New HD-DVD Disc is 51 gb's -- Surpassng BlueRay

I think once it gets to around 25% adoption rate , it will begin to increase much quciker as more people will know people with HDTV's and want one as well, the price will continue to get cheaper.

And 600 dollar HDTV's are usually the smaller variety, and the real feature to the idiot (not average) is the size. As more and more larger 4:3 CRT projection SD big screens fail, they will continue to be replaced by digital HDTV's in homes, as well as other crt SD jnkers breaking down. Ive yet to meet someone who in the last 2 years whos purchased a new TV that wasnt an HDTV, even if it was for the kids room.
 
Barry_Green said:
We're still having this same argument, because here it is six years later, HDTVs are $600 now, and they're STILL not the norm. We're at about 15% market penetration in the US. Maybe 3 years from now HDTV will be commonplace, but the odds are still almost 7 to 1 against someone having an HDTV in their house.


More like about 10-15, if the adoption rate of HDTV is any indication.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree with everything youve said here. it took DVD's MAYBE 3-4 years to become the norm, and they started out the exact same way HD-DVD's have. one thousnad dollar players, 30-40 dollar DVD's. In no way will it take HD-DVD's 15 friggin years to become a norm. And how can you possible say all this while in other threads HDV owners are saying that "SD is becoming more and more obsolete."

It just doesnt make any sense
 
Cynic821 said:
The short of it, is that there is a TON of stuff that doesnt benifit society as a whole. Take a ferrari , unneccessary auto that does the same job as a Hyundai. But Ferrari is still in business and prospering.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but the HDTV situation is the equivalent of the US government telling the Hyundai owner that they will have to go out and buy a Ferrari. The FCC has mandated that, at some point (the last overly-optimistic target date I paid any attention to was the end of 2006 :) ), SD broadcast will go away, and if you don't have an HDTV, then you're screwed. (Oh, right, you'll be able to buy an "adapter." I'm sure 720p and 1080i scan-converted to 480i will look real good. That's when people are going to notice a difference, when the converted HD signal looks worse than the original SD did on their SD set...)
 
Betting with any consumer format that Sony supports has historically been a fairly poor choice (L-Cassette, consumer Beta, mini disc, SACD ...). That said, don't think for a moment that Blu-Ray is a "Sony" format, its a format supported by a number of big players.

As my company is a manufacturer of very high end optical playback equipment, believe me that we are watching this "battle" very closely. As of today (just returning from CES and having sat in on a number of meetings) I can say that there is no clear winner yet, but one of the two looks to be pulling far enough forward that in the next few months it could reach a point of critical mass. I am not about to reveal what I know here (I am under non disclosure agreements) but would suggest that for those interested, they should follow some of the industry trade publications (like Replication News) to see the emerging trends.
 
AllAroundFilmLV said:
it took DVD's MAYBE 3-4 years to become the norm,
Click to expand...
The facts would disagree with you. It took DVD five years to penetrate 50% of American households. That's just the 50% point. And at five years it became the FASTEST adopted new standard in technology history. Faster than CD, faster than the Walkman, faster than TV itself.

And it still took five years.

In no way will it take HD-DVD's 15 friggin years to become a norm.
Click to expand...
You forget one crucial factor -- 85% of the households out there have NO WAY TO DISPLAY THEM! 85% of the households out there have no HDTV at all. Are you saying that you think two or three years from now everyone will have an HD-DVD player even though it's still slated to be around 2010 before 50% of the households even have HDTVs?

Think about this: when DVD players came on the market, they worked with everyone's existing TVs. HD-DVD and Blu-Ray do not have that advantage.

Then, look at the sales figures. Both formats TANKED HARD during the holiday season. Warner had to cut its estimated sales by a massive amount -- don't remember how much, but they cut it to something like 1/3 of what they originally projected.


And how can you possible say all this while in other threads HDV owners are saying that "SD is becoming more and more obsolete."
Click to expand...
Because there's the way some HDV camcorder buyers wish the world was, and then there's the way the world actually is. I try to find out what actually *is*, not what people think something is or what they wish it was.

