As someone with over 400 discs, MANY in DTS, I can't agree with you. Anyone who had a laserdisc player knows how severely DVD is lacking in the sound department and I think I'm looking forward to the sound abilities of a future format even more than the picture improvement (and yes, I own an HDTV). I will have no problems dumping my DVD's for the HD version in a heartbeat. I've already started thinking about my purchasing choices and how to get the most while saving for an HD format. BRING IT ON!

I don't know. i don't think people will abandon their old disks and players, but the new players must be backwards compatible or people will simply not be interested. HD DVD has a chance because the player will be cheaper and 90% of the buying population doesn't really know or care about teh new formats they are probably just shopping for a cheap dvd player.

Eventually all players will be Blu-ray so people won't have to worry about buying a player to play them. It will be there. And there's no question about it being backwards compatible.

What makes you think the HD-DVD player will be cheaper, Morrow?

That the HD-DVD discs are apparently currently slightly cheaper to produce doesn't change the cost of the player (and, for that matter, likely won't change the price end consumers pay for the discs. CDs were cheaper to produce than cassette tapes, but they still cost more in the store). That is, even assuming that HD-DVD makes it to market.

Of course, someone who is buying solely on price likely won't buy until the format issues are completely decided. Even if there was still going to be a format war, those people likely wouldn't contribute.

I've watched DVD movies since 1999, and I can watch them for another 6 years if need be. In fact, I've seen DVDs on my friend's HDTV, and goddamn, they look great. Yes, a high def DVD will look so much better, but for now, I can live just fine watching DVDs on a HDTV.

And another thing. DVDs are cheap. I sense it will be a very long time before the execs of these companies get their act together and present a great package for their consumers.

There are many sources (a few in this thread) indicating that the HD dvd players will be cheaper because the blu-ray players incoporate more current technology. I am sorry but the average consumer is not going to spend more on a player than they do for a tv. Most people don't even have a tv that will benefit from an HD player. Also, rentals will suffer because prices will go up as movies are goign to cost more. DVD sales are going to cost more too and torn between 2 formats is going to add confusion. If consumers were smart they wouldn't buy anything and in that way fight back and force manufactuers to agree on one format. It's a flashback to the old beta / VHS war.....oh and FYI beta format was far superior to VHS but lost!

As an aside I wouldn't be suprised if movie ticket sales boom in the next yr.

Ummm...but there is one format? No way in hell HD-DVD is going to launch. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.

If the studios were smart, they'd stop making regular DVD movies OR they'd make the Blu-ray version cheaper. ;)

Not likely. Did you notice what the Tower records guy said in the article posted by speedy1961 above?:

Cassidy said it is imperative the new format be marketed to consumers as a premium — not commodity — product.

“It is important that there not be a race to the bottom regarding pricing as occurred with DVD,” he said. “We need a format the consumer can recognize as a value-add.”

I would guess that Blu-ray or HD-DVD discs will be sold at premium prices for a few years at least.

I guess I can't read because all I see is that the discs could be manufactured cheaper (and the idea that having a PS3 priced at $500 with Blu-Ray playback capability could be a potential boon for that format). The articles I have seen published this month about Toshiba's new player quote a $1,000 price point, which is what Blu-Ray players have said to cost, as well.

Though, again, manufacturing costs don't determine the price whether it's the media or the player. Companies will charge what the market will bear.

Proof will be in teh results....if I hook up an HD dvd format with an $$ player and it barely looks better than the setup I have now, Why bother.....

So it seems Sony is stuck. If they release the PS3 with BR capabilities at a competitive price to other consoles they will have to be nearly 1/2 the price of stand-alone BR players. Hence pissing off all those that sided with them to make BR the format winner. If they don't include BR playback then they lied about their format being in "millions of homes" due to the PS3 as a reason to choose BR over HD-DVD. Am I missing something here???

As far as the BR dvd being a premium "value-added" product I think that is a bad idea. It will be hard enough to convince alot of people, NOT JUST J6P, to jump on the EXPENSIVE bandwagon. As alot of people have already mentioned, the super audio DVDs were suppose to be a premium audio product.

You're not missing anything.

I think they'll just go with the first, and not give two shits about screwing over the other companies that sided with them.

They're also working against their own interests, in that case. Sony themselves will be marketing $2,000 standalone Blu-Ray players. Who's going to buy one?

I agree with digitalfreaknyc.

I myself have over 4000 DVDs at present count and the audio side ( from MY perspective) has been lacking.

I do not own a HDTV set but will be looking to upgrade to one in the next 5 years.

Hardcore videophile early adopter types. Those are the only people that are going to buy standalone players regardless of the PS3.

The HD formats aren't going to catch on for a long time in the mainstream. Probably never IMHO.

The selling point for HD-DVD was that discs could be manufactured using current DVD making equipment, at a predictable and low cost. The Blu-ray discs will require new machinery and have an as yet undetermined cost of manufacture. Hence this from the article in speedy1961's post 219 above:

When it became clear that Blu-ray was launching at the very least as a component of PlayStation 3 regardless of the plans or support for HD DVD, Warner execs decided they wanted to have input into Blu-ray.

They got that through a couple of important concessions from Blu-ray. The format will now include a low-cost red-laser option that will allow studios to create a Blu-ray version of the DVD-9, a “BD9.” Cardwell said that since the costs of manufacturing blue-laser-based Blu-ray discs “are unknown to us,” Warner wanted to ensure there was some level of expenses the studio could more accurately project.

The option is essentially the same one Warner proposed to both the Blu-ray and HD DVD camps more than three years ago, but which Blu-ray previously rejected.

The studio plans to use the red-laser option for shorter programs that don’t require all the storage capacity of a blue-laser disc or for budget-priced titles that might not justify the higher costs.

