PC's Role Key in New Format War 180
An anonymous reader writes "With the PlayStation 3's launch still a ways off, Toshiba and Sony are turning to the PC as the next battleground for the DVD format. News.com reports that some manufacturers are, at least for now, planning to offer both options on upcoming desktop and laptop PCs. Only a handful of films and software are to be available for the formats this year." From the article: "PCs equipped with HD DVD or Blu-ray will cost several hundred dollars more than comparably equipped models with DVD drives--a factor that should keep sales relatively low this year as consumers wait for applications and video titles that can take advantage of the higher capacity."
why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:5, Interesting)
Disclaimer: following comments are based on the assumption these new DVD formats and drives for PCs support recording, an assumption not clear from the referenced article. If the drives won't be capable of recording, the incentive to consider either drive is even less.
All the recent roiling around locking down digital formats, keeping them from consumers, begs the question, "why would anyone pay extra, especially a couple hundred extra, for a computer with a DVD drive they seemingly may not be able to use legally anyway?"
The horizon is murky, it's not clear there will be much use for these new DVD drives be they blu-ray or HD.
With the incredible leaps in hard drive capacity and declining cost per gigabyte of storage (remember when it was described in terms of cost per megabyte?), even the notion of using these new high capacity DVDs for storage/backup is not compelling. People are beginning to turn to Network Access Storage as that becomes more affordable.
Also, there's is a growing trend in internet storage and backup, one I think will become huge. So, even MORE of a reason to not be interested in the new DVD drives.
Factor in the historically slow speeds and high failure rates of recording to disc media (I've given up on this approach, I get a write failure or corruption failure on creating data DVDs of about one in ten at least, a prohibitively high failure rate in the data world), even MORE reason to not buy.
As for gaming and movie viewing on PCs, ain't going to happen in huge numbers. People still prefer to watch their movies on real screens (bigger and bigger these days), and serious gamers tend to have their favorite dedicated game box.
Finally, until the legislative dust has settled users don't and won't know if there's even anything they could legally record to the new DVDs. It's not entirely clear users are going to be allowed to even make a backup copy of a purchased movie.
The industry, if they had half a brain, would be offering incentives to get buyers to go for their format, just for the sake of making the consumers roll the format-war dice.
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:3, Interesting)
USB hard drive enclosures are another good back system for a home user. They are very cheap and seem to work pretty well.
Yep I have to admit I am in the wait and see category. There is very little need for a higher density optical format loaded with DRM. I am hoping they will be as popular as the LS-120 floppy disk was.
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Multiple backups.
2. Only use drive for backing up. If a Hard drive has a MTBF of 10,000 hours it should be good for five or six years of backups. By then you will probably need a bigger drive anyway.
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:2, Informative)
Most modern harddrives have a MTBF of between 750,000 and 1,000,000 hours.
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:2)
Games (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Games (Score:2)
collection. I think God of War is on a dual-layer disc (European version with extra languages) and
The Bard's Tale is definitely a dual-layer disc. I expect collections of series of modern games to require
multiple DVDs anytime soon
Re:Games (Score:2)
Also don't forget that an animation sequence using the game's own graphics takes up a whole lot less space then say a pre-rendered video
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:5, Informative)
You're quite right that hard drives are getting cheaper and better for backup; I am myself building a file server, but high capacity optical disks have their place. I can hand out CD-Rs and DVD-Rs like candy, and these next-generation formats will come down in price if they survive.
Oh, and as a competing anecdote, I've never had a failed write/corrupt DVD-R. It's been a couple of years since I last (accidently) turned a CD-R into a coaster, too. Maybe you should look into higher quality drives and media.
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:2)
Hard drive on the other hand, I
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:3, Funny)
1/10 failure? (Score:2)
I personally don't have burn failures period. At worse, 1 in 1/100. Even if there's failures, the cost is counted in pennies making backups so cheap it's pointless to quibble over it.
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:2)
The only place I somewhat disagree.. or have a different opinion/view is with data backup. I agree, DVD's completely suck, but so do hard drives for other reasons. Neither medium is great for long term storage. However, hard drives really don't have great capacity for data backup. DVDs aren't great either but there is a difference. DVDs are extremely cheap media these days. I have about 50GB of data that is extremely important to me that I'd like to maintain incremen
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:2)
The important part is that to weekly burn and mail a bunch of disks takes a bunch of time you're not accounting for,
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:2)
Let's not bring in "my time" since you don't know how I might solve that so it isn't a factor at all.
