HD-DVD or Blu-Ray Player

[Sonnie]

Let's take a poll on these formats.

Are you going to buy a player for HD in the next year or so?

Does is matter to you which format you use?

If it does matter, which format would you prefer?

You can choose more than one option... your votes will be public!


I voted that I am undecided for now. I hate to spend 500 bucks when I can only imagine better and less expensive players will be available within 6 months or so. However... I'm dying to have one and if I get the urge, I may splurge!

[Exocer]

Good poll question!
I'll definitely be waiting for the second and third generation units. Prices by then should be more conservative, bugs/issues should for the most part be resolved by then. This also gives me time to focus on other parts of my system like getting a new TV

[Ayreonaut]

I can't imagine buying a one format player and being unable to watch videos that have only been released in the other format. I'll either have to get a dual format player, one of each , or wait until one format dies.

[toecheese]

Blu-ray is the better technology- from a technology standpoint. So was betabax, so we'll see.

Chances are, I'm going to get a PS3 to use as my Bluray player (not because I own a PS, but because it'll be cheap)

[Ayreonaut]

toecheese wrote:

...but because it'll be cheap)

$599. Nothing to sneeze at.

[kingkip]

For me it is like DVD-A vs SACD. Both good formats, but not worth buying two separate components to listen to. Too many interconnects, too much confusion as to which disk where. My wife would kill me as she can't seem to figure the easy stuff out as is. A good universal however makes life better IMO.

Same rules apply here. I am not about to go slapping on stickers to my components and disks so that my wife can just match the pictures to the player and then try to figure out how to make the stuff turn on.

I am lazy and I like things easy.

[toecheese]

Ayreonaut wrote:

$599. Nothing to sneeze at.

Yeah, but what are players going to cost? The 'base' PS3 is $499 anyway.

This page has a good description of the PS3 (again, I don't own a console- other than a Sega Dreamcast) and its potential as a player: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-6070342.html

Here's a Pioneer standalonee player for $1800.

http://ces.engadget.com/2006/01/04/p...coming-in-may/

[FlashJim]

I'm waiting to see which format wins, pretty much. I'm holding back for a while.

[rcarlton]

I think HD-DVD may win out...first out of the box, reasonably priced movies, reasonably priced and versatile players, plus name recognition. People know what a DVD is. Blu-ray??? They don't even spell blue right!

[Josuah]

On the other hand, it seems that trying to use the Toshiba player is like using a 9600bps modem. As for pricing, I think I read somewhere that when redbook CDs first came out the price for a CD player in today's dollars was $1000.

And in my opinion, I don't think the movies or players are priced (for either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray) for widespread adoption yet. The hardware I can understand being expensive. But the software is too expensive. I only buy DVDs around the $10 mark. I'll only buy high-definition discs around the $20 mark. And I expect my $20 threshold to drop once we've hit mainstream sales. There's a huge markup on $20 DVDs right now anyway. The publishers are looking at the high-def stuff as a way to get around the loss-leader sales of DVDs that are currently happening right now. And pushing out download services that are priced too high on purpose, to ensure they still get their high margins off DVD sales.

The other thing I'm waiting for is a way to not have to deal with the stupid copy-protection restrictions. I'm still not sure what the deal is going to be with computers, because existing computer hardware does not have HDCP support with HDMI connectors. Only DVI connectors with no HDCP support. And the next generation of computer displays are moving towards a new connection type and not HDMI (HDMI's cable technical requirements and HDCP implementation details are annoying to deal with, so that's probably a good thing).

[toecheese]

Josuah wrote:

And pushing out download services that are priced too high on purpose, to ensure they still get their high margins off DVD sales.

I'm a little off-topic here, but I've got to disagree with this statement.

There's nothing cheaper to the studios than to release movies via download. With a physical DVD, there's the production costs, media costs, distribution, retail profit, etc. eating away at the bottom line.

In a fit of irony, one studio is now using bittorrent to allow downloads of their DRM movies- same price.. but you're using your own upstream to help them download it to other people.