It appears that there will be a way to make a lower capacity disc, of known manufacturing cost, that will play in a Blu-ray machine. But that is not to say that regular Blu-ray discs will be inexpensive to make; quite the opposite, most likely.

This, of course, is the salient point. Current DVDs are very cheap to manufacture but that has little or no bearing on the pricing. Only if Blu-ray discs were very expensive to make would some of that cost have to be passed on to the customers so that studios and retailers could have the markup they want for their products.

I completely disagree. HD is here to stay and is the way everything is moving. It's not going to stay at something as low rez as DVD forever.

I think it will stay, but it won't be the top selling format. It will just sell enough to stick around.

Most people think DVD looks fantastic and have no desire to upgrade. Just like CDs. DVD-A and SA-CDs sound better, most people don't care.

People ditched VHS not just because DVD looked and sounded better, but that it did that and had no rewinding, instant scene access, extra features, durability, etc. on top of the a/v leap.

I just don't see something that only improves audio and video being a hit with joe six pack and every dethroning DVD.

I'm confident 20 years down the road every mainstream movie will still be available on DVD. Just like every album is available on CD today 25+ years after the format debuted.

While I completely see where you're coming from, I think you're underestimating Joe 6-pack. I have friends who don't have a ton of money but cannot WAIT to get a plasma screen and know all about HDTV. They know what it looks like and know how gorgeous it looks. If it starts to get marketed to them and they see the difference between what it looks like on DVD and then on HD, they're going to want what's better. We're reaching this weird period where home theaters are becoming a sign of status. It's as if it's the new "toy" that everyone has to show off. I see people of all different classes buying home theater systems whereas it used to only be a high end interest. People are really clamouring for what is new and looks better and sounds better. Although DVD can look great on an HDTV, you can definitely see the difference between something on a DVD and an HD broadcast. I would go so far as to say it's night and day especially when you see them side by side. And if you put that information out there, J6P is going to want to buy...as long as it's affordable as well.
Neither of the formats you mentioned was promoted nearly as much as I assume an HD format will be.

NYC people (and other big cities), even J6P's there, are going to be more hip on technology that people in non-urban areas.

Promotion will be wait and see, but price will be the killer. The players are going to be expensive for a few years, the TVs are still expensive (dropping but still out of most peoples range for one of a decent size) and I see no way the discs will be as cheap as DVDs.

Especially the big releases that the use as loss leaders.

Time will tell I guess.

I don't care one way or the other as I just dont' care much about audio and video and won't be replacing many discs. When ever I pick up an HDTV and the bluray players are cheap I'll pick one up and start buying new discs on it and rebuy some essentials like star wars and lotr.

So basically you're saying that less than $1000 is still really expensive for a TV?

And that you don't care about audio or video...you just care about having a big collection of movies. Doesn't matter what you play them on.

Huh. I'll get back to you when I find the sense in all that.

It's called I enjoy the actual content of the films and thus I buy the DVDs. I don't buy them for the A/V specs. All I need is a good clear picture, and 5.1 sound. DVDs give me that. I hate audio/videophiles who care more about that crap that the actual content of the movie.

Also given that I've had a DVD player since 1998 and have only 195 or so DVDs(probably 10 or so of which are music) hardly classifies as a big collection IMO.

Anything over $300 is more than most people can afford for a TV. I couldn't afford a new TV period if mine broke now. I'd just have to do without as I'm on a tight Ph D student budget. Plus if you note my above post, I said HDTVs were still expensive for one of any size. I don't see the point in buying one sub 40 inches at the smallest. I'd rather stay with my 27" Wega until prices drop or I'm making more money and can afford a large set. Since I don't care much about video quality, and mainly want the size upgrade eventually, there's not point in shelling out $600-1000 on a 30 inch or so HDTV

Please understand not everyone who is waiting for HD feels this way. Just because a person might want a closer experience to what the director intended does not mean they don't care about the plot of said movie.

I'm sure many would care if director's started shooting on HandyCams! Then again, it certainly would save mucho bucks for the studios on film and camera costs .... ;)

Good Luck! I'm a few classes away from graduating and can't wait.

I'll agree with this. I have a 30" Phillips for my bedroom that I bought used at a very good price. I'll also add that HDTV prices have been falling like rocks and will continue to do so for sometime. A lot of the ultra expensive big screens will be very affordable in the next few years as the industry is moving toward mainly flat panels, not to mention many companies are going to start massive pushing of 1080p sets into the market. It wasn't that long ago that a 40 inch plasma was around 8 grand. Seems like a giant waste given current prices.

Oh I know. I was just directing it at the comment that it didn't make sense to not care about A/V quality, and yet have a "large" collection.

I know most people love movies and just want them in the best possible A/V presentation.

I just can't stand when the occassional rare person can't seem to get how someone can enjoy a movie on DVD if there's a better looking and sounding version out there.

Makes no sense to me. The movies are what everyone should be buying dvds, blu ray etc for. The A/V quality is secondary, and is just the icing on the cake.

Looking and it like digitalfreaknyc is kind of missing the forest for the trees IMO and losing sight of what's important.

Sorry Josh. I'm not going to settle for second best.

Yes, I enjoy what I have. But if "better" is out there and I can afford it, I want it.

Again, having grown up with laserdiscs and switching over to DVD, I can't wait to get back to that sound.

Not only are movies my passion but this is also a hobby and as such, the collecting aspect of it will not go away. It will just transfer to whichever medium is out there.

And I wouldn't judge my point of view simply because it's different from yours. As has been debated before, HDTV's ain't that expensive and the people that bitch that they can't afford them are the same people paying x amount of dollars every month on DVD's. I'd rather be watching them on something bigger and hold off on buying some than suffer on a 20" tv.