I think the real problem here is that people do not acknowledge how poor magnetic media is at preserving data. It's very error prone and as bit densities increase the problem gets worse.
I do employ an external HD for short term backups, while I store long term on DVD-R.. knowing that some will
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:5, Insightful)
When CD-roms where being introduced, a single cdrom was larger than many harddrives.
Now blu-ray and HD-dvd are slowly being introduced. Yet even today a single harddrive has a capacity 10 to 30 times larger than these media.
Re:why pay more for DVD drive? (Score:2)
Toshiba's HD-DVD player is powered by a Pentium M and an Intel chipset. I anticipate that 40-70% of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray "players" will really be some form of an HTPC.
Difference? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Difference? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Difference? (Score:3, Insightful)
PCs won't have much effect on this until Apple ships a Blu-ray drive.
You may scoff, but they have a long history of doing just that. And with Apple sitting on the Blu-Ray board, and Jobs basically being new High Overlord at Disney, I think Apple may be the piece of the highdef format wars that people are overlooking. If there are a flood of MacTels and PS3's with Blu-ray al
Re:Difference? (Score:2)
That home theater setup is across the room, while the 19" monitor is 18" from my eyes. Also, the drives shouldn't really cost that much in a year or two.
most people I know are just now getting DVD drives for their computers
I've had one since 1999, and I didn't get a
What?! Yes, you DO have an HD monitor! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Difference? (Score:2)
Re:Difference? (Score:2)
Why would I want this on my PC? (Score:5, Insightful)
They have a history of disabling previously working hardware without warning (HDCP, Cablecards).
The standards are not settled yet and very soon there will likely be a Dual drive.
The average human can't tell the difference on a 55" screen across a 20' living room from a 720p.
Don't plan on seeing Dual drives (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Why would I want this on my PC? (Score:2)
My god man- when I go to my friend's house we are a good 15' from a 32" TV and it is big enough.
I think you may be sitting a bit too close.
Re:Why would I want this on my PC? (Score:2)
Re:Why would I want this on my PC? (Score:2)
Man- people used to sit 8 to 10' from 25" screens.
32" were "big screens" back in the mid 90's and viewed from across the living room.
Clearly someone is defining "optimal" to some new standard. Several of the sites I see providing helpful calculators are *big screen tv sellers* which makes those calculators a little suspicious to me.
Seriously- think back-- living rooms are the same size. So either TV's used to be sitting in the middle of the room or else the "optimal" distance is getting shorter. For
Right Choice (Score:5, Interesting)
Hewlett-Packard, the number two player, has said it will support both standards. - Right Choice
Re:Right Choice (Score:4, Insightful)
If this foramt fracas were going to be resolved in the marketplace, the winner would be the player that got the most drives out there and in use. Don't try and even remotely recover costs on the first million units, but make darn sure you have a million units out there at 50-100 bucks a pop before the other camp ever knows what steamrollered them. Do what it takes, waive licemsing fees on the first million units and the first 50 million pieces of media, etc. For content, approach the studios about releasing 1 season per disc of old series.
But, if either camp tried that tactic, the other camp would just make darn sure that massively released format would wind up incompatible with some legeslated requirement that has not yet been written.
Re:Right Choice (Score:2)
In short it will come down to movies. It appears that the chicken and egg problem will be solved by the PS3, and thus it looks like this is one reason that blu
Re:Right Choice (Score:2)
Hewlett-Packard, the number two player, has said it will support both standards. - Right Choice Um, no. Having one consistent standard makes it safe to buy a drive without worrying that you've just bought a Betamax -- and it makes it safe for studios to actually release movies on them. Having two competing standards is just about the worst possible outcome, especially if some titles are available on one, and some on th
Well, here's a battle (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Well, here's a battle (Score:2)
We are getting some wierd moderating around here lately.
There is no way the above post was a "troll".
Re:Well, here's a battle (Score:2)
Umm... Maybe another 100 years, when the broadcast standard is rewritten again for a higher resolution. These formats deliver the maximum HDTVs can display, and that's unlikely to change for a long time.
