Blu-Ray/HD-DVD Talks End 389
Last minute talks to unify the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray formats have failed. Matsushita, owner of the Panasonic brand, has stated 'the market will decide the winner.' From the article: "The two sides held talks last year in the hopes of avoiding a prolonged format battle similar to the one between Betamax and VHS videotapes in the 1980s, knowing that it could discourage consumers from shifting to the advanced discs and stifle the industry's growth. But the talks soon fizzled out, with each side reluctant to establish a format based on the other's disc structure. At stake is the $24 billion home video market and a slice of the personal computer market as PCs will be equipped with Blu-ray or HD DVD optical drives."
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
Third way (Score:5, Informative)
I also cannot help but wonder, faced with two contradictory and low-uptake standards, how many stores will actually want to stock hddvd or bluray discs? It seems to me that the only chance either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray has of actually getting widely stocked is by making dual-capability DVDs that can be played on either a next-gen dvd player, or a current gen dvd player (both next-gen formats support this; it's done by burning a disc with one layer of DVD and one layer of hddvd-or-bluray).
HD-DVD no friendlier in terms of copying (Score:3, Informative)
I wish people would stop propogating the myth that HD-DVD has "better" copyright abilities. Both formats use the exact same DRM scheme. Both allow managed copy (HOWEVER please read up on what managed copy really means, it's not like a REAL copy ability).
Heck, Blu-Ray discs from Sony (at least at first) will let you have full res video over analog connections, have any HD-DVD studios followed suit? That would seem to tilt the copyright niceness a little towards Blu-Ray, though not much... both are pretty laden with protections.
Re:Just fine (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Just fine (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Third way (Score:4, Informative)
But LG Electric is going to produce a combo, and they decided to challenge those licensing terms in court.
As for Matsushita, fuck them. in both eye sockets.
Re:blu-ray all the way! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Just fine (Score:5, Informative)
Good Article on the state of Managed Copy (Score:3, Informative)
Summary:
* Both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray use the same AACS standard for copy protection (and thus managed copy protection)
* Players out now cannot do managed copy because the standard is not done - it's hoped the ability can be added later in a firmware update.
* Managed copies will likley require an internet connection so it can "ask" to make a copy, and possibly also involve payment for the right to copy.
Some good technical details there on how the system might end up working.
Re:Just fine (Score:5, Informative)
HD-DVDs are just a minor upgrade to DVDs, so it's not a stretch to have Blu-ray drives reading them.
That means absolutely nothing. It's quite easy to handle various layouts. DVD players handle VCDs, SVCDs, JPEG/MP3/WMA CDs, and DVDs, with no problems. I've never yet seen a disc misdetected.
Completely wrong. They both mandate EXACTLY the same video codecs, and of the same audio codecs as well (audio codecs are trivial next to the complex video codecs anyhow).
"Everything" meaning "Almost Nothing".
Don't let ignorance stop you from spouting off, though.
Re:the 'market' (Score:3, Informative)
Re:blu-ray all the way! (Score:2, Informative)
Thats so wrong I dont know where to start.
Normal DVD's: 4.7GB (9GB dual layer)
Blu-ray disc capacity: 25GB (50GB dual-layer)
HD-DVD disc capacity: 15GB (30GB dual layer)
Ignorance (Score:2, Informative)
Blu-ray uses a 405 nm laser wavelength.
HD-DVD uses a 405 nm laser wavelength.
There is no difference between the HD-DVD and Blu-ray lasers besides their numerical aperture characteristics, which is less of a problem.
In the meantime, both blu-ray and hd-dvd drives will already have to supply multiple wavelengths, because CDs, DVDs, and hddvdbluray all three use different wavelengths-- and next-gen DVD drives support all three. Is the difference between three lasers and four that enormous?
The massive amount of marketing which has served to outline the so-called "differences" between these two formats has made it very easy to obscure the plain fact that these two formats are almost entirely indistinguishable from an engineer's perspective.
Re:the 'market' (Score:5, Informative)
The first-to-market standards proposal has a good shot at winning, because by the time other competing proposals get to market, the first one has so much market penetration that nobody wants the second for fear of incompatibility.
Licensing models that are less restrictive and more open also tend to find favor among consumers. The less cost and hassle the consumer experiences wins product loyalty in the marketplace.
Consider a few examples:
VHS vs. Betamax: Sony was first-to-market with Betamax in 1975, followed in 1976 by JVC with the VHS format. Based on time, Betamax should have become the standard for magnetic recording of video. However, Sony made a mistake with licensing: only Sony would produce Betamax tapes and devices. JVC opened up their technology to licensed manufacturers, allowing for competition in the marketplace which drove the prices of VHS far enough below that of Betamax (and increased the features) to influence the marketplace to invest in VHS technology. Because at the time Betamax devices were still expensive, there was little market penetration for JVC to overcome. In summary, the open standard won.
DVD vs. Divx (not the codec [divx.com]): Does anyone remember this debate [sfgate.com]? Those who do, remember that these two competing CD-like digital video distribution technologies were in a little war for the consumer's pocketbook. Both technologies came out about the same time, so time-to-market wasn't an issue. The issue was Divx pay-per-view licensing model: instead of buying a video once and wathing it an infinite number of times (as with DVD), the consumer would buy the Divx video fairly cheaply but then pay something every time it is watched. Needless to say, this went over like a fart in church. DVD won based on its superior licensing model.
AM Stereo: I'm not up on the licensing models or time frame of the competing AM stereo technologies, but they were both late-to-market in relation to standard AM radio. There was already HUGE market penetration of standard AM broadcast equipment and receivers; few people saw benefit in replacing that equipment. Had there been just one proposal for AM Stereo, and had it been completely open, it is still doubtful it would have ever caught on.
Microsoft vs. Linux (Gates vs. Torvalds):consumer but it poses problems for developers who, for economic reasons, wish to maintain security over their intellectual property. It is for this reason that many hardware manufacturers do not support Linux: their legal departments cannot confidently say that their intellectual property will be protected if they provide Linux drivers for their products. In this regard, Microsoft's licensing model is superior to Linux's for the developer.
So in the Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD debate, who will win? Which proposed standard will be first-to-market? Which will have the less-restrictive licensing model? What about the third factor, technical superiority? What about the fourth factor -- does the public even want it (think DAT or video phones)?
~Jon
Re:Just fine (Score:3, Informative)