Community weekly poll: Who do you predict will win the HD format war?
- 2/6/07 2:50 PM
(NT) Thanks for your comments. You may very well be right!
by gudguy - 2/8/07 12:43 PM In reply to: More than two formats will co-exist. by montreal_1HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray = Beta vs. VHS
by rtweedle - 2/6/07 9:29 PM In reply to: Who do you predict will win the HD format war? by Marc Bennett
Same as the Beta-VHS war, it will depend on who spends the most on advertising. We've already seen that it isn't necessarily the better system that wins.
This is NOT a Beta vs. VHS redux...
by Link1n - 2/7/07 7:52 AM In reply to: HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray = Beta vs. VHS by rtweedle...because unlike the videotapes, both disk formats are the same physical form factor, along w/ DVD and CD. Consequently, players and media will emerge that are compatible with both standards.
As for these media being the answer to a question no one asked, again I take issue. I and countless others invested in a HD-TV that gets 1080p. I want that resolution and detail in the movies I watch and the games I play. Can't get it on DVD. It's about time that we leveraged technology for higher quality for a change (unlike the situation w/ audio, where each generation of technological change seems to compromise quality, from vinyl to CD to MP3).
beta v vhs?
by CobNat - 2/7/07 10:13 AM In reply to: HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray = Beta vs. VHS by rtweedleactually, vhs won because they sold their souls to the porn industry. it had nothing to do wiht advertising just so you know.
Were you even been born back then?
by deltoncbaker - 2/7/07 10:41 AM In reply to: beta v vhs? by CobNatI lived it and Beta just was the wrong way to go!
ONE: Beta machines required that you clean them almost every time you used it. TWO: most people didn't have a TV capable of showing the picture difference. THREE: Cable TV was still a pipe dream, so everyone received their broadcast TV over the air waves. That mean the picture from VHS was a thousand times better than what they were used to. FOUR: VHS was cheaper and getting cheaper with each passing day. FIVE:The VHS media was cheaper too. SIX: The only real advantage BETA had was that you could fast forward the BETA machines and still see a picture. When VHS came out with their FOUR HEAD SYSTEMS they too could be fast forward and still see pictures. That was the end of the BETA.
It had nothing to do with selling ones sole to Pron or the devil.
Meh
by eibbor7 - 2/6/07 10:01 PM In reply to: Who do you predict will win the HD format war? by Marc Bennett
I really don't care. I'd frankly prefer if both faded into obscurity. It might sound a little counter-progress or whatever... but I'm pretty happy with the capacity of regular DVDs, and the sound and video quality they provide. Watching Lord of the Rings on a "regular old DVD" on a 43 inch pioneer plasma TV with a good 5.1 surround sound setup courtesy of Yamaha, Nuance, and Mirage, through some Sony DVD player is quite the experience. I definitely don't find myself longing for "more".
Not that "more" is a bad thing. I'm more concerned with the transition. I don't particularly like the idea of having to shell out stupid amounts of money to buy some hardware that can play either of these new formats. Last I checked, an HD DVD capable player at best buy ended up costing well over 1000 bucks Canadian... whereas a good regular DVD player costs 1/5 of that, or less.
HD DVD and Blu-ray strike me as the answers to a question no one asked. It's great that they can hold as much as they do and all, but do people really want to pay all kinds of money for all kinds of new equipment when a regular DVD does a great job already (and no one but the biggest of tech-geeks will actually notice a difference)?
spot on
by canta_brian - 2/7/07 12:34 AM In reply to: Meh by eibbor7Perfect post, ticks all the boxes for me.
BluRay vs HD DVD
by gavandtra - 2/7/07 4:51 AM In reply to: Meh by eibbor7Can't see the point of either until I can buy the players for under £20, as I can get a perfectly decent DVD player for this amount from Tescos/Asda/Sainsburys or who ever. Also I see no need for the discs untl they plummet in price and I can buy them for the 5 for £25 that I can in Virgin/HMV or where ever. Seems to be just an excuse by manufacturers to tell us we need to spend more on something I really don't see as being necessary for anyone other than Tech-geeks who have to have the latest toys.
