Paramount, Dreamworks back HD DVD, drop Blu-ray

[jimjim]

Blockbuster and Target are backing Blu-ray, now this bombshell is going to further the divide.  People make comparisons to the the Beta/VHS war, but that was over in a heartbeat.  I don't think that this will end shortly.

It was predicted the PS3 would make it a slam dunk for Blu-ray, but the PS3 has not sold as well as expected.  I think the only hope is for players that play both formats to come down in price.

Here is the link to the article:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-08-20-paramount-dreamworks-blu-ray_N.htm

[patrickl]

People make comparisons to the the Beta/VHS war, but that was over in a heartbeat.

Not sure how fast your heart beats, but didn't that one last for about a decade? Even Video 2000 lasted for several years.

[jimjim]

Actually, it wasn't even a "war" when talking about home entertainment.  Unless you are referring to when the last Betamax rolled off the assembly line in 2002 as being the actual length of winning/losing.  I'm sure HD DVD and Blu-ray will be around for years to come.  I really talking about market share allowing one to dominate enough that there is no question on what will be the defacto format for home entertainment use.

From Wikipedia,

"By 1981, U.S. Betamax's sales had sunk to only 25% of all sales...In the UK, Betamax held a 25% market share, but by 1986 it was down to 7.5% and continued to decline further".

If you figure the % dropped every year after 1981, when was the outcome ever in doubt?  I don't know if anybody thought that there was going to be a sudden change to reverse the trend, but being old enough to live through those years, I remember it being difficult to find Betamax rentals, whereas VHS Mom and Pop stores were springing up everywhere.

In the case of Blue-ray vs. HD-DVD, situations change daily.  I thought the Blockbuster rental agreement was the signal, but I guess that may not be true.

[patrickl]

started in 1975 though.

[DaveMMR]

Yeah.  I'm sitting this High-Def DVD/Blu-Ray war out until a winner is chosen (or there's a handsomely price combo unit on sale when I have money burning a hole in my pocket).

At least the DVD vs. DIVX ("Digital Video Express" - not the codec) war was easy to choose sides for back in the late 90's.

[jimjim]

Once again I'm talking about commercial/home use.

1975 Betamax had a 1 hour record time... nobody (referring to home movie renters) cared about which format would win because nobody rented or bought movies to watch at home because there were none available.  

So I guess you're right, because in 1975 Betamax owned 100% of the market because VHS did not come out until 1976.  From 1976 -79 they were too expensive for home use, and movie rentals had not saturated the home market yet.

In the case of home use, I'll defer to Wikpedia again.

"Betamax held an early lead in the format war, offering some technical advantages. By 1980, VHS was gaining marketshare due to its longer tape time (3 hours maximum, compared to just 1 hour for Betamax in USA) and JVC's less strict licensing program."

"By 1980, out of an estimated 100,000 homes with VCRs, 70% were rented, and the presence of two competing formats meant that renting was an even more attractive choice, since a small fortune (about £2000 or $2600 in today's prices) could be spent on a system which may become obsolete. "

In 1980 Betamax tapes could only run 1 hour in the U.S. and people wanted to start a library of movies,  then the war was over before a shot was even fired.  Nobody questions the superior video quality of Beta tapes.  I believe that people who wanted a superior version of a movie for library or archival purposes, and those who had spent a ton of money on Beta players, kept Beta around longer than its commercial success warranted.

[hypernova]

At least the DVD vs. DIVX ("Digital Video Express" - not the codec) war was easy to choose sides for back in the late 90's.

I remember that.  That was probably like the movie 300, except in this case, the 300 all got slaughtered without doing much, if any damage.

I wonder who the poor idiots were who jumped on that format.

[patrickl]

Once again I'm talking about commercial/home use.

My parents had a Video 2000 and we used it till it broke down many years later. By then there were still V2000 and Betamax tapes in the video rental. Just a little less copies than for VHS. So what? You could get every movie just fine.

There might have been a system with a bigger market share, but all three the systems (or two in the US) were in use for years and it was not clear that only one would remain right up until the point Sony and Philips abandoned their systems.

Either way, doesn't matter if it took 5 years or 10 years, that's still a pretty slow heart rate.

[CheffoJeffo]

I wonder who the poor idiots were who jumped on that format.

Disney.

