Point blank, no bull, is D-VHS a direct threat to dvd? (1 Viewer)

[Inspector Hammer!]

Is it, or isn't it? From everything i've read so far, this new format blows dvd out of the water...but is it too late to the party to make it?

I am at a cross roads here, do I really want to start my collection ALL OVER AGAIN with a format subject to deterioration, and without the ability to skip around, and have to (GASP) rewind!?

I just don't know fellas, I just don't know.

So, will this eventually replace dvd or what? Sorry for the urgent sounding nature of this thread, but I just want a straight answer.

 

[Joe Schwartz]

Of course the picture quality of D-VHS blows DVD out of the water -- because HDTV looks much better than NTSC.
But no, D-VHS will not eventually replace DVD. HD-DVD will eventually replace DVD. And then you can start buying your collection all over again.

 

[Will_B]

DVDs are popular because they're small. This served stores, and it served people.

That said, the window for DVD is expected to be only, what, 5 years? By then, I hope and expect that the next disc-based format to take hold will be backward compatible.

Five years is a long time. Half a decade. enjoy them now.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Understood, but here's what I don't get, from another thread I saw here, the studios are releasing some pretty a-list titles to this new format, why are they pushing this format if they know that HD-DVD will be here soon? Couple that with the price, and equipment needed to full enjoy this new tape format, and it just seems like this whole thing is really ill timed to me.

The only thing I can figure is that this is a temporary solution until HD-DVD is perfected, to give those that want it, and can handle it, HD resolution on a home video format.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

If the stores were stocked to the roof with D-VHS tomorrow, 98% of the DVD buying public would have no interest.
If the stores were stocked to the roof with HD-DVD tomorrow, 95% of the DVD buying public would have no interest...they are watching on 27" (or smaller) 4:3 NTSC TV.
No HD format can be a threat to DVD today. Any can only be a niche.
But if HD-DVD has watered-down picture and sound quality compared to D-VHS when it finally comes out, I hope D-VHS kicks its ass.

 

[Will_B]

Studios don't know about mediums. They did not invent CD. They did not invent VHS. Before this turns into a Dr. Seuss thing, let me conclude by saying they only know about content. And some not very well.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Well, the studios may not have invented d-vhs, but they're certaintly supporting it, I just want to know, at this late point in time, why?

 

[Rob Tomlin]

D-VHS, I believe, is intended to fill a very small niche market. These will mostly be "videophiles" who need the best possible resolution NOW.

I would LOVE to have these beautiful images on my High Def set now. But the cost involved, combined with the negative aspects of going back to tape, as well as knowing we WILL eventually get HD-DVD prevents me from even considering investing in a D-VHS setup.

 

[Josh Simpson]

HD or not, I will never buy another tape again. I can collect DVD's while tape will just break down over time with each watching. I don't have to rewind DVD's. Tape is 80's. DVD's are now. I will just wait for HD-DVD.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Well, I feel a little better about this now. To tell you my honest opinion, I don't want D-VHS to succeed.

 

[luke j. chung]

The D-VHS format isn't intended for the mainstream audience, aka J6P. It's intended for the well-heeled (read RICH) videophile who want their picture and sound without the compromises imposed by NTSC broadcast limits. Even the studios supporting D-VHS readily admit that the average DVD fan won't be buying into this higher-quality medium because it's both more costly and less convenient to use than DVD. Basically, it's intended for the Hi-Def fan who can afford to buy into a more expensive format to get the best picture currently available. So, it's obviously NOT a serious threat to the mainstream success of DVD!

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Funny how every D-VHS thread always ends up with people bashing the format...yes, we know it is tape. :rolleyes
You people better watch what you say...there is still a decent chance that the karma gods will give you watered down HD-DVD that looks like crap.

 

[Alex Spindler]

To me, it seems to be too many steps backward for anyone to seriously consider it.

A) You have the tape medium, which invites all kinds of degredation over time. Remember that this is supposed to appeal to the collectors among us.

B) Then there is the serial format of tape. No more random access. No more seemless branching.

C) Then there is the tape format itself. Bulky, and you have to remember to store then in the right orientation to prevent them from sagging.

No, this format has to appeal to us, and it contains to many things we were happy to discard.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Alright, i'll take the collective responses in this thread so far, as a resounding NO.

