comment #1

Me says ...

Don't care. I refuse to support another format just to give the studios more fucking money.

comment #2

JD says ...

These announcements simultaneously solve and complicate the problem. For one, many films are released on both HD DVD and Blu-Ray. If a dual format player is released, how are consumers supposed to decide which disc is preferable? Also, will the dual format players play Total HD? I'm assuming they will, but this doesn't even matter if the two formats are already playable on one player. I guess people who already own an HD DVD or Blu-Ray player might be interested in Total HD, but Warner already releases most of their titles in both formats anyway.

comment #3

JD says ...

Me, there's no reason not to support these formats once a solution is reached. Since your old DVDs are compatible, there's no need to re-buy anything (unless you want to pay for an upgrade of a particular title, which is obviously optional). In any case, DVDs are kind of a joke in comparison and if you keep buying them, you'll ultimately wish you had made the transition sooner.

comment #4

Mark B says ...

Great....just two weeks after I cave in and buy my first HD DVD player. Oh well, it will be interesting to see how the whole things plays out. BTW, I know you've been avoiding the whole high-def DVD thing because of the format war. However, you're definitely missing out. The picture quality on these discs is absolutely stunning. I just watched UNFORGIVEN a few days ago on HD DVD. Wow!

comment #5

lesterg says ...

Great news. If there's some way to get these combo-players below the 500 dollar mark in a year or two, high-definition dvd may have a chance of breaking out of the niche market.

comment #6

Mark B says ...

I agree. Although breaking free of the "niche market" is a double-edged sword, it will mean (a)that the format will survive, (b)that software prices will drop and, most importantly, (c)that many more titles will get the high-def treatment.

comment #7

lesterg says ...

Absolutely. The funny thing is that even with the combo player on the horizon, I still don't feel the need to purchase a player if I'm going to be out a grand or more. I've been getting by just fine with multiple HD movie channels and standard-def DVD's (despite the obvious limitations).

I guess we'll see what happens with these latest developments, though.

comment #8

Cory says ...

A couple of online forums have found out that the combo player is going to retail at around 1200 dollars. Not the greatest price in a world, and yet there are two Blu-Ray players on the market that go for 1200 and 1400 dollars and neither on of thoes have HDMI 1.3 like this combo player will have and it plays both formats.

Also, it looks like Microsoft could, could be releasing a new version of the Xbox 360 that has an HDMI port along with a bigger hard drive, 120GB, and the possibility of an internal HD-DVD drive...all for about the same cost as it cost to get 360s now.

CES will be interesting this year.

comment #9

Edward says ...

So I guess I'll buy the Xbox with the HD-DVD drive, even though I could care less if I play video games ... hmmmm.

comment #10

Jay T. says ...

This battle was over with the names. It's very simple. Your average Joe has no idea what blue-ray is, but he's heard of DVDs before, and he's heard of HD before, so the concept of HD-DVD is fairly simple to grasp. Done and done.

comment #11

Eric says ...

Ditto. After all, at that price, the gaming function is just a bonus. Might come in handy for parties.

But will it have HDMI 1.3. That's what I'm holding off for.

I was thinking about getting the new Toshiba HD-DVD player with HDMI 1.3, but now I'm going to have to consider waiting for the LG device. After all, it will probably street closer to $1,000 anyway.

comment #12

JD says ...

Toshiba's HD-A2 HD DVD player is a good, affordable short term solution. It's only been on the market for a few weeks, but the reviews have been excellent and the price has already dipped below $400 at amazon.com (although it's now back up to $409).

comment #13

Cory says ...

I would think the v2 of the 360 would have HDMI 1.3 to counter what the Playstation 3 is. It would quite stupid, I feel, to have an inferior version of HDMI when your competition has the latest version.

It wouldn't surprise me if Microsoft offered three different versions of the v2 of the 360:

-HDMI with 20GB hard drive.
-HDMI with 120GB hard drive.
-HDMI with 120GB hard drive and internal HD-DVD player.

They're going to want to keep the cost lower than than the Playstation 3, hence why I think you won't see a version of it with the internal HD-DVD drive.

Besides, I prefer the HD-DVD drive separate from the console. I've been having great fun with this 200 dollar HD-DVD player.