IMHO anyone who downloads a DRM movie- at the same price as a physical disk- is deficient in a lot of ways.

[Josuah]

I guess I wasn't clear. The point is that from a technical and financial perspective, releasing movies for Internet distribution is even cheaper (once you've got the infrastructure and system in place: one time costs) than replicating and distributing DVDs. But they are deliberately pricing it too high because they don't want to pass those cost savings down to customers at the expense of their own profits and because it's a distribution method that they are not comfortable with.

The DVD sales business is huge for them, with high margins (lost sometimes due to loss-leader sales at places like Wal-Mart and Target), and a business they are now comfortable with. They want to keep things this way for as long as possible. As you said, there's no compelling reason to purchase off one of their download services because the price is too high for the value you're getting, as the value is considerably less than the value of a DVD which can be found for less in many cases. What I'm saying is this was done deliberately.

[DMF]

FlashJim wrote:

I'm waiting to see which format wins, pretty much. I'm holding back for a while.

Then you're going to be waiting a LLOONNGG time! How long did it take for VHS to "win"? 10 years?

[DMF]

I can't change my vote? Didn't realize it was multiple selection.

[Sonnie]

I don't think so. I looked at editing it but I don't see anywhere to void the vote and let you start over or anyway to add you name to another. I'll check in the admin control and see if there is something I can do.

[Ktulu]

I'm a current owner of a Toshiba HD-A1 and serveral HD-DVD discs. No preference for a "winner" but I wouldn't want my investment in HD-DVD content to become worthless.

[nobbie]

I'm perfectly happy to sit on the sidelines and let HD and Blu-Ray duke it out! I got my Denon 756s Universal Player with HDMI, Up-Converting, DVD-A and SACD and I am happy as a clam, thank you very much!

[ironhead1230]

I do not currently own either so all of the following is based off of reviews or message boards that I have read. Who knows what will happen in the future, but looking at the current hardware and movies, HD-DVD is a pretty clear winner. The HD-A1 is half the cost of the Blu-Ray players, and I haven't seen a single review of a Blu-Ray player that wasn't disappointing. On the other hand, except for the slow response, the majority of reviews of HD-DVD have been positive. I have read uncomfirmed reports that there are picture quality issues with the Blu-Ray players themselves, but until the higher capacity Blu-Ray discs are released, it's not possible to do a proper review of the players. Whatever happens in the future, I think it's pretty clear which technology is in the lead right now.

As Bobgpsr pointed out below, I was wrong in my description of the video decoding hardware of the HDA1. I have removed those comments so nobody gets confused.

Lastly, on top of being able to play HD-DVDs the HD-A1 is an excellent upconverting player for SD discs, rivaling the best SD players on the market. So I will be buying a Toshiba HD-A1 in the near future.

-Mike
"You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing."

[bobgpsr]

ironhead1230 wrote:

...The next gen players will probably have specialized chips to decode the video and not a general purpose chip like the PIV..

FYI

The Toshiba/RCA HD DVD player does use a specialized chip to decode the video (a Broadcom BCM7411):

Broadcom Announces Next-Generation Advanced Video Compression Chip Supporting the H.264 Standard for High Definition Consumer Video Applications

its the audio that uses general purpose DSP's (4 Analog Device SHARCs). The Pentium in the player is used for the iHD menuing. A lot goes on in this thingy

Bob

[MrPorterhouse]

I guess you could say I'm waiting for second or third gen players, but I do plan on getting a PS3 to venture into the Blu. At this point, the future is unclear, but marketing, industry volume and support are leaning towards Blu-ray.

[azjimmy]

Same goes for me. I'll jump on the PS3 somtime next year after the first price break.
I have never been a "bleeding edge" kinda guy. Got my first surround 4 years ago, first big screen 2.5 years ago and my first pro-scan dvd a little over a year and a half ago. I still don't have HD I'm a patient man.

Jim