After all this time, I still didn't know DVD came out in '97. I thought it came out mid '98 for some reason. I bought my first player in June of '99 which was a $350 RCA with DIVX, and I thought I was sort of an early adopter because I only knew one other person at the time with a DVD player.

I can honestly see them both succeeding. I mean if the UMD format can find sucess (which evidently it has in spades so far) then i don't see why both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray couldn't both stick around for the long haul.

So my prediction is that they will both be around until their eventual successor comes along. But the 'loser' won't ever die off, it will just get fewer releases instead of getting releases of everything like current DVD does.

I don't see them both succeeding until a multi-player is offered. You have most studios on one side or the other so to get all your favorite movies/new releases you have to have both formats.

In the short run? Forget Beta or Divix, I see this going the way of SACD & DVD-Audio, both survive but neither really succeed and no clear winner.

In the long run? I don't think it will catch on until writable drives are offered for PCs, and even then it only catches on as a viable storage medium.

The only way I see it working is like awmurray said, get the players to a price point where standard DVD players are just phased out and there is no other option than HD. HDMI is the kicker though, it will be a long time before everyone has a tv with that input.

It depends what you mean by succeed. I want one format to be as succesful as current DVD so we get more than just mainstream movies released. UMD may be succesful, but certainly not to the point where we're going to see obscure releases from Anchor Bay, Dark Sky Film, or Blue Underground on that format. That's what I want for the next generation HD format, as big of a selection as we have now with DVD, and the way they're going about the release it's going to be a LONG time, if ever, before that happens. Survive? Maybe. Become the true successor to current DVD? I doubt it (but I hope I'm wrong).

Akin to video game platforms, I could see both technologies succeeding. Like the video game model, some releases could be available on both platforms and some exclusive.

If multiple formats can survive in the video game world, two can likely survive in the HD world.

I disagree.

History has shown that the vhs/beta war was costly for consumers, retailers and manufacturers as well. Laserdisc suffered for a variety of reason but died even though it was superior to vhs.

SACD/DVD-Audio are battling for a nich market share and not succeding.

Gamers are passionate about their games and many gamers have multiple systems. Most movie watching people are older and simply want to put a disc in a box and watch the show. The current full screen vs. wide screen debate shows that two "standards" are always trouble.

In the UK 16:9 TVs just seemed to fly into people's homes over a relatively short space of time. We've had one for two years now and we adopted fairly late when they were at rock bottom prices. Practically every home in the UK has a 16:9 TV. 4:3 TVs have all but vanished except in 14" sizes. Now if you go into a shop, there's usually only one or two regular 16:9 TVs shoved into a corner somewhere out of sight. HDTVs are everywhere in shops and it seems to have happened over just a short space of a few months. I think the same thing is going to happen with HDTVs as with standard definition 16:9 TVs and in a year or two, everyone (a vast majority of households) will have one.

High Definition DVDs will gradually become the 'norm' too since the same will happen with HD players. If studios want High Definition DVDs to catch on faster, they'll have to go with either highbred discs or include a second disc with the HD version of the film with SD DVDs. Then they can just phase out SD DVDs gradually.

How was laserdisc range too much?
1. Laserdisc players were anywhere between $299.99 and up.
2. New release Laserdisc only cost around $34.99 whereas new release (at the time) of VHS were just under $100.00.

[QUOTE=Brian Shannon]I disagree.

Laserdisc suffered for a variety of reason but died even though it was superior to vhs.

The major reason Laserdisc filed was due to marketing.


QUOTE]

Laserdisc players for the first decade and a half were way above $300. For an almost bottom of the line model in 1993 I had to pay $600, on sale. And $35 is more than twice what DVD costs. With prices like that, any disc format WILL fail. Comparing to VHS isn't the issue, keep in mind they didn't sell many prerecorded VHS at first, just blanks for taping.

Laserdisc was doomed from the start. It served it's purpose for the people that wanted the best reproduction of the theater in their homes. And most of those said people made a decent living and could afford it. HD-DVD/Blu-Ray will be different. Prices will fall like they never did with Laser.

It's going to be a niche market for at least 2 years however. Once prices start to fall in hardware and software more people will adopt. Also as more and more people purchase HDTVs and get a taste of HD video they will jump on board. Personally, though I'd love to have an HD player right away, I'm waiting for the prices to come down to Earth and for a dual format player. I'm not wasting my money on something that I'll have to upgrade when one format eventually dies.

When you look at other home video launches, the ones that succeed are the ones people wanted. It's really that simple. People will want HD. Maybe not our good friend Joe Six Pack, but enough people to actually have a market for it where buying a player and some movies doesn't mean a second mortgage and your first born.

Until they're released, no one knows. Anything said now is a guess.

