News HD DVD shrugs off Blockbuster move

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2007/06/21/hd_dvd_shrugs_off_blockbuster_move/1

Earlier this week, Blockbuster video announced that it was going to expand its line of Blu-ray titles into another 1450 stores in America. HD DVD has shrugged this off as an insignificant event.

 

The point you made at the end is quite important but I doubt the consumers will take much notice.

 

para 8 - "like it is going to continue for" - missing 'to'.

 

Should it not be "a HDTV" instead of "an HDTV"

 

poor Tim !

these guys won't let you rest for a minute

 

Actually this is an ambiguity in the English language and generally relies on native speaker preference

 

Yep - I prefer to see 'an HDTV'.

 

Not me.

I always thought the 'rule' was not to use two consecutive consonants... which would make "a" high definition TV the correct way to write it

 

You don't pronounce H heych.. it's eych if I was saying high definition TV, it would be a high definition TV, but I've said HDTV.

 

Hit the nail on the head.

 

Whichever format offers the most capacity at the best price is what I would go with. I just can't get over the fact that I would be able to carry my entire 10-year music collection with me on a freaking disc. That is just crazy/awesome! Blu-Ray, to me, seems to offer the most capacity and is becoming less and less expensive, so I hope it will become just as affordable as HD-DVD. Idk why, but I think of HD-DVD as more of a Walmart-based format that offers just enough to get by, but on the other hand I think of Blu-Ray as the more superior, technologically-advanced format that you may have to pay a little bit more for. Either way, consumers will be the deciding factor, so enough said.

Lastly, I say "an HDTV" because that's how I would say it; "a HDTV" sounds too impersonal and it's harder to say I think.

 

That's not quite true. While a player and a disc may both technically adhere to a specification, when the two come together they may not play well with others.

According to a recent PC World article, the HD DVD releases of King Kong and Miami Vice caused problems with Toshiba players. It isn't just HD DVD, of course. Both Blu-ray and HD DVD players rely on firmware updates to keep the players up-to-date with the latest disc features.

The discs even come with the usual legal language explaining that they may not be compatible with your particular player.

-monkey

 

The point is that the online features in future Blu-ray discs cannot be used by most early Blu-ray players because the set top boxes don't have an Ethernet port. BD-J hasn't been finalised either, and I'm guessing that older players may be able to support this via firmware updates... but what about the players already in consumer's living rooms? Do consumers have to take them to a service centre to "unlock" new functionality?

 

Actually, the reason why you say it is because you were(I hope) taught to say "an" before vowels, and "a" before consonants, and "eych"(as Tim S puts it) sounds like a vowel beginning.


H.B.

 

To be honest, I'm just kind of siding with Bill Gates on this whole issue and saying that this is a superficial format war that won't matter with a couple of years. Rising internet access speeds along with better compression algorithms are making on-demand movie rentals easier and easier every day. The one thing I'm looking forward to is being able to purchase my movies with my cable box and them having all the feature sets of a standard DVD/HD DVD/BD film. I know I have a far greater tendency to "rent" movies from my cable company then going to the video store...I just wish there was longer then a 24 hour limit on them as I have a tendency to fall asleep while watching movies and having no time to finish watching them before they expire.

 

I'm not sure about that - I think that if people are going to spend money on a movie, they want to see something physical for that money. It's the same with episodic games - people would rather see a physical disc rather than the downloaded files. I know it's strange, but that's the way it is. I guess it's kind of an idea that you're getting less for your money if you don't have something to show for it.

Added to which, downloaded content is likely to be DRM'ed and time-restricted - if people are going to pay for something, they want to be able to watch it again and again, at their own leisure, not when some distant company tells them they can watch it.

The thing I find most interesting about the whole HD format war is that only the consumer level companies have produced players. Very few (if any?) of the high-end AV players have announced anything (we'll see if anyone announces anything at CEDIA next week, but I doubt it).

 

I think allot of what holding digital distribution back for movies is the fact that you aren't able to view any special features at all. You get the movie, and only the movie and 99/100 times the movie is in full screen. If the same options were to become available for on-demand movies that are available with DVDs, then optical media could become the standard for everything. Contrary to what you might think, most people don't really give a rats tail about DRM as long as they are able to watch their movies or throw it onto their iPod or whatnot as they currently can, then it's no big deal. If you check out the data from cable television providers concerning their on-demand service, you'd see that it's sharply on the rise and I suspect it will increase dramatically next year when every cable company will be required in broadcast everything in a digital format leaving current SDTVs in the dust without an analogue-digital converter.

I'll eat my black Stetson cowboy hat if digital distribution isn't the main means of movie rentals and/or purchases by the end of 2010.

 

You will eat your hat!


H.B.

 

Still ... ""Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of [insert media of choice]"" ... I think either HDDVD/BlueRay do have enough time to complete their life cycle until internet speeds catch up.

-btb-