Basically I agree with all the other people who have said similar things the only difference I see is that when the VHS vs BETAMAX thing was going on there wasn't already a usable alternative up and running so one of those two had to win, now however there really is a third much cheaper alternative for everyone and that is just to stick with DVDs, which are great, easy to use, no real format problems and as I keep stressing CHEAP CHEAP CHEAP!!!
BluRay vs HD DVD
by MikeTex - 2/7/07 5:57 AM In reply to: BluRay vs HD DVD by gavandtraI waited until there was a clear winner before I bought my first video player, it was VHS...how did I know they would win? You'd walk into any video rental place and there'd be racks of VHS and only a few shelves of beta ( I don't know anyone that bought movies then - they were selling for 75$ and up!)...the format that gets the most titles out to the consumer the quickest will win...and then the cost of the players will drop.
Everyone with a large screen HD TV will want an HD player (especially with all the hype coming from the studios), and more and more people are buying HD TV's....so it's only a matter of time.
HD-DVD and Blu-ray kid
by jlemdon - 2/7/07 6:06 AM In reply to: BluRay vs HD DVD by gavandtraI supported both but I really wanted HD-DVD to win but oh well I still have a PS3.
HD VS BLUERAY OR WHO CARES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
by noelvm - 2/7/07 6:13 AM In reply to: BluRay vs HD DVD by gavandtraWell I had one of the first VHS players. It was a recognized fact that the quality was not up to movie theater standards, but hey, I could make popcorn when I wanted to and watch what I wanted to, when I wanted to, without commercial interruptions. It was great. The quality of TVs wasn't all that great then anyway and we all had the best for the time.
Along comes DVD, along comes major advances in TVs. The current DVD machine hooked up with an HDMI cable going to a current gen TV is really great. I am NOT sitting there saying to myself, now if the picture was just a little better. Hey, it's great! I am still searching for those last few converts from VHS to DVD but 90+ percent of what I had has been coverted and there are a few more every year to have something to look forward to.
The hell with HD and Blueray. Suppose they gave a party and nobody came. :D:D:D:D:D:D
noelvm
I agree
by kevlap1 - 2/7/07 5:36 AM In reply to: Meh by eibbor7I just cannot believe the prices on these things!! A PS3 is $600, and the new Pioneer Blu-Ray player is around $1500!! You cannot tell me that there is that much of a cost difference to produce these units. I hope they both fail, I have a library of about 300 regular DVD's that play and look perfect through component cables to my Hitachi HD widescreen.....
You hit the nail on the head....
by jrdinger - 2/7/07 6:12 AM In reply to: Meh by eibbor7Like you, I dont feel as though my DVD experience is sorely lacking. Neither do I feel as if tech companies really deserve more of my hard earned money for a new DVD format.
Lets say Blu Ray (for the sake of argument) comes out on top. In five years, a competeing company will come out with Green Ray, or Uncle Donkey Video or whatever. No matter what format "wins", we'll all be forced to shell out our cash, switch over to the new standard, and start all over again.
I think about watching TV and movies ten years ago, and I can tell you that my 27" CRT and my VHS did just what they were made to do - watch TV and movies. I dont remember turning to my wife and saying, "Boy, this could be a lot better if it was on a 224 inch screen, and we had 30 hours of behind the scenes footage to watch." My life has not improved dramatically since the introduction of HD or DVD - wich is a shame, because the TV ads I saw all said I would be happier.
The difference between Blu Ray, HD, and regular "Old Timey" DVD's is negligable; and DVD is SO much cheaper.
I say, screw the Industry and keep your DVD player.
And, yes I DO still use my VHS.
And my 8 track. But that's a different post.
I agree
by AVPro - 2/7/07 6:16 AM In reply to: Meh by eibbor7There's no way I'm going to fork over hundreds of bucks to upgrade my DVD collection and the price of the players isn't worth the investment. When Sony can manufacture a blueray player for under $300 I might consider it depending on the titles avalible. LOTR and some of my favorite scifi flicks would be great in HD but for now I'm perfectly happy with my upscaling DVD player and my Sony 34" HD CRT.
One thing I noticed is the silence concerning the fact that both formats will ony work via HDMI to prevent copying. It's not something the manufactureres or retailers like to talk about.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
