new DVD generation (1 Viewer)

[Anthony Moore]

So, what will we have next? HD-DVD or Blu-Ray? Does it matter? Will either of them take off..even if they were just one format?

Its been my experience that people are happy with what they have as long as it works. I say that even if Sony/others work out thier differences and come to one format, it will be a long while till people actually go out and purchase one of these players.

I mean, look at dvd-audio and sacd. There ARE players that play both, but still no one buys?

Why? I say because this day and age people just dont care about quality. Sure, HD-DVD/Blu-Ray will look better, but will the average Joe care? Will he go out and buy a new player and new movies just for the quality difference? I dont think so.
Just look at mp3 players...in my house there's no way an mp3 will make it to my main speakers. They sound horrible. But my brother says "the quality is great..even better than my cds." Which I know is crazy..but what can I say? Your hearing is off?

Give me the option of downloading full-quality songs and ill bite.

Obviously I know that eventually everyone will take notice and purchase one..but how long will that take? I say years and years before regular dvds are being replaced by hd-dvds on blockbusters shelves. Even those who bought an HDTV already will be hesitant on replacing thier old dvd player.

How about the fact that less than half of the people I know take advantage of all thier HDTV set has to offer. I ask,"So what channels does your local company offer in HD?" And theyll just give me a blank stare. How can these people just buy an hdtv and have no idea what to do with it?

The average Joe doesnt care about quality..and I say that the new dvd formats wont really take to the average joe for at least 5 years.

If only people actuslly cared about quality.

 

[Lars Vermundsberget]

I'm pretty sure there are more people today who care about video quality than ever before.

But that is the "HTF segment", of course, not Mr Joe.

It will most probably take a while, but that doesn't mean that a new format isn't going to take off. That's how it worked with DVD.

But it's possible that a new format within the next handful of years is still going to be too soon for Mr Joe. Even if it won't be for the hardcore HTFer.

 

[Jack Briggs]

I'll let another moderator decide whether to fold these posts into one of the existing HD DVD/Blu-ray Disc threads. But I will bite:

If the "average" customer did not care about quality in the first place, would the current DVD standard ever have come along?

 

[Anthony Moore]

Well, I think there is a big difference in VHS-to-DVD than DVD-to-BetterDVD. One is digital and one is not. But the question remains: where is the line drawn? What is "good enough for now" for most people?

I think the DVD-HDDVD will have the same get-go as DVD to dvd-a and sacd did. Not a very good one.

The only thing that will help is if the studios release ALL new releases in the new format.

 

[MichaelScott]

They care about quality the same as they did when Beta and VHS were the choices.. or Laserdisc and VHS.. regular DVD will still be here a long, long time..people don't like change, this forum isn't a real view of the big picture.

 

[FrancisP]

The problem is that as far as the studios are concerned, they have released all of the titles they want to release.
There are plenty of movies that could be released but its
apparent the vast majority of the titles will never be released. For example, I doubt that Warner has even released
half of the titles they own. I don't believe you're going to see titles released in hi-def that aren't on SD. I don't see the average person who bought the Star Wars set rushing out to spend another $60+ on a hi-def set.

The fact is that people are not rushing out to buy digital tv sets. The date for ending analog broadcasts has been pushed back several times. They had to drop the requirement that 85% of tv sets receiving digital products because they
can't meet it. I have heard some experts say it may take a decade.

 

[ChrisMatson]

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...=&pagenumber=1

 

[Mark Lucas]

Actually, from LD to DVD. What serious film buffs were watching VHS anyway?

 

[ChristopherDAC]

DVD was intended as a replacement for VHS, and it has been adopted by the general public as such. In addition to all the advantages of LaserDisc [high resolution, no wear, the availability of multichannel audio, &c.] it has one overwhelming advantage: cheapness for the retailer. A DVD uses only a little shelf space, and it's lightweight, so it could actually be considerably higher-priced and still be cheaper to ship and stock at a reasonable turnover.
Videophiles bought it because it rapidly became what was available, and because of the increased availability of anamorphic video, and because of the greater availability of multichannel audio, and because of the lower price point, and because they are human enough to appreciate having only a little lightweight thing to handle, and less shelf space to allocate, and fewer side flips and disc changes. The modest improvement in picture quality, an equipment-dependent phenomenon related mostly to the change from composite to component video, was not really a major driver, particularly with the early releases [they have improved a great deal now, but much of that is the video transfer rather than the medium].
The general public will have little incentive to buy into the new format, at first anyway. Videophiles, however, will probably find a system actually designed to match the performance of 35mm motion-picture film very attractive indeed, presuming it isn't burdened with the most egregious of usage restrictions [a matter of some dispute].