Can you imagine the cost to parents when the kids get up at 6:00 on Saturday and play that DIVX copy of Aladdin 30 times .... I wrote to Disney about it and eventually received a response that they had reversed their decision.

[ChadTower]

The main difference between beta/VHS and now is that back then movies in the home were a completely new technology.  Everyone was adopting a technology, not a format, so the stakes and potential gains were much higher.  Now, there are dozens of formats and choices, from HD-DVD to Blu Ray to DivX to WMV... you can watch on a projector, a TV, a laptop, an iPod... in your car, your home, your yard, on a train in the rain in spain with John McClain... it's not a two horse race, it's a 5 thousand entrant race with all sorts of contestants.

[DaveMMR]

At least the DVD vs. DIVX ("Digital Video Express" - not the codec) war was easy to choose sides for back in the late 90's.

I remember that.  That was probably like the movie 300, except in this case, the 300 all got slaughtered without doing much, if any damage.

I wonder who the poor idiots were who jumped on that format.

A guy I work with bought a DIVX player for his parents - a few months later, it was nothing more than an overpriced DVD player (luckily, they did play regular DVDs). 

I know the movie "Something About Mary" was only available on DIVX for a time.  Basically Dreamworks, Paramount and Disney (as previously stated) were backing the system (the former two backing HD-DVD exclusively now) while everyone else jumped on the DVD bandwagon.  Maybe history will repeat itself. 

[ChadTower]

Am I the only one who has a DivX compatible DVD player that regularly uses it to view DivX stuff?  I just wish I could update the firmware to make it play DivX 6.

[CheffoJeffo]

Am I the only one who has a DivX compatible DVD player that regularly uses it to view DivX stuff?  I just wish I could update the firmware to make it play DivX 6.

Nope ... I have three.

[Jeff AMN]

I have both HD-DVD and Blu Ray in my home. I actually prefer HD-DVD quite a bit, despite the lower storage capacity. It doesn't really matter for movies and such, but HD-DVD (currently) has WAY better features on the disc than the BD counterparts.

The HD-DVD tech is cheaper, more fully featured, and more similar to what we have with DVD. Either format could win the war and it's going to be the same to me, but I'd rather see HD-DVD succeed at this point. That and I feel that Sony could use a good humbling.

[clanggedin]

Michael Bay said announced on his blog that this move was stupid on Paramount's part, and that he will not be making a Transformers 2 because of it. It will be interesting to see if he really follows through with this threat.

Does anyone remember the Videodiscs that came out in the 80s?? I remember renting movies on them. They only held 60 minutes of video on each side, so you had to flip the disc over to watch the rest of a movie. It was kinda like the laserdisc of the 80s.

I remember after buying my first DVD player I asked a Blockbuster employee when they would start renting DVDs. i was told that they did a survey and found that more households still had Betamax players than they did DVD players. LOL This was back in 1998.

[boykster]

Am I the only one who has a DivX compatible DVD player that regularly uses it to view DivX stuff?  I just wish I could update the firmware to make it play DivX 6.

Wrong Divx.  You're talking about DivX compression, they're talking about the disc format DIVX (Digital Video Express) that was circuit city's attempt to create a new video rental avenue.  Basically, you'd "buy" a movie for $4 and could watch it for 24hours.  then, each subsequent viewing it would cost them $3.25.  The players were essentially dvd players with "phone home" capabilities, and would check with the central server to get your authentication.  Much like payperview.  The first players didn't even play regular non DIVX dvd's, but the later ones did.

It died a terrible death....

[ChadTower]

Oh yeah, I remember that, looking through the selections at a Circuit City Express what seems like a hundred years ago.  They sucked and the technology sucked.  Even the sales guy said so.

[TOK]

I'm waiting this one out a bit, but if I was to buy now it'd be HD-DVD, just for the fact that it seems like every spec that Sony creates or backs is the one that loses.

[boykster]

Oh yeah, I remember that, looking through the selections at a Circuit City Express what seems like a hundred years ago.  They sucked and the technology sucked.  Even the sales guy said so.

Bingo....

WORST IDEA EVER!

[DaveMMR]

Bad news for that theoretical money burning a hole in my theoretical pocket:  the plans for the combo player is a no-go.

http://news.com.com/A+DVD+combo+Dont+hold+your+breath/2100-1041_3-6024875.html

The war continues....