Now, all someone has to do is release a Blu-Ray player that's not a console that's 400 dollars or less, with HDMI 1.3 and upconverts DVDs. I'd be okay then.

comment #14

Rich S. says ...

When DVD first came out, I shelled out almost $300 for a DVD drive for my computer and an MPEG decoder card so I could hook in my television. The next fall, I was able to buy a stand-alone DVD player for $300.

This past holiday season, I saw a stack of DVD players at a local Albertson's grocery store for $39. They were set up as "stocking stuffers" i.e. impulse buys. My days of early adoption are over.

comment #15

MathewM says ...

HD is totally worth it if you own a front projection display. Only problem is that you are quickly spoiled by how good it looks and don't want to go back to standard DVD.

comment #16

JD says ...

But Rich S, DVD came out a decade ago and it's slipping into irrelevancy. Of course the price has plummeted (plus, $40 DVD players are a pain-in-the-ass; I once had one and playback routinely went out-of-synch). Surely, the extra $260 has been worth a decade's worth of DVD playing, hasn't it? You may pay a few hundred extra bucks for HD DVD today vs. 3 years from now, but you'll also get 3 extra years of HD DVD viewing. Sounds like a fair trade-off to me.

comment #17

ROTC says ...

I've maintained for a long time, as have many tech reviewers (e.g., David Pogue in The New York Times), that this whole format battle has been a snake-oil war resting on a fairly bogus foundation. If you buy a good-quality standard DVD player (not the $40 kind) that provides 1080i upcoversion through an HDMI connection, you will likely be pretty astonished at the enhanced, more pristine picture a standard DVD disc displays on a large high-definition TV set; the difference in picture quality between the standard disc from such a player versus one from one of the new HD-formatted discs will be negligible at best to the average viewer. Since you can currently buy that kind of standard-disc player for about $125, and since HD discs presently offer almost no extra content to distinguish them from standard DVDs, it makes virtually no sense at this point to invest at least three times as much for a player in either new format. (Which is why I believe that, between the two formats, Blu-Ray now has the edge. By bundling it in, not as an optional add-on, to Playstation 3s – currently at an enormous loss per machine to Sony – Sony will eventually grow Blu-Ray into the default HD format in millions of Playstation 3 households.)

Another issue, at least for DVD collectors (as opposed to renters), is the source materials. Anyone who has been buying DVDs for a while knows that too many older DVDs don't compare to more recent releases/reissues because the studios typically didn't bother to master them properly. Even some of the highly acclaimed and collectible ones from The Criterion Collection are comparatively unwatchable now on a widescreen TV because they weren't released in anamorphic or enhanced formats (which has resulted in Criterion beginning to reissue and remaster many of its most prized, previously restored titles – still in standard DVD format). A lot of people got burnt by investing early in their DVD collections, and therefore might be unlikely to repeat that mistake with the premiere generation of these highly speculative new formats.

Complicating the outlook even further: Large libraries of HD video-on-demand appear to be much, much closer on the horizon than anyone had ever anticipated.

comment #18

Rich S. says ...

JD,

I guess I would agree if the content were that much different. I was an "early adopter" of HD and had a set pretty much as soon as HD was available from the cable company. HD makes all the difference for things like sporting events, I agree. But I've never seen that much difference in HD movies. I know, I've been told that HD-DVD is far superior in quality to even the best Universal HD/HDNET/HBO HD presentation. But it's not like DVD really looks bad, especially since I've got an upconverting DVD player.

I don't know how old you are, but I've been through VHS, LD (because at the time VHS was almost exclusively pan-and-scan) and DVD. Each time, I've purchased an extensive movie library, usually re-purchasing the same movies over-and-over. This stupid format war finally gave me an "out," and I'm going to use it. When they've sorted things out and the players drop below $100, I'll consider it. Until then, current DVD will do just fine. (And I'm pretty sure HD on demand will come down the pike before then.)

So, yes, manufacturers. I am a perfect example of the damage your little spat has caused.

comment #19

Rich S. says ...

I also want to thank ROTC for making a lot of other points I forgot to include. The whole "double dip" situation is yet another reason not to early adopt.

comment #20

JD says ...