The only possible forseeable event that might obsolete highdef video discs is cheap holographic displays, and I'm not holding my breath for that one.
Right!
Blu-Ray is hitting verticals (Score:4, Interesting)
But I thought (Score:3, Funny)
Sigh. (Score:2)
Re:Sigh. (Score:2)
Re:Sigh. (Score:2)
Re:Sigh. (Score:2)
I beg to differ (Score:2)
Re:Sigh. (Score:2)
Re:Sigh. (Score:2)
Heard that one before... (Score:3, Insightful)
Look, we heard that one before with CDs replacing cassettes/vinyl, and look what happened. Yes, it was (more) expensive initially, but there were small but noticeable benefits and, lets face it, we in the 1st World are consumer whores. Given the amount of time we spend watching TV as a society nowadays, I really won't be surprised when nearly everyone has a HD-TV in 3 years' time just for that improved resolution or whatever.
Accept that it's going to happen. The only question left is which way the chips will fall. I would rather see Blu-Ray win out simply because it has a far better spec than HD-DVD, but unfortunately I think the gap between X-Box360 and PS3 release will push markets towards the latter. C'est la vie.
Don't shoot the messenger.
Re:Heard that one before... (Score:5, Informative)
CDs had significant advantages over vinyl:
For a next-generation format to succeed, it has to offer something other than increased quality. Sometimes it doesn't even have to offer that; compare SACD/DVD-A to MP3, for example. Direct-download of H.264 video would have the same advantages as MP3, as well as (potentially) better quality than DVDs. If someone decided to offer 720p H.264 downloads, I can see this eclipsing both formats. If not, I expect to see the movie industry wondering why there is so much piracy of recompressed HD-DVD / Blu-Ray films.
Re:Heard that one before... (Score:2)
Re:Heard that one before... (Score:2)
No. Internet connections are currently fast enough to download MP3s without much hassle. Back when everyone was on dial-up, MP3 was a fringe thing.
Unfortunately, we're almost all on dial-up, relative to highdef video. Not to mention that the cost of hard drive space, or multiple DVD-Rs, surpasses the cost of a pressed HD-DVD/Blu-ray disc.
Re:Heard that one before... (Score:2)
At this encoding, it woul
Re:Heard that one before... (Score:2)
Because most of us watch more than just the current Hollywood blockbuster remake crapfest.
I wouldn't count on unlimited download subscriptions. The bandwidth costs are going to be far too high to support that, unlike music.
Re:Heard that one before... (Score:2)
It seems to me that solidarity is what's needed. (Score:5, Insightful)
Collectively (as a nerd community) we should all refuse to purchase or recommend the purchase of either of these technologies until the DRM is either perfected or removed.
Since "bits never die", the likelihood of the DRM being made even remotely correct is somewhere between 'slim' and 'none'. So that leaves . . .
Not purchasing DRM-infested (crippled) hardware. Not recommending to our non-technical friends that they install such infested (crippled) hardware. Actively opposing the PHB's of the world who will start clamoring for a business use of such infested (crippled) hardware.
Work together people - let's vote with our wallets, the way free enterprise is supposed to work!
Re:It seems to me that solidarity is what's needed (Score:2)
Re:It seems to me that solidarity is what's needed (Score:2)
Re:It seems to me that solidarity is what's needed (Score:2)
Re:It seems to me that solidarity is what's needed (Score:2)
Re:It seems to me that solidarity is what's needed (Score:2)
Since your UID is in the 800,000s, I presume you weren't here when DVDs were comming out, a couple years before DeCSS was created, and when people were posting comments very similar to yours about DVDs.
The "boycott" on DVDs was a long-running joke that would pop-up whenever anyone mentioned owning a DVD.
Point of note . . . (Score:2)
Whether destined to succeed or fail, I can only do as I think is right. I'll purchase an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray device when I can use it to perform all of the functions which I legally have a right to, not before. I reco
japanese computer companies... (Score:2)
time for me to take a break... (Score:2)
I had about 3 seconds of excitement thinking about playing Tux Racer on my Tux, customized holographic clothing a'la Automan [wikipedia.org], and the possibility of hacking into the evening gown of a beautiful but dangerous female Russian spy.