And the way things ARE is that very few households currently have HDTVs, and of those that do, a very very small minority of them are actually paying to watch HDTV service! Something like 3% of American households actually subscribes to either a satellite or cable HD service. And how many people do you know who have HDTVs with "rabbit ear" antennas or UHF antennas on them, to pick up over-the-air HDTV broadcasts?

It just doesnt make any sense
Click to expand...
Yet it is what IS. If you want to read more, follow up what Kagan Research says. They're a media research firm who makes it their entire business to know these things. Here's a link to a summary of their report:
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/?epi_menuItemID=989a6827590d7dda9cdf6023a0908a0c&epi_menuID=c791260db682611740b28e347a808a0c&epi_baseMenuID=384979e8cc48c441ef0130f5c6908a0c&ndmViewId=news_view&newsLang=en&div=564050909&newsId=20061009005800

And they say that a high-def DVD format will not be the major market delivery medium until 2015. In 2-3 years (aka, by 2009) they expect it to be a $2.6 billion slice of the almost-$20-billion home-entertainment pie. So in 2-3 years HD-DVD and blu-ray combined may account for a tad over 10% of the market. Far from being "the norm."

And frankly, I doubt it'll be that soon, because I expect we'll leapfrog past discs entirely and move to downloading, just like iTunes did for music.
 
Last edited:
Captain Pierce said:
The FCC has mandated that, at some point (the last overly-optimistic target date I paid any attention to was the end of 2006 :) ), SD broadcast will go away, and if you don't have an HDTV, then you're screwed.
Click to expand...
100% not true.

The FCC has mandated that ANALOG broadcast go away. But that doesn't mean anyone has to convert to HDTV. They just have to broadcast digitally. Of the 18 digital TV formats approved by the ATSC, 12 of them are standard-def (or EDTV). Only six are HD.

There is not now, nlor has there ever been, any US government mandate to go to HD. We all expect that they will go to HD, yes, but there's no mandate that says that. A station could broadcast digital SD and be in complete compliance, as that's all that's been asked for.
 
AllAroundFilmLV said:
I completely disagree with everything youve said here. it took DVD's MAYBE 3-4 years to become the norm, and they started out the exact same way HD-DVD's have. one thousnad dollar players, 30-40 dollar DVD's. In no way will it take HD-DVD's 15 friggin years to become a norm.
Click to expand...

It will if people don't have anything to play them on.

DVDs were the fastest-growing conumer electronics item because 1) they offered something FAR, FAR, FAR above what you could get with the then-current norm, VHS, and 2) because they only had to buy the player to get the biggest benefit, which was the convenience and all the extra bonus material.

HD-DVD doesn't offer anywhere near the leap in convenience or benefit over DVD that DVD did over VHS, and you have to invest a considerable sum to get ANY of the benefit HD-DVD has over DVD.

So, until HDTVs are far more prevalent, HD-DVD adoption will be slow.
 
AllAroundFilmLV said:
And how can you possible say all this while in other threads HDV owners are saying that "SD is becoming more and more obsolete."

It just doesnt make any sense
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that HD is far more useful as an acquisition tool than it is as a delivery tool at present. You don't need to deliver as HD in order to take advantage of HD (and in the case of the HVX, the 4:2:2 color space) in your production process. You can deliver a superior product because you acquired superior video which gives you more and better options in post.

I'll say this -- HD may be quickly becoming the norm for acquisition, but as a consumer display format, it may NEVER become dominant.
 
Captain Pierce said:
Yeah, but the HDTV situation is the equivalent of the US government telling the Hyundai owner that they will have to go out and buy a Ferrari. The FCC has mandated that, at some point (the last overly-optimistic target date I paid any attention to was the end of 2006 :) ), SD broadcast will go away, and if you don't have an HDTV, then you're screwed.
Click to expand...

They are not stopping SD broadcasting, they are stopping all ANALOG broadcasting and will strictly be digital. The government is reclaiming the airwaves for their own personal use. WTF would make you think otherwise?

And its not an adapter, its a cable box, and who doesnt have a cable box? And if you dont, all new tvs anyways come with digitial cable inputs.

cmon now.
 