[dstone]

That article was published in January. Since then, LG (and somebody else, can't remember who) released a combo player. There's even a PC drive out now that can read all formats and write the current standards plus BluRay.

http://www.lge.com/products/model/detail/bh100.jhtml

[HaRuMaN]

That article was published in January. Since then, LG (and somebody else, can't remember who) released a combo player. There's even a PC drive out now that can read all formats and write the current standards plus BluRay.

http://www.lge.com/products/model/detail/bh100.jhtml

Samsung

http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9749669-7.html

[DaveMMR]

I was betrayed by a Google search?  That was like the first or second link.  Then again, I did like 5 seconds of research before chiming in.   My bad - I didn't see the date.

[patrickl]

Won't most people here buy both a Xbox 360 and PS3 anyway?

I remember using my PS2 as DVD player for a while.

[ChadTower]

No.  I'll be really surprised if I end up with either within the next 5 years.

Plus the 360 isn't an HD DVD player, is it?

[shardian]

plus the 360 isn't an HD DVD player, is it?

The HD-dvd player is a $150 add-on.

[ChadTower]

Exactly.  No way I'd pay an extra $150 for it even if I had a 360.  It's not that much better than an upconversion.

[shardian]

I've seen some blue-ray dvd's playing and I'm not all that impressed. For about 98% of movies out there, 480p is as good as needed. The only thing IMO that is worthy of HD is sports. Watching an NFL game in hd is definitely a HUGE step up from regular cable. A movie, not so much. And most people won't be watching sporting events on blue-ray now will they?

[ChadTower]

I'd upgrade to an HD DVR for my one HDTV if the Sunday Ticket package came with HD games.  It doesn't.  They're like $100 more.

[divemaster127]

LG has already released a unit that plays both HD-DVD & Blueray its about $800.00
dm

[patrickl]

I've seen some blue ray disks played and they looked staggeringly much better than standard DVD. If you don't see the difference then you haven' t seen it on a Full HD TV or the disk wasn't Full HD.

Besides it's not like you need to replace a perfectly good playing TV and DVD player now, you can replace it when you need to. I'm buying all new stuff when I move into my new house. I will most definately be installing a HD DVD or Blue ray then.

[Jeff AMN]

Like I said above, I have both HD-DVD and Blu-ray in my home. The wife and I never watch regular DVDs anymore if an HD counterpart is available in either format. The difference for us is HUGE, but we're using a 1080p 61" TV. HD-DVD and Blu-ray (when they're not craptasitcally transferred) look even better than broadcast HDTV.

Eventually one format will win, but the fight is going to be longer than what we saw with the Beta/VHS war. This will probably last through this holidays and all the way through next year before anything is settled.

[divemaster127]

Jeff since you have both, which one do you like better
dm

[Jeff AMN]

I actually prefer HD-DVD. In early releases HD-DVDs looked significantly better than Blu-ray, but now that BD is using the VC1 codec it's pretty much the same picture from BD to HD-DVD. Studios aren't going to spend the time to do two separate masters when both HD-DVD and BD use the same codec now.

Right now HD-DVD discs have better features on them. That's a fact. Blu-ray players are going to receive an update down the line that will improve the disc features functionality, but currently if a movie is available on both formats, HD-DVD is going to be the better release in the end.

Add into the mix that HD-DVD is cheaper, I think it's just a better buy. The exclusivity BS kind of messes the scene up though. You have companies pledging exclusive support to one format or another, so you have to look at the libraries closely before choosing.

[patrickl]

A week ago I read an article that claimed that Blue ray is outselling HD-DVD 2 to 1. So that would mean Blue ray has a much bigger market share already.

Personally I hope blue ray wins. Simply because of the bigger disksize.

[Jeff AMN]

The disc capacity on Blu-ray is nice, but since both HD-DVD and Blu-ray use the same codec for encoding films, it won't ever make any difference in the film industry. Both movies use the same amount of compression.

For PC applications, Blu-ray provides a lot more storage, but I rarely even use up the storage on a normal DVD when burning stuff.

[ChadTower]

That extra space would be used mostly for DVD extras, then.  I rarely if ever even look at the extras.

[TOK]

A week ago I read an article that claimed that Blue ray is outselling HD-DVD 2 to 1. So that would mean Blue ray has a much bigger market share already.