But then I remembered this [tronguy.net], and was glad I was wrong...
No Value Add (Score:3, Insightful)
Who needs it? (Score:3, Interesting)
Why choose a format? (Score:2, Interesting)
Shot Themselves in the Foot (Score:5, Insightful)
High Definition is a rich person (or not so rich, but with lots of disposable income,) toy. And most people aren't gonna be buying into that fad until its a lot cheaper. Throw in the heavy backlash from the tech-savvy crowd because of DRM, the lack of a single standard format, and the high cost of media compared to "traditional" DVD, and its gonna end poorly for these companies.
Very few people outside of video editing, etc, are going to take advantage of this technology for burning storage. And the PS3 may be linked with blu-ray, but that doesn't mean its going to drive sales of the media, outside of the games.
Re:Shot Themselves in the Foot (Score:3, Funny)
You can get a very large phillips projection screen TV for 1199 from circuit city when it goes on sale on the major holidays. After taxes-- 1299. After taxes and service plan 1699.
That's in the budget of anyone making 50k a year and up. If it is the main thing you want in life -- it's in the budget of people making a lot less-- probably down to about $35k.
Re:Shot Themselves in the Foot (Score:2, Informative)
most families have kids.. you know.. kiiiiiiiiddddsss. they suck up a lot of money you know, you have to plan for their college, for your own retirmenet, pay a mortgage.
within the budget? maybe in your dreams.
Re:Shot Themselves in the Foot (Score:2)
Even a person at $35k can typically afford a grand a year (under 3% of their income) for their particular hobby.
It may be going to movies, it may be going out dancing on the weekend.
I have a bud who makes half what I make and yet has a bigger TV, a newer house, and a really expensive telescope (over $3k). And he has a 2 year old. Clearly he'
Re:Shot Themselves in the Foot (Score:2)
What you are saying I don't understand is *exactly* the point I'm making.
They *can* afford to purchase a big TV *if* they want a big TV. However many will choose to afford other things (gun, motorcycle, telescope, trip to europe/vegas, lottery tickets, etc.)
And just above I repeatedly argue that 32" is plenty big from 10 to 12 feet away. Perhaps you meant to respond to one of the other posters? We seem to be making the same point.
One area where it isn't a ripoff... (Score:2)
Most of the time, for $300.00, that 30" SDTV is going to weigh a ton, because it will contain a glass picture tube. It will take two people to safely move it and set it up, each and every time you need to move it (unless you enjoy hernias for some stran
Re:One area where it isn't a ripoff... (Score:2)
What I don't underst
WTF (Score:2)
Re:Shot Themselves in the Foot (Score:2)
What I find highly amusing is that many slashdotters seem to disagree on this point. They talk about how they have HDTVs that cost them only $500, which is still twice the cost of a SD set with the same screen area. Meanwhile they ignore the fact that most people would rather have a bigger picture than a sharper one. Even I would rather have a big screen SD than a dinky little (by dinky, I mean anything less tha
Re:Shot Themselves in the Foot (Score:2)
You are a lucky SOB to get a projector for $5.00 - I know I have gotten my share of "deals", but most of them have been in the VR HMD arena, not data projectors - oh, well. I myself am in the "market" now for a new TV - my 12 year old 27" is giving up the ghost, so I am looking into options. Currently,
Re:Shot Themselves in the Foot (Score:2)
There, fixed it for ya!
Are these companies retarded?! (Score:5, Funny)
The ONLY reason someone would want to pirate an HD-DVD format is to reduce its quality to be viewable on current technology.
Re:Are these companies retarded?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Virtally all laptops now support at least 1280x1024 (which allows 720p, or 1280x720), and many now come with 1920x1200 (allowing 1080p at 1920x1080).
Now, will that look good on a 17" display? Across a room, from the TV stand to the couch - no. On your lap?
Really? (Score:2)
I won't argue with you that VGA->NTSC/PAL TV scan converters can be "crap" as far as output - I know I have seen my share to realize that (although AverMedia has put out some nice products in this area). I also won't argu
Notebook as portable HD DVD player for large HDTVs (Score:2)
Also, any notebook with an HD DVD or Blu Ray drive can serve as a portable player that can be connected to many HDTVs. There are a lot of HDTVs out there without set top HD DVD players. Toshiba's and Acer's new HD DVD-equiped notebooks have HDMI outputs, so I can see them being connected to many HDTVs before set top players become common.
