Support for Blu-ray seems to be growing, but I must admit I have not given much attention to these two rival technologies yet.
If you were to take the plunge, if you haven't already, what would you go for?
Blu-ray vs HD DVD
-
Nick Harvey
- God
- Posts: 4162
- Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 22.26
- Location: Deepest Wiltshire
- Contact:
A bit like Betamax, D-MAC, et al?nodnirG kraM wrote:I feel it is the more robust format.
I'll add to the posts ignoring the original topic.
DAB is an outdated technology that has finally been "outed" as such by non-technical media management. They haven't all got the message yet, but they will soon enough. Those of us who aren't blinded by marketing nonsense and visions of the emperor's new clothes have known this for a while. It will now die, but very slowly.
Blu-ray vs HD DVD is the biggest example of corporate DRM yet, and unfortunately it appears they are managing to get Blu-ray on top.
DAB is an outdated technology that has finally been "outed" as such by non-technical media management. They haven't all got the message yet, but they will soon enough. Those of us who aren't blinded by marketing nonsense and visions of the emperor's new clothes have known this for a while. It will now die, but very slowly.
Blu-ray vs HD DVD is the biggest example of corporate DRM yet, and unfortunately it appears they are managing to get Blu-ray on top.
And now the retailer's view...
Based on a year or so now of having both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD equipment running in my store and having watched a wide range of titles, I reckon that HD-DVD has a slight edge in sound quality, whilst Blu-Ray usually gives the better picture. However, as the ears are much more forgiving than the eyes (which is why the usual complaints on digital TV are about picture rather than sound quality - even though both are horrendously overcompressed), Blu-Ray appears to have won the 'quality' camp.
On the equipment side, all top-tier brands except Toshiba have a range of Blu-Ray players (and some with Hybrid players). Whilst on the other hand, Toshiba stands alone as the only top-tier brand selling an HD-DVD only player. This apparant desertion of the format has lead to Toshiba being about to make a public statement on the future of HD-DVD, and on the titles front Paramount is the only top-tier studio producing exclusively HD-DVD.
ATM, it all looks pretty set like Blu-Ray will be the way to go, but in other format wars it's usually come down to pricing rather than quality.
* In Betamax vs VHS, Betamax was technically far superior to VHS. Yet VHS is still (just about) holding on in 2008, whilst Betamax more or less died a death 20 years ago - because VHS was ultimately cheaper.
* In BSB vs Sky, BSB's DMAC system was far superior in technical quality to the old PAL with FM sound system which Sky used. In content terms, BSB also arguably provided a better quality of output, with Sky News being the only real feather in Sky's cap against BSB. Yet BSB collapsed less than a year after launch and the platform on which it was based was scrapped in the UK in 1992 (with the 'merger' of BSB and Sky being a takeover in all but name) whilst Sky's inferior technical standards on the analogue service survived into late 2001 and Sky themselves are still going strong today - all because in the early days Sky's offering was cheaper.
And this might be HD-DVD's saving grace. The players and the titles are being very aggressively priced (along with ridiculous numbers of bundled titles often coming with the players just to get a person's library started). If they can hold it together long enough to convince more studios to come on board, they could still have the last laugh yet.
Based on a year or so now of having both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD equipment running in my store and having watched a wide range of titles, I reckon that HD-DVD has a slight edge in sound quality, whilst Blu-Ray usually gives the better picture. However, as the ears are much more forgiving than the eyes (which is why the usual complaints on digital TV are about picture rather than sound quality - even though both are horrendously overcompressed), Blu-Ray appears to have won the 'quality' camp.
On the equipment side, all top-tier brands except Toshiba have a range of Blu-Ray players (and some with Hybrid players). Whilst on the other hand, Toshiba stands alone as the only top-tier brand selling an HD-DVD only player. This apparant desertion of the format has lead to Toshiba being about to make a public statement on the future of HD-DVD, and on the titles front Paramount is the only top-tier studio producing exclusively HD-DVD.
ATM, it all looks pretty set like Blu-Ray will be the way to go, but in other format wars it's usually come down to pricing rather than quality.
* In Betamax vs VHS, Betamax was technically far superior to VHS. Yet VHS is still (just about) holding on in 2008, whilst Betamax more or less died a death 20 years ago - because VHS was ultimately cheaper.
* In BSB vs Sky, BSB's DMAC system was far superior in technical quality to the old PAL with FM sound system which Sky used. In content terms, BSB also arguably provided a better quality of output, with Sky News being the only real feather in Sky's cap against BSB. Yet BSB collapsed less than a year after launch and the platform on which it was based was scrapped in the UK in 1992 (with the 'merger' of BSB and Sky being a takeover in all but name) whilst Sky's inferior technical standards on the analogue service survived into late 2001 and Sky themselves are still going strong today - all because in the early days Sky's offering was cheaper.