Personally I hope blue ray wins. Simply because of the bigger disksize.

This is kind of funny, because the weekend newspaper here says HD-DVD has 65% of the market.
Guess its all a matter of who's BS spin you're getting. 

[patrickl]

Indeed I was thinking more about the recordable versions of these disc types. A bit more storage space on them would be nice. I always have trouble that current DVD's offer not enough space.

What's the actual size for these recordable discs? I thought 25GB for Blu-Ray and 15GB for HD-DVD was the max, but I also saw 50GB Blu Ray recordables. Also, only Blu-Ray has rewritable discs?

PS3 games might benefit from bigger storage space too.

I didn't think about film size and compression, but if its the same codec and storage size is bigger, couldn't Blu Ray technically use a higher bitrate (and thus have a better picture)?

[patrickl]

A week ago I read an article that claimed that Blue ray is outselling HD-DVD 2 to 1. So that would mean Blue ray has a much bigger market share already.

Personally I hope blue ray wins. Simply because of the bigger disksize.

This is kind of funny, because the weekend newspaper here says HD-DVD has 65% of the market.
Guess its all a matter of who's BS spin you're getting. 

Lol, that is seriously strange. I forgot where I read it, but I found several references of Blu-Ray outselling HD-DVD. Here is one

[TOK]

I noticed in that article that they're talking about Blue Ray discs selling more, not the players. The article I read was related to player sales. That would seem a bit more important to track in the long run, since its the hardware, and not the disc sales that is important in the long run.

[patrickl]

Well it kinda makes sense to assume that the sales of the Blu-Ray players overtook the HD-DVD players too. You could argue that only Blu-ray owners buy disks, but it does not sound very likely. If the BD vs HD market share was really 1:2 and they outsell 2:1 the Blu-ray people would have to buy 4 times the number of disks HD-DVD people buy.

I'd say it's pretty safe to assume that sales of the PS3 since November 2006 has had a serious impact on the HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray market shares.

[shmokes]

Disc sales is going to be an important variable because it will influence the studios behavior with regards to releasing titles.  If I'm Columbia Tristar and I don't want to go through the expense of creating and distributing two different HD versions of a new movie, I'm going to think long and hard about which version of disc is out-selling the other by a 2:1 margin.  Twice as many potential sales is a big deal to me.  The same goes for justifying rescanning older films for release in HD.  No reason to go through the expense unless there is profit to be made and as a movie distributor there is currently twice as much profit (all other things being equal, of course) to be made with BluRay  So if brisker sales of BluRay titles cause the library total available BluRay library to grow much bigger than HD-DVD, that is going to drive hardware sales.

[patrickl]

From Sony I can understand that they will only do Blu-Ray, but Paramount is not owned by one of the HD-DVD manufacturers is it?

The rationale for the decision given in the article is:

Standalone HD DVD players have a bigger slice of the market than Blu-ray players. But when you count Sony's PlayStation 3 game console, which comes with a Blu-ray drive, there are more Blu-ray players in U.S. homes.

Rob Moore, president of Paramount Worldwide Distribution, said market data shows that people who own gaming consoles buy fewer movies than those who invest in a movie-only player.

Yet apparently more Blu-Ray disks are sold? wtf?

:edit: I found some rumours that maybe they (Paramount and Dreamworks) were "paid" $150 million (#50 for Paramount and $100 for Dreamworks) to pledge allegiance to HD-DVD. UPDATE: Desperation Move & Cash Grab? Or Bloodier Blu-ray/HD-DVD Format War?

Note how there's no mention of the money Paramount (I'm told $50 million) and DreamWorks Animation (I'm told $100 million) is receiving for "promotional consideration" from the HD DVD side to continue with what is widely recognized as the losing high-def format

[ChadTower]

Wrong Divx.  You're talking about DivX compression, they're talking about the disc format DIVX (Digital Video Express) that was circuit city's attempt to create a new video rental avenue.  Basically, you'd "buy" a movie for $4 and could watch it for 24hours.  then, each subsequent viewing it would cost them $3.25.  The players were essentially dvd players with "phone home" capabilities, and would check with the central server to get your authentication.  Much like payperview.  The first players didn't even play regular non DIVX dvd's, but the later ones did.

It died a terrible death....

[boykster]

wow, funny, very obscure, find 

[ChadTower]