HD-DVD forum rejects Toshiba/NEC Blue Laser format (1 Viewer)

[Oleg]

It is pretty hard to see how anybody could be enthusiastic about caddies. At least anybody who actually used them. Caddies suck. Yes, they add protection, but at the same time they add bulk, hassle and cost. Caddied/Cartridge media has either been dying a painful death (VHS, mag tapes) or has never really been born (mini-disc, DVD-RAM).

Sony and Philips have a long history of pushing dubious formats out the door (CD-I anybody?) or crippling promising formats with protection technology that limits its usability (mini-disc, lame sony attempts to market non-DAO CD-R units).

Despite people's enthusiasm, and the idea that 'it would be nice' to have something that's high definition, I don't think blu-ray is going to fly as is. Come on, different PC and consumer appliance formats?

 

[Dan Rudolph]

Jeff, I don't think they'll go with a standard color for packaging. Any color you choose that isn't black will clash with cover art.

 

[Richard Paul]

Caddies may not be good for Blu-Ray, but the truth is they are needed to protect the data on future optical formats. Whether now or in 10 years they can't keep increasing the data on optical disc's and not use cartridges. Many people think Sony chose to use cartridges but in reality if there was a way not to use cartridges Sony would've done it. The smaller the data pits on the disc the smaller the scratch needed to interfere with the laser. The reason AOD doesn't need a cartridge is the fact it holds less and it's still in the lab. AOD may very well need to remain in the lab since without a cartridge it WILL be easier to ruin than a DVD. No one will say that a caddy is easier to use but I understand why it's needed and that it will become normal in the future.


Wayne your view is just a little odd since in truth what would you expect them to do? You specifically said that either voting against or abstaining is a conflict of interest? Sony simply voted what they wanted which any company would've done. Was it a conflict of interest for Toshiba to vote for their own format? The DVD Consortium was ONLY designed for DVD. For some reason people keep thinking it was designed for more but in truth it's only function was to standardize pre-recorded DVD which they did. Unfortunately the success of DVD has guaranteed that neither side will want to compromise meaning you best start cursing the AOD camp as well.

I find it funny that people keep bringing up Sony's failures while avoiding their successes. The Walkman, CD, and Playstation where all very successful yet are never mentioned by those saying Blu-ray will fail. Also this isn't Sony going it alone so much as Toshiba and NEC going against the major manufacturers. Blu-Ray is not perfect but with Hitachi, Mitsubishi, Panasonic, Philips, Pioneer, RCA, Samsung, Sharp, and Sony saying it's better than AOD it just might be .

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Boy...some fears here are *really* unsupported. Do some of you people just sit and try to *imagine* things to worry about?

1. Who ever said BluRay players would NOT play standard DVDs? 99% chance that any BluRay player will play both standard DVDs and audio CDs. Sony's SACD player plays legacy red-book CD software. Why is everyone acting like BluRay players won't play standard DVDs???

2.

Also this isn't Sony going it alone so much as Toshiba and NEC going against the major manufacturers. Blu-Ray is not perfect but with Hitachi, Mitsubishi, Panasonic, Philips, Pioneer, RCA, Samsung, Sharp, and Sony saying it's better than AOD it just might be

Exactly.

We'll just have to wait and see won't we folks

In the meantime...let's stop crying the blues about how we won't be able to watch standard DVDs on our future BluRay players since there is no reason to suspect this.

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

Wayne your view is just a little odd since in truth what would you expect them to do? You specifically said that either voting against or abstaining is a conflict of interest? Sony simply voted what they wanted which any company would've done. Was it a conflict of interest for Toshiba to vote for their own format? The DVD Consortium was ONLY designed for DVD. For some reason people keep thinking it was designed for more but in truth it's only function was to standardize pre-recorded DVD which they did. Unfortunately the success of DVD has guaranteed that neither side will want to compromise meaning you best start cursing the AOD camp as well.

If you'll re-read my post, you'll see that I already did curse all of the companies, but I cursed Sony the most. What would I expect the Blu-Ray companies to do? Don't you think withdrawing from the DVD steering committee would have been the honorable thing to do? Abstaining is not appropriate, unless Blu-Ray was also proposed to the committee, which it wasn't. Then between the remaining companies that supported AOD or weren't involved in either format, AOD might have had a majority vote. But that would lack the collaboration that brings about a single format. I suppose AOD could be brought to market on its own since the DVD steering committee is a dead end, but that also lacks the collaboration.