 

[Bryan X]

Improved picture quality isn't what made DVD popular. DVDs became popular because the medium offered improved features for the consumer: No rewinding, instant access to any part of the disc, etc. It also helped that DVD looked just like the CD, which had already become hugely popular.

DVD to HD-DVD (or blu-ray) really offers no tangible benefits to the average consumer. The average consumer doesn't even take full advantage of current DVD resolution. They aren't going to care about the improved picture with HD-DVD. Increased disc capacity is also a yawner for the average consumer. Nearly every movie already fits on one disc. And so what if an entire season could be had on one disc versus five. That's not what's going to get people to buy in to next-gen DVD. You can go on and on about all the nifty ways the studios could trick out these HD-DVDs with that extra disc capacity, but if history is any indication, it won't happen. Remember all that talk about DVDs with multiple versions of movies seamlessly branched, being able to change the angle on-the-fly during a movie. None of that ever happened to any significant degree.

It's going to be a much slower process going from DVD to HD-DVD than it was from VHS to DVD. It will probably happen eventually, but I wouldn't be suprised if DVDs still held the vast share of the market even 5 years from now.

 

[Mark Lucas]

All of this points to HD-DVD (Bluray) becoming a niche format for serious videophiles. But that's okay with me. Keep Joe and his family away from it.

 

[jim.vaccaro]

I don't understand this elitist attitude, Mark.

Joe and his family embracing HD has positive effects for HT enthusiasts. It brings down software and hardware prices and speeds adoption of a high quality video format. True, there have been some negative aspects to "mainstreaming" home theater, like full screen presentations and badly remixed 5.1 tracks to "fill up the screen and the speakers", but overall, mainstream acceptance of a single HD format can only be a Good Thing (TM) for all of us.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

This is precisely what I wanted to say. And I think standard DVD is quite satisfactory as it is. I don't expect HD or Blu-Ray to take off at all on a mass scale, and the only way it can is if the studios strategically cease making standard DVDs all together. The average consumer (which means the largest chunk of the profit) does not care about re-re-re-revamping his entire movie collection again, just because the V/A quality is better on a format that's already very impressive as it stands. The reason DVD took off as it did across the board was because of the conveniences quoted above.

And besides, as I never tire of asking, what's next once we upgrade... "Super Duper HHHHD DVD" or "Polka Dot Ray"?

 

[Lou Sytsma]

I believe the next big break through will be a medialess format which the consumer can store in some manner.

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

If you think that DRM is bad on physical discs, you can imagine how crazy it would get with something you download. Of course, there is nowhere near enough broadband penetration or bandwidth for this to be a possibility for HD in the near future. And on the legislation side, I'd be doubtful if the telecom and cable companies would be willing to let go of their least-bandwidth-for-most-money lobbying anytime soon.

 

[Lars Vermundsberget]

Physical discs are very important to those of us with a collector's mentality...

One Good Thing about the new format (probably) is backwards-compatibility. It's going to be a disc the same size as DVDs (and CDs) and we'll be able to play our old discs on the new players. That could turn out to make it less of a "switch" - even to Mr Joe.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

If the new format IS backwards compatible, that is a horse of another color. It would be very wise for the studios to allow for this.

 

[Mark Lucas]

I think it's been said before that not everyone is going to switch over to hidef. They won't buy the tv, they won't care or won't see the increased resolution. For them it's "dvd forever" and that's fine. HD is for the serious filmbuffs and videophiles. ::plays snooty elitest classical music::

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Well, at least for five to seven years until the studios come up with the next excuse to re-buy everything!

 

[MarkHastings]

I totally agree. I was going to say that the DVD popularity (with a lot of people) is NOT quality.

Besides what was mentioned above, I think a lot of the popularity is psychological. Example, most people now realize that CD's are better than casettes. DVD made this comparison (when it first came out) and a lot of people, who don't know that DVD has better quality than VHS, bought DVD's because they knew CD's were better than casettes.

The shiny little disc was VERY attractive as compared to VHS - It just LOOKED more advanced (again, even if people didn't know just how advanced it really was). As was mentioned, HD-DVD won't have that same effect and most people will be like "I already own DVD's..."

The big "WOW" effect is based solely on the quality, and since most people don't 'exactly' see it (or even care), it will be a tougher battle.

HD-DVD will definitely need to give these reluctant consumers some kind of incentive. Like give-a-ways or even making them cheaper than DVD's...whatever it is, it can't sustain a large market penetration based only on quality.

As was said about Beta vs. VHS, VHS won because of price and not because of quality.

I mean, I use my family as the test market all the time. While I can show my brother the big difference between a Component cable and a Composite cable...and even though he is amazed at the picture difference, I still can't get him to buy one because of the price. He has a 'free' component cable (that came with the DVD player) so (as he'll say) "why the need to buy anything? It looks good enough to me"