Many of these concerns are valid and some have also prevented me from taking the plunge, but I don't entirely agree with arguments comparing this to the conversion from VHS to laserdiscs or laserdisc to DVD, etc. Since DVDs can be played on HD DVD and Blu-Ray players, your entire DVD library remains viable. Also, any fears about double dipping are equally relevant today with DVD. Who would waste their money on the new Miami Vice DVD if a superior transfer is available on HD DVD? Sure, you could buy the DVD and simply choose to ignore HD, but once it becomes the mainstream format -- eventually, all DVD players will also play HD DVD and/or Blu-Ray, I suspect -- you'll be confronted with the same double dip dilemma. Of course, nobody says you have to upgrade your old discs. Better transfers will always be on the horizon. But, at the very least, if you're buying a disc for the first time, you should be getting the best quality available... and standard DVD just doesn't offer that anymore.

comment #21

lawnorder says ...

Since I want to take advantage of the HD format, I've purchased both a Sony Blue Ray and a Toshiba HD DVD player. My reasoning is this: I typically upgrade DVD players and other equipment every 2 to 3 years. The great thing about early adopting the HD format is that you can rent HD and Blue Ray discs (at no extra cost) through Netflix. Why settle for a lesser format when the new technology is out there? My total investment was about 1,500, of which, since I'm in the business, I'll probably get a tax write-off for half that amount. But take it from me, you can very clearly see the difference in quality, especially if you're using a video projection system. Once you get a taste for HD, you won't want to settle for standard def again. As for actually purchasing discs, I think I'll wait until the dust settles and see which one is the superior format. I'm leaning toward Blu Ray for now. I think Sony has learned the lessons of Betamax and they're not going to accept defeat this time around. The Blu Ray Sony player does great standard def upscaling, which I can't say for the Hitachi A2.

comment #22

Doug Pratt says ...

guys, it's sound, not picture, that merits the upgrade. The sound on DVDs has always been badly compromised. As for Warner's announcement, I assume all they're doing is pasting a bluray format on one side of the platter and an HD format on the other side and calling it new, or am I miss reading it?

comment #23

ROTC says ...

lawnorder: "Why settle for a lesser format when the new technology is out there?" Because at current prices the new technology is a waste of money, and the older format is not discernably lesser. As I recall was noted in David Pogue's assessment of both new formats, you won't really start to perceive the difference in quality on anything less than a 60-inch screen. And while it's true that you can rent HD-DVD and Blu-Ray discs at no extra cost through Netflix, you currently would have to buy a player for each format if the standard DVD experience has become intolerable for you because a lot of titles are not being released in both formats. Yes, LG is supposedly coming out with a player that will play both formats ... for $1,200. Meanwhile, Samsung announced it has tentatively cancelled plans for a dual-format player, no one else has ever indicated any plans for a dual-format-player, and electronics super-giant Sony will never make such an announcement unless/until the format war is lost to HD-DVD.

Doug Pratt: Your point about the sound quality is not without merit, but I don't believe it has much to do with any clear-cut technological advancements in either of the new formats. Again, it goes to the source materials. If you watch a DTS-encoded standard DVD through a reasonably priced receiver with optical interconnects, I think the sound will blow most people away.

comment #24

Craig Kennedy says ...

I woke up this morning and said to myself "Man, life is great, but it would be ever so much better if my DVDs looked and sounded just a little bit better."

Yeah, ok that never happened.

I'm all for the improvements and I'll upgrade eventually when it's time to buy a new player, but I'm not falling for the studio trick of having me rebuy all the DVDs I already own any time soon.

comment #25

christian says ...

fuck the studios up their greedy fucking asses.

i still have vhs tapes that i watch when given the mood and circumstance, i.e., not available on dvd. and i have dvd's. and lasers. and even super 8.

i'll wait.

comment #26

Cory says ...

cj,

None is saying you have to rebuy all of your DVDs over again. That's your choice. Like alot of people have been saying, DVDs still look great. They're just not HD.

I have HD-DVD and as much as it is tempting to rebuy everything I have, especially once I get Blu-Ray, some titles just don't scream to be replaced with their HD counterpart. And that's how I look at it.

DVDs aren't going anywhere. The studios are too dependent on DVDs sales for them to go anywhere right now. Hell, I still buy them because now I have a choice when I walk into a store on whether a film is HD worth or not.

comment #27

Craig Kennedy says ...