David makes a good point, and perhaps references what the other guys may be talking about -- HD is rapidly becoming a must-have in the video production realm. If you're not shooting HD now, you'd better have a good reason. (such as, your product is destined for local broadcast or only ever for DVD distribution; SD is perfectly fine for those purposes).

But for delivery and adoption by the consumer, HD is an entirely different subject.

And manufacturers are already talking about Ultra High Definition TV... I don't know what to make of that. I suspect they could get an infrastructure for manufacturing end-user gear up to speed, but I bet the networks and broadcasters would throw a holy fit at the prospect of having to move to all new transmission equipment again, so...
 
quite a few suprisingly. considering the cost of them is around 20 bucks and less, i see quite a few people indeed. For as many ipods that are out there, i dont see as many as id expect to walking around. People dont take into account the multiple ipod owner. i have 2, my dad of all people has 4. my mom has 2. Apple tends to get ya to want more of their products, i have 4 Macs as well

but thats besides the point. iTunes did not stop the sale of physical media in the stores. Its still a HUGE business
 
Can't agree on the CD thing on this one. The Sales of CD's have dropped drastically since the introduction of downloadble content. And that started way back when Napster hit the underground market.

Now it's more prevalent than ever. CD's no longer sell as great as they once did. And the Mp3/M4a does reign. With the introduction of installed Mp3 players in vehicles, CDs are being phased out that way. Just as well, as the drivers of our age begin to purchase more cars, their tuned more into Digital radio that plays what they want all the time, or a compliation CD burned on their home computer system.

Go ask Mariah Carey. She'll tell you with tears in her eyes.
 
Cynic821 said:
quite a few suprisingly. considering the cost of them is around 20 bucks and less, i see quite a few people indeed.
Click to expand...

I'm *highly* skeptical that very many people still do.

The point is that iTunes gives people a much more convenient way to purchase music, and iPods and other MP3 players have caught on like wildfire, not because Apple makes you drink the Kool-aid when you buy something from them, but because they offer a real, tangible, and significant benefit over the alternatives -- having to buy whole albums; having to go to a store; if you want more than twelve songs, having to carry multiple CDs around; needing a big bulky player vs. a tiny matchbox of a player, etc.. The CD "walkman" is nearly dead and the physical CD probably isn't far behind.

Conversely, HD DVD does not deliver a quantum-leap benefit over the current standard.
 
Yeah, but why buy a CD for 12-15 dollars at a store when you can purchase on Itunes for 10 in the comfort of your own home? I buy everthing on Itunes.
 
Cynic821 said:
Just because you purchase a CD does not mean you have to play it in a CD player. :/
Click to expand...

Yes, that is true -- but if you're not going to "play" the CD, how long is PURCHASING the CD going to last when you can just download the songs you want, and they're already in electronic form -- no ripping required?

And heck, most new cars have stereo systems which accept an auxiliary plugin, so you can use your MP3 player of choice in the car. I wouldn't be suprised if CD players disappear from cars as well, in the fairly near future?
 
David Jimerson said:
Conversely, HD DVD does not deliver a quantum-leap benefit over the current standard.
Click to expand...

Indefinitely agreeable in the mass-consumer sense.

As acquisition and storage, I like the concept of larger discs just as much as swappable hard-drives. I own an HDTV, though, and I can say that after one week of having an HD-DVD player I realized I had no use for it and it was a waste of money. I'm happy, at the moment, with Enjoying my SD widescreen DVDs.

iTV might change that up just a little for me, because hey it's only 399.99. But not by much.
 
David Jimerson said:
Yes, that is true -- but if you're not going to "play" the CD, how long is PURCHASING the CD going to last when you can just download the songs you want, and they're already in electronic form -- no ripping required?

And heck, most new cars have stereo systems which accept an auxiliary plugin, so you can use your MP3 player of choice in the car. I wouldn't be suprised if CD players disappear from cars as well, in the fairly near future?
Click to expand...


http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=825140&postcount=54

Maybe next time, Jimerson! AHAHHHAHA HA HA HAAHAH AHAHA HA HA HA...HA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top