I used to think the
Isn't this really... (Score:2, Interesting)
The only real winner is to support both formats...
My result: Two losers (Score:2)
Both are ridiculously crippled with DRM. Both are by a magnitude too expensive. Neither offers any value that a DVD doesn't. I don't watch movies on my computer. Software, even games, don't need more than a DVD or two can offer. Why bother going "either or" if the obvious choice is "neither"?
Words have meaning (Score:2)
That statement is not true. Both offer the ability to store full length movies at HD resolution.
That's "value" - "worth in usefulness or importance to the possessor; utility or merit." It may not be value you're willing to pay for (I'm not either), especially considering the huge negative value the DRM offers, but you can't say that there is no value offered over a DVD.
Re:My result: Two losers (Score:2)
I want to see the transition to HDTV be successful. We can't be stuck with NTSC from now until doomsday, that's just too depressing to contemplate. But if now isn't the time for HD, then when wi
Question Blu-Ray support in WIndows (Score:2)
At least Blu-Ray also has Apple as a backer, that can make Blu-Ray support a first-class citizen on the Mac. They already have iMovie HD so they are ready to include Blu-Ray burners when the cost is low enough.
That was not Sony, subcontrator of media divison (Score:2)
Ha Ha. Very funny, sadly not accurate as the rootkit was made by another company for Sony/BMG- the music division.
See, what you and others do not realize is that in a company the size of Sony, Sony/BMG and the Sony games division are basically two seperate companies. Hate Sony BMG all you like but Sony Games does not deserve t
Who *cares*? (Score:2)
I liked films on video tapes. Watching them on DVD makes no difference in visual pleasure to me.
Mind you, DVDs have a higher resolution (easier to make good screenshots), don't wear out (cool) and are much smaller. Thus I use them.
Now, along comes a new format. Can do higher resolution on films. Has no other advantages, except a *lot* of hardwired protections. Thus I don't care at all.
Data storage? What for? I have a simple software-RAID 5 on my Linux
Re:dell and ps3 = blu-ray win (Score:3, Informative)
Lot of good it did em.
Re:Minority Vote? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Minority Vote? (Score:2)
I know of a widely-available Red Hat box [geekswithblogs.net] you can buy that will play both DVDs and HD-DVDs.
Re:Minority Vote? (Score:2)
Re:Minority Vote? (Score:2)
My understanding is no for now (but maybe yes) (Score:2)
Re:Combo Drives? (Score:3, Interesting)
However, I do bet that in a couple of years, there will be combination Blu-Ray/HD-DVD drives unless one format really wins out. But I think that won't happen as there are too many companies on both sides that are getting royalties from discs and players to let "their format" die off
Re:Combo Drives? (Score:2)
That's both true and untrue. DIVX (not to be confused with DivX) was not a separate physical format from DVD. It was a [software] variation of the DVD format which could not be played in standard DVD players, but DVDs would play just fine in all DIVX players. The truth, though, is that DIVX was never really a competitor to [open] DVD, even for the short time (less than a year) it was being sold.
You can find
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Combo Drives? ... Actually, Yes! (Score:2, Informative)
Do the research before posting comments!
Google Search: http://www.google.com/search?q=hd-dvd+BlueRay+comb o+drive [google.com]
1st two hits:
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=7 0486 [nvnews.net]
Re:Why do you hate America? (Score:4, Interesting)
How about by using a libertarian privacy line of reasoning. That's about as non-communist as you can get.
On the other hand, what's so wrong with sounding like "some kind of communist"? It's only a dirty word in the USA - and only in certain circles of ignorance at that.
High Time for Hi-Def (Score:2)
It's true DVDs are a relatively new format, *but* the point you're missing is that they weren't a huge improvement over what came before: namely, LaserDisc. And LaserDisc was introduced in. . . 1978? 1979? Sometime around then. The audio and video quality of DVD is practically identical to that of LD. The DVD merely puts it into a smaller and longer-playing format. Which is nice, but. . . DVDs are still displaying NTSC video, and NTSC is old a
Re:High Time for Hi-Def (Score:2)
Re:DVDs are dead (Score:2)