Usenet's first DVD discussion (1 Viewer)

[Mike_G]

Since google.com finally released the entire 20-year usenet archive, I decided to go in and search for the earliest DVD discussion I could. Here it is:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...D20%26 sa%3DN
There is one earlier annoucement with no followups, but this is the first discussion. Interesting how people were chatting about it in 1995!
Mike

 

[Ryan Spaight]

That's great stuff. Thanks for posting the link.
I particularly liked the part about how Criterion LD owners would sure be cheesed off if Criterion started selling DVDs at a fraction of the LD price.
Ryan

 

[Phu Vo]

Wow. Sounds like alot of people were really against DVD in the beginning. That is so funny. Now there are petitions to get older catalog titles to the DVD format. How ironic.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I'm sure not cheesed off about Criterion DVDs being cheaper than LDs.

I'm cheesed off that tons of Criterion LD supplements will never appear on DVD.

It's not Criterion's fault, though.

 

[Joel C]

Best quote:
"Well, you get what you pay for. I paid $119 for the Criterion version of THE KILLER. This disc has the best supplements I've ever seen. It was truly worth the price I paid. I doubt we will ever see it on a DVD."
It was released, and for $40 at that!

 

[Mark Zimmer]

Some pretty funny stuff there, like the insistence that we'd never see DVDs retailing at $12-15. Oops. Better clean off the crystal ball.

I'd completely forgotten about Polygram trying to price Portrait of a Lady at $70. Did they ever actually do that? If so, how many did they sell in those nasty certain-scratch cases that Polygram used at that price???

 

[Brian Lawrence]

No Portriat of a Lady was delayed after the announcement and when it eventually did street it was $29.99, Interestingly enough the other title that Polygram was going to release on dvd for 79.99 was Lost Highway and to this date that has still not been released on dvd.

 

[Keith_R]

Wow, I can't believe how many people were against DVD! boy how times have changed since 1995. Good stuff there though.

 

[Blu]

For DVD to succede, it will have to sell millions almost immedeatly to the
average consumer, John Q. Public. But I am wondering, just what does DVD
offer the average consumer that he/she dosent already have? Why should
they want it?
LOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOLLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Best Quote of the list!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Jesse Skeen]

"With all I've been reading about DVD's having all these options of LTBX or Full Screen, bilingual, etc., my question is this; How can the manufacturing of these discs with all this stuff on it be sold for so cheap? If a special edition LD can run up to $100 bucks, how can they put so much into DVD and charge so little?"

That's exactly what I've been asking since I started buying DVDs, thankfully of course! It's quite a relief to get special editions that retail for $30 and can be gotten cheaper after having movie-only LDs come out priced at $40! I heard it cost something like $6 per disc to manufacture LDs; the prices were just too high. I'll always wonder if LD would have fared better if they'd priced them lower and marketed them better.

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

While that link didn't work for me, I remember the flame fests from alt.video.laserdisc quite well. While some of what was said is true regarding MPEG artifacts, it is hardly as big a deal as was made at the time, especially compared to the noisy laserdisc transfers that were coming out on a regular basis. The best part was a number of folks claiming DVD sucked, even though noone had ever seen one!
I sure don't miss paying over $150 for an SE of a title.

 

[Seth Paxton]

I remember seeing the comparison of Twister LD to DVD and the DVD was darker. Of course you could adjust it, but at the time I was a tad worried about the MPEG compression. I had just finished a couple of semesters of DSP/MPG classes in college and knew how nasty things could end up.

Like Jeff and others I was pleasantly surprised.

But think about this, my first DVD player was because I needed a new LD player so I bought a dual. That way for titles where the quality/extras weren't as important I could buy the cheaper DVD of it, sort of like a permanent VHS in OAR.

Uh, yeah. :b

But this wasn't crackpot. There were some legitimate concerns. Honestly I think the DVD format is a bit of an upset, at least in how well they managed to put it all together.

Just think, OAR to the masses, anamorphic introduction, progressive scan, component feeds, software on the disc, multi-angles, dual layer discs...there were a LOT of technical pitfalls to be dodged along the way, as well as the whole marketing effort.

We take it for granted but new formats come along all the time and die, good or not.

 

[Ted Todorov]

BTW, keep in mind that when you click on that link you get two totally different threads that were posted two years apart. The subject heading is the same, that's how they got lumped together.

I don't find it strange (or stupid) that people thought the DVD format might go nowhere. But why were some laser disk users afraid of it??

Ted

 

[Jeff Ulmer]

I too bought a combo player (first one in town) since when I did, there were only 4 DVDs availble to buy at that time. They were using an IMAX disc as a demo, which had horrible artifacting (Afica: The Serengetti, first pressing), so I was wary. The discs were more expensive than lasers at the time by about $10, but it was technology I had to try. Now...well...

 

[Ryan Spaight]

I don't find it strange (or stupid) that people thought the DVD format might go nowhere. But why were some laser disk users afraid of it??

1) They only knew digital video as cruddy Quicktime files, VHS-quality CDi and VCD, and artifact-laden DSS -- it was widely assumed that DVD would look similar. LD users were afraid that DVD would kill LD with a vastly inferior product. (Also, it was assumed that DVD, a "mass-market" product, would never have the extras found on some LDs.)

And the "real" reason...

2) People didn't want to re-buy their movies on a new format.

I guarantee that the next new format that comes out, no matter how good, will get heavy criticism from DVD fans for an updated reason #1 and the same ol' reason #2.

Ryan

 

[Mark Zimmer]

Which kind of makes it a relief that the studios will never permit their content to be released in any higher quality format.

 

[David Lambert]

Good history lesson there!
This guy turned out to not be too far from the truth, eh?

Danny M ([email protected]) wrote:
: Your answer couldn't be further from the truth. DVD's are actually
: expensive right now, in a few years they will come down to the price of
: CD's, around $12-15 for new releases and $9-10 for the classics.

Only off by about $5 or less, y'know?

 

[NickSo]

Wow, what a great read! thx... its like going back in time!

As for the itty bitty x-tras on DVD's, as opposed to the massive amounts of stuff you get in LD SE's? Well, you get what you pay for. I paid $119 for the Criterion version of THE KILLER. This disc has the best supplements I've ever seen. It was truly worth the price I paid. I doubt we will ever see it on a DVD.

Yaknow what i want to do? just attempt to email them and see what the people hwo posted this thinks... but i doubt many of their addresses are still used.. but its still worth a try..

 

[David Lambert]

NickSo, the same idea occurred to me! I'm just not sure what I'd say to them if I was succesful...
Also, it would be interesting to look back through those old threads on Google and find names that are on HTF today...

 

[Travis Hedger]

Talk about memory lane!