Also when considering VHS prices, you have to remember that $100 for a VHS was rental pricing. While you could if you knew how buy those movies, it wasn't really pricing intended for the general consumer. When they did release VHS titles for consumers to buy, the prices were much, much lower. Around 20 bucks I believe.

Laserdiscs on the other hand, were on the low end 34.99. Many were priced much higher than that. Actually, I thought they all were but I guess 34.99 might've been the baseline there.

This is an excellent discussion!

While, I agree that it will be harder for high def dvd to make the same splash as DVD initially, I think we shouldn't overlook one advantage that this transition has. When you transitioned from vhs to dvd, you had to buy two decks and live with two completely different mediums. Currently, a person who goes out to buy a new high def dvd player will automatically get a compatibility with dvds, and hopefully CDs. Of course, now we have a format war, so you'll need two players...

I think that right now everything is too abstract. People think they'll see a big difference in picture quality (I know I do!), but it's when they actually begin to see it, how they'll respond is what counts!

I also think that this will be different from laserdisc, or sacd/dvd-audio. I think there will definitely be a format war and it will be absolutely savage! These companies are out to bury one another and they will be marketting and aggressive pricing like crazy! They will do everything they can to make the masses sit up and take notice.

The way things stack up now, there is no way both these formats suceed. Blu-Ray has the long term advantage because of greater studio support, and because the longer this goes, the better their manufacturing will get until hd-dvd's price advantage will be significantly diminished or erased. I think that hd-dvd has the short term advantage, because of costs, and because they seem to have something solid coming out of CES, whereas Blu-Ray seems a bit nebulous to me.

To summarize, I think that high def DVD will make bigger splash than most people realize, that prices will come down and the titles will release in numbers like never before. I also think that this year HD-DVD has a chance to score a knockout punch, but the longer the format war goes, the more advantage will shift to Blu-Ray.

Hey, call me an optimist, but I think not too long from now we'll be discussing where are the best deals on those players and those high def titles.
Stan

LD lasted for over 20 years. It predated VHS and CD and survived for a couple years against DVD until the studios woke up and started doing anamorphic DVDs. Define doomed.

Frankly, at this point the only thing BD/HD-DVD have going for them is the familiar 4.75" disc shape started with CDs. Which was one of the top reasons DVD did so well.

Taking into consideration the amount of people who already own dvd players, can these two fail?

Kinda like the Super Audio CD.

Seious question, because it seems like a console war at the moment where you have to choose one or the other.

I don't think SACD fails, as it was intended for audiophiles instead of mainstream market. I think this will be the case of high def DVD, at least for now.

Well, since neither of those discs will even be recognizeable by all those DVD players that people own....Yes, they could fail. Just like SACD, which is gasping for life at best.

On SACD....Sony really screwed themselves with that, putting out many many discs that were SACD-only at first. Once they finally started putting out SACD/CD hybrids, nobody cared.

Theres too much riding in it for them to fail. Companies like Sony are betting the farm.

I think the only thing guarenteed is that one will fail. And the day after it fails, I will buy the other one

Hmmmm, really depends on what qualifies as success. It won't be near the success of DVDs. It may supplant dvds over time, but I don't think we will see the market takeover that we did with dvd over VHS. It would not surprise me at all to see the market move slowly enough that another technology will move ahead of it before it gets good market penetration.

So my guess is that it will be a success in the same way the Nintendo 64 was a success. It was fine, and made some money for the company, but was supplanted by better products and plenty of people passed it over happy with their PS1 and skipped to PS2 and Xbox.

I sometimes wonder if Sony wanted SACD to fail. I remember them pushing Minidisc in the states harder than they did with SACD. The hybrid discs were a great idea but they let if just slip away.

You make it sound like Sony's future as a company is tied up in Bluray. Doubt that.

Well, that's what I've been consistently reading in the past few months.

Another thing to look at is this;

Most people have more then 1 DVD Player in their house (I have 5, for example) which in turn cost €30.00 around here.

No-one's gonna pay $500 + for a HDDVD with a HD-tv in each room.

Then you say, "well just get it in one room"

But for people with more then one DVD Player, it will stil be outselling the HDDVD's if people have one HDDVD player and around 3 DVD Players.

And example would be if I got a HD-DVD Player in my house. I'd still be getting DVDs for 5 other players. Not all are mine, it's just an example.

Head-scratching smileys removed.

It can be a good idea to re-read your messages before you post them. Sometimes what makes sense to you while you're typing will be incomprehensible to the world at large. I have no idea what the second half of your post is trying to say.

I have no doubt that one fromat or the other will succeed. I am normally an early adopter, but not this time. I've got two great HD sets, a 64" Pioneer RPT and a 43" Pioneer plasma. They both look great with an off air HD tuner feeding them through their component inputs, and there's the rub. No budget for a new big screen with HDMI inputs, so I'll be way behind the curve on this technology .

Phil