I can't dare to be an early adopter of an expensive format that doesn't have full support of all manufacturers and all studios. I knew DVD would succeed, but right now I can't even be sure that high definition as a whole will succeed.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Wayne,

good points. please read my number 4. The bluRay camp have specifically NOT wanted to submit their format to the dvd forum because they don't want it labeled "DVD" bcs they don't want to split royalites with Warner. They are trying to make sure that the dvd forum does not sanction a viable format to keep the competion to a minumum. The "honorable" thing to do? It's business politics.

Business is war

And do consider this:

BluRay has more manufacturer support now than DVD had when it was introduced. The difference in regard to studio support was that DVD had Sony *and* Warner supporting the format upon lauch, and in the case of BluRay Sony is launching without Warner.

DVD did *not* have widespread studio support upon launch. that came much later

 

[Jeff Kleist]

I believe there are enough manufacturers behind Blu-Ray, and I've heard that many studios are impressed with it, that it stands an excellent chance of making it as the final format

 

[GlennH]

I'd feel better about the chances for an earlier rollout expansion and success of Blu-ray if Warner was onboard too. Having only one studio (Columbia) makes it a tougher sell. Warner holds a lot of cards when it comes to content.

 

[Philip Verdieck]

A few thoughts.

I am surprised Warner is supporting anything, with their desire to see VOD become the future of home entertainment.

(Wayne) If you'll re-read my post, you'll see that I already did curse all of the companies, but I cursed Sony the most. What would I expect the Blu-Ray companies to do? Don't you think withdrawing from the DVD steering committee would have been the honorable thing to do? Abstaining is not appropriate, unless Blu-Ray was also proposed to the committee, which it wasn't. Then between the remaining companies that supported AOD or weren't involved in either format, AOD might have had a majority vote. But that would lack the collaboration that brings about a single format. I suppose AOD could be brought to market on its own since the DVD steering committee is a dead end, but that also lacks the collaboration.

I disagree totally. Under your scenario a format war will result.

1) Sony and allies go it alone because they would be morons to pay royalties.
2) Toshiba and Warner can now push through their format. It gets sanctioned as HD-DVD
3) Both products are on the market.

Since the options to Blu-Ray are inferior, then they should be aborted and not allowed to mature. I praise Sony and allies for any and all actions to this end.


Another thought. What percentage of DVD product out their will never look better? Aren't we looking at a format which has so much information that the majority of content produced before, say 1970, won't look markedly better than it does now? I ask this as some salve to my conscience about not having to buy everything all over again

I think Sony should call it HDD (hi-def-disc) or HDVD (hi-def-video-disc) or HDDD (hi-def-digital-disc) or something.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Aren't we looking at a format which has so much information that the majority of content produced before, say 1970, won't look markedly better than it does now?

Philip,

do you mean film-source material?

the 70mm prints for Ben Hur contained more information than you could possibly represent in a 1920 x 1080 grid. For that matter...even old 4x3 B&W movies contain significantly more information that both Standard and Hi-Def digital. Direct-video programs clearly could never benefit (aside from scaling) on BluRay, but even the B&W prints for Metropolis will look vastly better in HD than they do on SD-DVD!

If you've ever seen a B&W print properly projected, or a restored 35 or 70 mm projection of a vintage film (see the Hello Dolly thread), the level of detail and resolution is *astonishing* and can put even HD source-material to shame.

 

[Philip Verdieck]

That was what I meant. Thanks for educating me.

 

[Dan Rudolph]

I'm assuming 16 and 8mm films won't benefit significantly, though.

 

[DaViD Boulet]

Depends on the particular DVD transfer/master and the source.

I'm sure you're right about 8mm...

but I have seen some 16mm film prints that clearly had much better fidelity both in terms of resolution and color than what you'd expect from a typical DVD transfer/master.

Most DVDs are excessively filtered for aliasing at the 480I level (grrr) which isn't a limitation of the format...just a problem with mastering. So in that case a BluRay version might look better not so much bcs the DVD format was limited as that DVD title wasn't mastered up to DVDs potential.

