If no clear HD winner, Sony would let Blu-Ray co-exist with HD-DVD? (1 Viewer)

[ChristopherDAC]

I dunno, as far as I can tell the "copy-protection" /remote control/ is about the same — you've noticed that "Last Memory" has to be specifically allowed on HD DVD, and since Blu-Ray uses the same stuff [AACS, whatever] it's probably just as bad but no worse. I still have my doubts about the alleged cost advantages, particularly on a cents-per-megabyte basis after a year or so of production. In any case, it's the content that I want. I'd be happy enough to have MUSE LaserDisc back! I'd just rather have the medium which provides the most space, the most bandwidth, the most whatever, since I expect that will eventually have an effect on the content. It's bound to make some difference in terms of quality and runtime, and it's almost sure to make a difference to the publishers. If they think it [whatever "it" is] will succeed in the marketplace, they'll publish on it ; if they don't they won't. Self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Ryan-G]

Actually, I got my information from copies of the report such as the one found here...

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/tic...428&ID=5674055

Which is for the quarter ending March 31 this year, showing a 66.5 billion yen loss, 581 million USD. So I'm not entirely sure where this conflict of information comes from. Perhaps you could link me to where yours is from?

Other reports on the same news item show that Sony posted a 400something million USD loss for Q1 2005 IIRC as well.

 

[Paul_Scott]

I have 0 problems getting up and switching discs when film has a clear intermission point- in fact a 'breather' is as much a part of the theatrical experience as its OAR.

In the case of LOTR, I have no problems with the way the EE sets are laid out now- Has anyone complained previously that the movie and extras are both spread over two discs? In fact, all I remember seeing were sighs of thanks that the film was spread out to give the A/V room to breathe.
I realize Bd's big claim to fame is that it can squeeze all this stuff onto one side of one disc- but in a list of personal priorities this ability would rank well fairly low for me.

 

[Rachael B]

I know this must be facitious remark but I don't want Muse back! Hmnn, $2000 - $8000 players! I am almost curious what a Muse LD from a proper HD master would look like though? The best looking Muse LD I have is Fishface (Okinawa Underwater). None of my movies look as good. I know, you know alot about Muse LD's. How many interlaced lines do they have? I've heard so many different figurs. I'm confused about that.

I've sold some of mine, but I stille have a few Muse movies I watch. Stargate is my fav.

 

[ChristopherDAC]

Given a choice between MUSE LD and no high definition discs, I'd take the HiVision LaserDiscs. If the powers-that-be were actually serious this time about introducing a HD disc format, presumably the players would be cheaper and the discs cheaper and more plentiful.

MUSE resolution is 1032 lines with about 1280 pixels horizontally [720 per picture height]. It's not the greatest [nor the worst : that's W-VHS with less than 500 pph], but with proper mastering I'd expect it to do quite well. If nothing else, it attempts to implement the "constant-luminance" principle, which improves the appearance of the picture, and I believe the decoder could be altered to provide a progressive-scan signal with relatively little work.

On balance, I'm sure the small-size formats are better, but if one is going to use one of them I'd just as soon have the one which eliminates the disc change in the middle of Lawrence of Arabia.

 

[Edwin-S]

That was then and this is now. Soon there is going to be a format with the capacity to hold the entire movie plus the extras. Why would I put up with having to switch discs in the middle of the movie when there is going to be a format available that is capable of eliminating that annoyance? Furthermore, The LOTR trilogy had no intermissions in any of the films, so there is no clear intermission point to interrupt the film: LOA, yes....LOTR, No. A "breather" is only part of the movie experience when the movie being experienced had a break in it to begin with.

I put up with the break in LOTR on DVD because the medium was incapable of storing a high quality image on one disc. Soon I won't have to. Unless we get saddled with a format that creates a "wonderful movie experience" where one never existed.

 

[Lew Crippen]

I’m looking at fiscal year earnings and profits, while the report you cite is for the last quarter. It is perfectly possible for any business to have a bad quarter and still make money for the year.

The report in your link accurately points out that year profits for Sony are disappointing, something perhaps more disturbing to the corporation than a quarter with a net loss. Regardless, low profits and quarters with net losses do not equate to going bankrupt, even if they are rightly serious concerns to the company.

I found the overall numbers in the WSJ, but the only details I could find online is on Sony’s own page: http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/fina...ght/index.html

The link you provided seems to focus on a number of problems that Sony is encountering, ranging from restructuring to problems with their music business (including some references to the Playstations). I could not find there, nor anywhere I checked that the majority of their business was video games or that, that division was primarily responsible for disappointing earnings.