And this might be HD-DVD's saving grace. The players and the titles are being very aggressively priced (along with ridiculous numbers of bundled titles often coming with the players just to get a person's library started). If they can hold it together long enough to convince more studios to come on board, they could still have the last laugh yet.
Technically one may win one way or another, but what about Johnny and Jane Normal browsing in HMV?
The main problem I have with HD-DVD, as opposed to Blu-Ray, from a marketing point of view, is the whole package.
First of all, HD-DVD isn't the easiest thing to say, and doesn't roll off the tongue like CD or DVD... whereas Blu-Ray both sounds futuristic and cutting edge, as well as being aesthetically pleasing. It also appears to be more of a revolution than evolution, which is what consumers are after.
Add to this the bright blue packaging for Blu-Ray as opposed to HD-DVD's dull maroon, Blu-Ray's unique logo as opposed to the cobbled-together HD-DVD logo, and you have a much more vibrant product.
The main problem I have with HD-DVD, as opposed to Blu-Ray, from a marketing point of view, is the whole package.
First of all, HD-DVD isn't the easiest thing to say, and doesn't roll off the tongue like CD or DVD... whereas Blu-Ray both sounds futuristic and cutting edge, as well as being aesthetically pleasing. It also appears to be more of a revolution than evolution, which is what consumers are after.
Add to this the bright blue packaging for Blu-Ray as opposed to HD-DVD's dull maroon, Blu-Ray's unique logo as opposed to the cobbled-together HD-DVD logo, and you have a much more vibrant product.
Personally, if this was to be based on the end-user aesthetic, I would have expected HD-DVD to win out, but I am seemingly being proven wrong.Alexia wrote:Technically one may win one way or another, but what about Johnny and Jane Normal browsing in HMV?
The main problem I have with HD-DVD, as opposed to Blu-Ray, from a marketing point of view, is the whole package.
First of all, HD-DVD isn't the easiest thing to say, and doesn't roll off the tongue like CD or DVD... whereas Blu-Ray both sounds futuristic and cutting edge, as well as being aesthetically pleasing. It also appears to be more of a revolution than evolution, which is what consumers are after.
Add to this the bright blue packaging for Blu-Ray as opposed to HD-DVD's dull maroon, Blu-Ray's unique logo as opposed to the cobbled-together HD-DVD logo, and you have a much more vibrant product.
I'm not sure people do want a mammoth revolution - this isn't the same fight that happened with the move from VHS to DVD, which was basically "wow, video is shit - anyone who still watches videos with their terrible picture and awful sound is a dick" - this is a softer move onto what seems more like an improvement on an existing standard. And that's why I would've thought HD-DVD would succeed - it's not new and scary - it's still DVD, which we're familiar with and rather like, but it's *HD* and that's new and shiny enough to warrant investment.
But, I'm naive and a twat. Semi-transparent blue boxes and Sony's marketing machine (for once) are the real champions of this format war.
As I'm not yet using either (on the basis I can't afford the player and I don't have a HD TV personally) I'm in the position of waiting and seeing what'll win.
I guess the thing is with this move, is that you need two lots of new equipment, as opposed to 1 back in the DVD move days. DVDs just needed a player, and as long as your TV had a compatible input, that was that. To appreciate HDDVD/Blu-Ray, you need a HDMI-compatible HD TV, HD-DVD/Blu-ray player, and possibly a decent audio system to boot.
This revolution (i maintain it's a new step, a third generation as opposed to 2nd generation.5) will only be complete when everyone's used to HD, which has only been around for what, 3 years now, if that?
I guess the thing is with this move, is that you need two lots of new equipment, as opposed to 1 back in the DVD move days. DVDs just needed a player, and as long as your TV had a compatible input, that was that. To appreciate HDDVD/Blu-Ray, you need a HDMI-compatible HD TV, HD-DVD/Blu-ray player, and possibly a decent audio system to boot.
This revolution (i maintain it's a new step, a third generation as opposed to 2nd generation.5) will only be complete when everyone's used to HD, which has only been around for what, 3 years now, if that?
-
Gavin Scott
- Admin
- Posts: 6442
- Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.16
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
I never saw DVD as a replacement for a VHS video recorder as for most of its retail life you couldn't record with DVD.
Nearly all my hundreds of videotapes started their life blank. I rented and bought some movies, but mostly it was a device for timeshifting and archiving favourite programmes.
I will buy blu-ray when I can economically record on it and have a display that can show off the results!
Nearly all my hundreds of videotapes started their life blank. I rented and bought some movies, but mostly it was a device for timeshifting and archiving favourite programmes.
I will buy blu-ray when I can economically record on it and have a display that can show off the results!