Cory,

If I had gobs of cash (which would probably mean having a different job where I couldn't sit on my can posting on Hollywood Elsehwere all day) I'd be up to my ass in the latest greatest audio/video technology available. I'm not knocking the technology. I'm all for it. I've been avoiding it, but if I ever sit down and actually watch one of the HiDef DVD formats I'm probably screwed. I already know how good HDTV can look.

comment #28

Dan Revill says ...

I'll buy an HD-DVD player when my current DVD player craps out. Not before then. Unless I get an XBOX 360 in the foreseeable future, which probably won't happen.
I won't double dip on any titles that I currently own, unless it's a film that was an older generation DVD or something I really love. (Like maybe (and I stress maybe) the Original Star Wars Trilogy - but only if Lucas includes the unspecial editions.)

comment #29

Cory says ...

cj,

That's what got me. I actually sat down and do a comparison between HD and DVD of Batman Begins at a friend's house and that was pretty much all she wrote.

Since then, I've been saving up what little cash I had and I immediately jumped on the Xbox 360 with add-on HD drive. And now, I'm back at it again with saving up for a Blu-Ray player but that'll take a while because there isn't an afforable one at the moment.

But next weeks CES could change that and I praying it does. 2007 Blu-Ray titles are looking rather good.

comment #30

lawnorder says ...

ROTC,

HD DVD is WAY superior and discernible to my eye, even on a less than 60 inch screen. If you want to keep deluding yourself that standard def is comparable, just go right ahead. Life is short and I want to experience the best it has to offer. For home viewing right now, that is HD DVD and Blu Ray. If one just bit the bullet and invested in HD DVD for now (and not Blu Ray), you can pick up a decent player for 400 bucks. That's not bad - and if you pay the damn thing off over a couple of months, the financial hit is minimal. The upside is, you get to watch all the standard DVDs you like and get to Netflix all the HD titles that are available - assuming, like me, you're not ready to invest completely in the format by replacing your favorite titles. And don't mistake the visibly compressed HD satellite signal for being the same as HD DVD. The quality is far superior and quite breathtaking when viewed on a quality screen or projector. Standard def looks fuzzy to my eyes these days.

comment #31

ROTC says ...

lawnorder - My sincere congratulations (and envy) on having such a discerning eye. Unfortunately for this debate, the general public does not. Consumer electronic stores all reported that while HD TV sets were flying off the shelves this holiday season, both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray player sales were pretty dismal despite high-profile displays in the showrooms. I'm not saying that one of those formats won't eventually (albeit briefly) take hold. But until the format-wars dust settles and prices come down a lot, this will remain a niche item and the technology's significance in the video marketplace will likely remain pretty trivial.

And it, much like the music CD business before it, will soon be driven into further irrelevance by HD video-on-demand and downloads.

comment #32

MovieBob says ...

That vauge sound of hundreds of aged, gruff voices swearing in Japanese all at once you can hear right now is the board of directors' meeting at Sony, as the Playstation3 loses yet ANOTHER rationale for it's existance :)

comment #33

Mark B says ...

"As I recall was noted in David Pogue's assessment of both new formats, you won't really start to perceive the difference in quality on anything less than a 60-inch screen..."

I'm sorry, that is simply not true. I have a 42-inch screen and I can attest that the difference is extremely significant. Now, how IMPORTANT that is to the consumer is another matter. For me, it was important enough to fork out some dough for HD DVD. For someone else, it may not be a vital issue at all.

comment #34

ROTC says ...

MovieBob - "I have a 42-inch screen and I can attest that the difference is extremely significant." Maybe so, but how good was your old standard DVD player? Was it connected to your set by three component video cables, or an hdmi cable, or just a basic single RCA video line?

Last year, after testing (and returning) several models, I purchased a Sony player with 1080i upconversion at Costco for $130. The difference between that player's picture quality and my older Sony model was night and day. And I've also compared my new player to the high-def players (both formats), and found, like Pogue, that the difference is pretty negligible.

BTW, I don't mean anything I've said to be a ringing endorsement of all standard DVD players with 1080i upconversion. I tested some such players from Toshiba and Samsung, and the picture quality was actually pretty poor. To be honest, the only 1080i-upconversion players that have impressed me have been the Sony ones.

comment #35

ROTC says ...

Soory, my last post should have been addressed to Mark B, not MovieBob.

comment #36

ROTC says ...

Oops again! "Sorry", not "Soory".