One thing that BluRay will have over DVD is color resolution, and for that reason color film-sources...even 16 mm...should present a fair-appreciable improvement with the more accurate encoding of BluRay (DVD does not offer full 720 x 480 resolution for the color channels...only the B&W Luminance channel). One way to see how these variables make an objective difference is to watch a DVD on a 480-res display (like the Piano Plus or Sony 400Q projector) then watch downconverted HD on the same projector. In both case the final image has only 480 res...but the downconverted HD image *smokes* the native DVD bcs it's got more color information to work with as well as no softening from interlace-filtering at the 480 level during mastering.

-dave

 

[Jack Briggs]

My Internet connection timed-out on me twice while reading this utterly fun thread. Thanks for starting it, DaViD!

 

[David Forbes]

Jack,

You have a connection that times out? My God, man, you need to go broadband!

 

[Jim Stegbauer]

Quote:

"4. The reason that BluRay has NOT been submitted to the DVD forum is a political one. Warner owns royalties on the "DVD" name. That's why they want an "HD-DVD" name and that's why they want the DVD-forum to sanction it. If sony submitted their BluRay technology to the forum and it was officially approved as "HD-DVD" they'd have to share some SERIOUS royalties with Warner and they don't want to do that."

The correct answer was found in the DVD FAQ:

Quote:

"No single company "owns" DVD. The official specification was developed by a consortium of ten companies: Hitachi, JVC, Matsushita, Mitsubishi, Philips, Pioneer, Sony, Thomson, Time Warner, and Toshiba. Representatives from many other companies also contributed in various working groups. In May 1997, the DVD Consortium was replaced by the DVD Forum, which is open to all companies, and as of February 2000 had over 220 members. Time Warner originally trademarked the DVD logo, and has since assigned it to the DVD Format/Logo Licensing Corporation (DVD FLLC). The written term "DVD" is too common to be trademarked or owned. See section 6.2 and visit Robert's DVD Info page for links to Web sites of companies working with DVD."

As far as I am concerned the sooner we see Sony's Blu-Ray HD-DVD the better it will for all of us who are dieing on the vine for more HD content.

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

Since the options to Blu-Ray are inferior, then they should be aborted and not allowed to mature. I praise Sony and allies for any and all actions to this end.

The inferiority of the alternatives to Blu-Ray is only your opinion. AOD has an advantage in disc manufacturing and using the same lens numeric aperture as DVD means a less complicated, less expensive pickup mechanism. Also, the last I heard, the AOD proposal included read-only and rewritable specs, while Blu-Ray was rewritable but the read-only format hadn't been created. Maybe they have it finished by now.

Here's another point of view about the caddy that a lot of you think is a good idea: I see it as a sign of weakness. It's a sign that Blu-Ray barely works. It's so close to not working that the slightest little blemish on the disc makes it unplayable. Is that an improvement over DVD? Maybe AOD wouldn't be any better in that regard but I see it as a bad sign when Sony already knows that their disc needs to be kept inside a protective shell. The caddy is not an improvement, it is a step backwards. Someone said Sony's working on improving it so a caddy isn't needed? They had better!

 

[Richard Paul]

Neither Blu-ray or AOD is a standardized pre-recorded format at the moment. In truth we are discussing which format has the best chances and the best specifications. Most formats come out without full support since competing businesses tend not to agree. High Definition though will succeed since there is no competition and those who have seen it tend to want it. Though many people hate how Hollywood is pushing HDMI/DVI-HDCP as the connection of the future, it shows that Hollywood has woken up to the fact that HDTV will succeed.

 

[Ricardo C]

I hope Sony does indeed set out on their own. They have the superior format, as well as widespread manufacturer support. The rest of the studios will have to give in and join the party, if Sony plays its cards right. I know I'm buying as soon as pre-recorded media is made available.

But Sony, please, PLEASE, send out the big guns right from the start. I never understood why the studios backing D-VHS let the format debut with so many "meh" titles. I want to be able to buy the BluRay edition of Spider-Man on launch day

 

[Jim Stegbauer]

I agree with Ricardo_C, if (Sony) Columbia - TriStar releases it's big gun titles in Blu-Ray at launch it will be a no brainer for all of us who are waiting for HD-DVD content for our displays.

I never could get excited about D-VHS, IMHO it was a format (tape) who's time had come and gone. I will be one of those who are going to be first in line to buy a Sony Blu-Ray player and Blu-Ray editions of "The Fifth Element" on launch day.