 

[Karl Englebright]

The several press releases I've seen (which have been linked to several times already) keep mentioning that this is aimed at the videophile. I think this will obtain a LD/vinyl type status. It will be used by people that don't care about what medium they are using, they just care about the quality of the presentation. Then, in a few years will have debates about how HD-DVD doesn't quite sound as good as the "good'ol HD-VHS tapes.
While $2K is quite a bit to pay for a tape player, if I had a hi-def capable front projector, I would jump at the chance of getting one of these (provided, of course, they had more than 5 movies...).
ps. how much care do you have to give vinyl to keep it in good shape?

 

[Ricardo C]

D-VHS will be to DVD as LD was to VHS. It'll make us HT enthusiasts happy, but it will have little impact in the mainstream market.

 

[Dave Scarpa]

Point Blank. No.

 

[Damin J Toell]

To tell you my honest opinion, I don't want D-VHS to succeed.

replace "D-VHS" with "DVD," and this sounds like 1995-6 all over again.

edited to add:

doing a Google usenet search for "DVD" during this time period can be fun. some examples:

"I too would like an optical disc with digital video, as long as it's as good or better than LD. DVD will not be it."

"One thing I think too many people are forgetting is that while in theory the DVD might be able to produce a better picture than LD, in practice it will not."

"Most probably, the players will hit the street with sufficient memory to produce a picture marginally better than VHS."

"The biggest question I have about DVD is the claim that the picture produced is "noticeably better" than laserdisc."

"The fact that MOST people (not us) don't have their tv sets calibrated correctly anyway leads me to believe that you will see a lot of DVD units on the mark-down shelves of quite a few stores because people will have gotten their new $500-$800 toy but they can't tell the friggin difference between it and their old VHS VCR after they finally get it home."

and i love this subject line: "DVD, a glued CD with low resolution images!!!"

DJ

 

[JohnJB]

I think VHS is crap but keep in mind how impressed we all were with say Toy Story or Lawrence of Arabia picture resolution on DVD vs. stadard VHS and that was only twice as good, then consider how impressed we'll be by HD-VHS which IIRC has about three times the resolution of current DVD, that's owesome, even if HD-VHS is the Robbie Williams (talentless turd of a 'singer' a 5 minute wonder any of you Yanks will luckily never have hear of) of the the format wars.

But as I'm a Brit my opinion is fairly worthless as we'll not have Hi-Def until about 2020 ???

 

[Joseph Bolus]

Damin:

Those are good points!!

I remember that in '97 I *finally* decided that I needed something better than VHS Widescreen to feed my analog 55" RPTV.

Everybody I asked told me LD was the way to go; that this newly-announced DVD format was tantamount to DAT tape: It would utilize lossy compression algorithms for both video and audio and would therefore be riddled with unbearable digital artifacts. There was therefore NO WAY the format could ever even begin to compete with LD.

Here we are five years later and LD has not only been supplanted in the minds of videophiles, but hasn't even been sold and distributed in this country since the Fall of '99!

The same thing really could happen to DVD. It does seem unlikely, though. The LD format never reached a user base larger than 2 million homes; DVD is currently in over 30 million. The disc itself looked and acted just like audio CD and computer CD-ROM's: it therefore made consumers feel very comfortable with the technology.

The main problem right now with DVD is more in the area of software than hardware. As of right now, a DVD owner still cannot pop into his player an authorized version of the original Star Wars trilogy and/or the Indiana Jones trilogy. The official unavailability of these titles in the DVD format alone is keeping LD player and LD title demand flickering even in the wake of no retail distribution or production for that format in over two years.

If we take Lucas at his word, the original Star Wars trilogy is still at least four years away from premiering officially on DVD and/or HD-DVD.

Should these films become available on D-VHS before December 2006, then I believe that any videophile with a HDTV-capable display will buy into the D-VHS format. And once exposed to this format, there is no going back to DVD!! I saw the format demoed at EPCOT in mid-February, and it absolutely leaves DVD video in the dust. HD-DVD video will need to be about 500% better than DVD to compete.

Will that be enough to dethrone DVD and/or HD-DVD? I think it's too close to call right now!!