post #1051 of 1635
1/12/08 at 7:58am
Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
|
Originally Posted by Edwin-S
Yes, at the present time I think that it is the most capable machine out there. It is a good stop gap machine until the BDA gets off its blu ass and puts out fully featured standalones. The PS3 isn't going to be the last player I own. I want to get a more traditional standalone, but for a comparable price, at this time, nothing else measures up. Once they do the PS3 will go back to being primarily a game machine in my rack. Anyway, I didn't intend this to become a PS3 yea or nay thread. This is supposed to be about Warner's Big Blu decision, so I think we need to get back on track.
Agreed? |
|
Originally Posted by Mark Booth
The report that Warner was originally hoping to go HD DVD exclusive as long as one other studio went red too... a story that I got an early inside scoop on and Ron subsequently verified here... has been published as fact in a major newspaper this morning:
Sound Advice: Blu-ray wins in format war, but at what cost? $620 million between Fox and Warner compliments of the BDA! So much for the consumer choosing! Mark |
| Warner gave Toshiba an opportunity to lure a Blu-ray studio to HD DVD |
|
Originally Posted by ReggieW
How are you drawing this conclusion when HDM still only accounts for less than 5% of the market? For the most part, consumers have given both formats a vote of no confidence. If hdm is to ever break into the mainstream, I assure you that people won't be rushing out to buy $400-$500 game systems to play them on, it will probably be a sub $100 stand-alone or some other inexpensive delivery method/device. The PS3 has been successful enough to give BD an edge over HD-DVD because a majority of consumers have stayed away from both formats, nothing more (It has also kept the PS3 behind the X-Box 360 and Wii). I agree there will certainly be other methods to deliver movie software, but to become mainstream it will have to be signifcantly cheaper than the PS3. The way the economy is going, I really don't think we'll see this mad rush to jump into hdm unless it's CHEAP.
|
|
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
Being a snob might not have anything to do with it so please stop judging others because there might be other reasons. For me, I'm not into gaming at all due to having no time for them and I don't like the looks of the equipment as it compares to the rest of my equipment in my HT rack. Furthermore, it's an indictment against this format and the BDA partners that the PS3 performs better than many of the standalone players. IMO, it shouldn't be that way. This is coming from an owner of three different standalone BR models. I'm an enthusiast so I'm totally into HDM, but what about the majority of consumers that these companies need to buy their product? That is why the manufacturers and studios need to do a better job of producing products that doesn't adversely affect consumer satisfaction. This has nothing to do with snobs, but instead good business.
|
| An opportunity was given, and Toshiba couldn't deliver. Too funny. |
|
Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein
Was it funny? Sounds to me like Toshiba may have been played....
and you know what?.....so be it. You can call it bias if you want, but that linked article above is the most accurate depiction of what we heard word-for-word prior to the announcement. |
|
Originally Posted by Mark Booth
The report that Warner was originally hoping to go HD DVD exclusive as long as one other studio went red too... a story that I got an early inside scoop on and Ron subsequently verified here... has been published as fact in a major newspaper this morning:
Sound Advice: Blu-ray wins in format war, but at what cost? $620 million between Fox and Warner compliments of the BDA! So much for the consumer choosing! |
|
Originally Posted by RobertSiegel
That's an interesting link, obviously written by someone who already preferred one format, it reads more like an editorial or someone on an hd-dvd thread on one of these sites.
|
| Just to get more out of SONY? |
|
Originally Posted by Mark Booth
Insiders have reported that Fox was planning to go HD DVD exclusive WITH Warner and it was to be announced at the Press Conference. Then, in the 11th hour, Fox backed out.
|
| but this is hardly the "facts" on the case... |
|
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford
First it was the formats that we labeled each other with and now, it's going to be which players we're using as we try to catagorize each other?
Personally, I think it's all silly. |
|
Originally Posted by Robin_B
Quote:
|
|
Originally Posted by Scooter
The Laserdisc price point, point, is valid. But back in the day, the converse was at work.
What helped LD as well as CED was the fact they were both always sold at "Sell Through" pricing. Meaning, MUCH less than VHS or Beta prices that were set for "Rental Pricing" ($99.99). Frankly, among the Joe Sixpacks I was selling and renting these 2 disc formats to, price was the deal. A small percentage went for the picture quality of LD. AND they ALL were mostly buyers. So, yeah...the price point needs to hit retail of $24.99 so it can be discounted to around $19.99 or less. |
| Was it funny? Sounds to me like Toshiba may have been played.... |
|
Originally Posted by tomes
The one area where Blu-Ray is TRULY next-gen, is the fact that it has much higher capacity per layer. All new replication equipment is needed for BD, compared to a minor upgrade for HDDVD. It's pretty clear that BD is a newer technology with more potential than HDDVD, but that said, HDDVD is today the better (more mature) format.
|
|
Originally Posted by Rich Allen
"Well it wasn't ALWAYS sold at sell through prices. After about 1984 when the price of most VHS movie dropped to $19.95, most laserdiscs were still around $40."
I know that isn't true. I remember bying Star Trek Generations in the early 90's on LD for less than it was going for on VHS when it first came out. That was one of the last in that category, but it was still well after 1984. |