 

[Rachael B]

Thanks! Well, if I had to backtrack formats, I'd choose D-VHS. Fishface is my only Muse LD that's at all competative with D-Theater tapes. Besides, I can make 1080i tapes.

 

[ChristopherDAC]

Cue background screaming :

Nooo! Not a tape format!!!111ONEONEONE

:evil cackle:

 

[Rachael B]

Yeah, I know what you mean Christopher! It was really weird for me to get back into tape. I had this quessey feeling about it at first. I'm glad I got D-VHS though. I'd rather make tapes than burn DVD's. Even my 480i tapes look better than DVD's. I'm also convinced my tapes will last longer than burned media. The decks...well, that's another matter. That's worriesome.

 

[Joseph Bolus]

While I don't really care which format wins this war, (I wish there wasn't a war!) I feel compelled to point out here that Toshiba and Sony both demonstrated their next-gen HD optical disc formats to the "DVD Forum" back in 2003 and 2004. This committee was tasked by the major studios and hardware manufactures to choose the "official" HD successor to DVD. They chose the Toshiba HD proposal over Sony's. That's the reason Toshiba is allowed to use the HD-DVD moniker. In effect, Toshiba has already gone head-to-head against Sony once, and won. The fact that Sony didn't capitulate to the decision of the "DVD Forum" (which they were a member of) is the reason we now have a format war.

 

[Juan C]

Wrongo. Blu-ray was never submitted to the DVD Forum and was therefore never even considered.

 

[Craig W]

Does anyone remember Sony tried to cause the DVD Forum not to approve any new standard since so many members had to vote in favor to approve? So Sony and the other Blu-Ray companies abstained from voting.

The DVD Forum then changed the rules for the number of votes required for approval.

 

[Joseph Bolus]

I just re-read some of the history of the DVD Forum's decision to go with the Toshiba HD optical system. While it may not have been formally submitted, Blu-ray was considered as a "proposal".

Here's a November 2003 article from TechWeb which states that:

http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20031126S0005

 

[RobertR]

There are negatives to the format war, but the big positive that makes me favor it is that it helps keep these people honest. They have to kowtow to the consumer and keep doing so, else they will lose out to the rival format. I do NOT trust them to give us what we want otherwise.

 

[Juan C]

Happy now?

 

[Joseph Bolus]

Well, I guess I was mis-informed on this. I do remember reading, though, that HD-DVD was endorsed by the committee on an 8-7 vote; so I assumed the other 7 votes went to Blu-ray ...

 

[Joseph Bolus]

Juan:

There's still something that I'm not clear on: Wasn't Sony an official member of the "DVD Forum"? If so, why didn't they submit Blu-ray to the committee for review?

It just seems silly to me that the studios and hardware manufacturers would task the committee to endorse a next generation format, and then not provide it with all the relevant information that it requires in order to make a proper decision.

 

[Aaron_Brez]

While it's impossible to speculate on exactly what motivates various members of the DVD Forum, the list is made up of more than hardware manufacturers-- some of whom, despite this, have patent money in DVD (and by extension, HD DVD) technologies, and some of whom are of the opinion, "Cheap extension to old tech? Fine! Then we'll sell it again in two years with an upgrade!" Those are the ones who would be sure to vote for the Toshiba solution and against the Sony/Matsushita one.

On the other hand, the companies with a financial stake in the new Blu-ray format, and who genuinely felt it was superior to the Toshiba proposal, would be sure to vote for the technologically much-riskier Blu-ray disk.

I suspect it was a pure numbers game, and the Blu-ray folks felt 1) it would be either too close to call or a loss and 2) the value of being endorsed by the DVD Forum was more trouble than it was worth. What exactly would it have bought them, in retrospect? Absolute best case it could have squashed Toshiba's offering-- but even then, Toshiba has proved it's willing to go it alone on this, so what would have changed?

 

[ChristopherDAC]

Most of the members of the "Blu-ray Disc Founders" are also members of the "DVD Forum".

Toshiba's "Advanced Optical Disc" represented very little change from the existing DVD structure : pit length and track spaceing are different, and newer video and audio codecs are implemented, but there is very little change from standard DVD in terms of either physical parameters or data encoding. I get the impression that this is the only type of proposal the DVD Forum was willing to entertain, as opposed to the radically different physical and data structure of Blu-Ray, which presumably would not even have been accepted for consideration as a proposal, being regarded as something entirely new..