course of the study, awareness rose from just 22 percent in 2003 to 41 percent in 2004 and then to 58 percent in 2005.
How long has BT been around now? if Blu-Ray takes that long, it's dead in the water...
They buy what they're told to buy (Score:2)
"Yeah, erh... Hi. I wanna buy this new DVD kind, ya know, the one with the better resolution and clearer picture and all that, you got that?"
"Oh, you mean (insert the tech they got more margin for)."
The consumer might have had a say in what's being bought some years ago. He has nothing to say anymore. He's buying what's available. Best Buy and its buddies don't even have to offer both. They dictate what's bei
Or neither will win (Score:2)
Does that mean both names suck?
Afterall there is precedence for formats simply not gaining traction. LaserDisk never got very popular, and most people have no reason what so ever to buy an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player as they don't have an HDTV to go with it. So, why bother?
Voluptuous Mounds (Score:2)
Both! (Score:2)
Oh, and the player must be able to play region 1 AND 2 discs, or be cheap enough so I can buy two players. I refuse to obsolete half my DVD library after all...
Why both may fail (Score:2)
My wife and I haven't rented a DVD since we bought our TiVo last year. We record at basic quality, so there are lots of artifacts in the video. Do we care? No - we hardly notice t
Re:It's the vibe... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The Opposite (Score:2)
Re:The Opposite (Score:2)
Physically, they are all the same thing -- 12cm plastic disks. There is no reason to make them sound "hip and sexy" because there isn't anything hip or sexy about them. They're disks. The only really significant difference for most people is that they are in "high-def" resolutions, hence "HD". Even BluRay is "like a DVD, except HD".
It doesn't even matter what the letters stand for. Most people d
Re:Price will tell (Score:2)