There is plenty of reason to buy. Remember what you saw at the HD-DVD demo?

It honestly wouldn't surprise me if HD-DVD won. I recently got some DVD-R copies of stuff that was recorded on Beta from the early 80's. The quality really knocked me out.

Pretty sad that VHS won out over that.

Understood. But what happens when J6P who pre-ordered it finds out that the player is delayed....or that he has nothing to watch on it....or went home and told some people what he was getting?? There are a lot of variables as to what can happen with that pre-order.

Do you really think there will be any noticeable PQ difference between BR and HD-DVD?

That's why I think price will become an even bigger factor that it ordinarily would. There are lots of reasons why BR is technically better but what difference is the average consumer going to see?

I'm not saying PQ will be a factor but there are other advantages of BR over HD-DVD. Again, with something that obvious, people still didn't pick up Beta so lord knows what they'll do now.

That actually brings up a good question though: Beta was obviously the better format. Why did it lose?

I do not remember why Beta lost, but I will assume that it was a cheaper price, and the amount of VHS tapes that were initially shipped were much more than the Betamax.

I always heard that beta lost because sony refused to let Porn be sold on beta.

IIRC, VHS offered longer recording times, and that was very appealing to people who were for the first time able to record all their favorite TV shows.

And yes, there was porn.

So basically it was the ability to record at a lower quality with longer record times that they loved.

Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice.

As Josh Z said, VHS had a longer recording time (the cassettes were bigger and could hold more tape). That was a major factor in its ultimate success. I think it also had better marketing because there were more companies selling VHS. As I recall, Sony developed both formats and then sold VHS to JVC and kept Betamax for itself because it considered it to be the better format. The rest is history.Yes, VHS could record two, four or six hours of TV programs, depending on the quality setting. Later, thinner, tape raised that to eight hours. I still use a VHS VCR to time shift TV programs. I'd switch to a DVR if I could find one that wasn't linked to a subscription service (TiVO and the like).

The beta flop makes me inclined to believe that Sony simply will not give up on Blu-ray Disc, no matter how well HD-DVD does. But I am guessing, just like everyone else.

Pre-recorded tapes of movies and the like were a later development. The initial use of VCRs was to record OTA and cable TV programs, especially for time-shifting and archiving favorites. Being a slave to the big three network broadcast schedules may seem quaint nowadays, but the ability to time-shift was a big deal back when VCRs came out (late '70s). Those blank tapes were damned expensive, too. On the order of $20 a tape IIRC.

So why did Beta lose then? Is it the length as was previously mentioned?

I actually know someone who bought one of the last Beta machines ever made. He never used VHS. I now understand why.

If I look at the quality of my VHS tapes from the early 80's....to late 80's...and on, there's a HUGE difference. The quality of those early tapes was great. They're also much heavier.

Another frequently cited reason I hear is that VHS decks were being manufactured by more companies, so there was more competition and therefore more pressure on prices. The comparison went that VHS was to IBM what Beta was to the Mac.

Marketing was a major factor. I remember constantly seeing ads for "Omnivision" (VHS) with Reggie Jackson and others, but nary an ad for Betamax. However, in some areas of the country that might not have been as heavy. Sony blew the marketing end big-time.

One big issue was that JVC allowed other manufacturers to licence the technology and make VHS recorders. Sony did not do that with Beta until much later in the game (either that or they were asking way to much for licencing fees). That meant that there was a larger variety of VHS players available at all different price ranges in the early days. That, along with it's longer record time, really helped VHS.

Sorry for hijacking this. Obviously I figured that since we've had a format war before, I was wondering what the circumstances were for finding a winner. You know, the whole "history repeats itself" thing...

I suppose all those reasons have some validity but I purchased VHS simply because at the local rental shop VHS titles outnumbered Beta about 5:1.

The one common repeating factor in any format war is that Sony usually loses: Beta, MiniDisc, DAT, SACD (well, no winners in that one really), etc. About the only time they've "won" is with the PS2, if you consider video game consoles to be a format war.

Yep, I remember what I saw at the demo. A few trailers, and a split screen comparison between HD and SD. Unfortunately, the HD material was so over processed to "simulate" SD, it was a joke. (Although, I could see why a J6P would be impressed, since they don't know any better.)

The original SD demos back from 1997/1998 that Toshiba sent out looked better.

Look, since both formats use the same compression schemes, or at least can, there technically shouldn't be much of a difference between the formats. That's why the big arguement for Blu-Ray has been capacity.

Personally, the more capacity, the better, so my instinct is to go with Blu-Ray. That being said, if there was enough product, and Toshiba actually knew how to build a DVD player that didn't need a firmware upgrade every 6 to 12 months, I'd consider it.

The sad part about this whole mess is that everyone is essentially running around like a chicken with their head cut off, and have just about guaranteed that both HD formats are going to completely fall on their face.

fitprod

Well not entirely true... MiniDisc was in a format war with DCC (developed by Philips & Matsushita) and won that battle, but of course didn't amount to much outside Japan.

DAT was relatively successful in the professional audio world, but I'm not sure how aggressively it was pushed for mainstream use.

Absolute huge point. I think the difference will be nearly indiscernable.

I will go so far to say that MSRP means more than studio support. Most people don't care what studio releases what film. Try to explain the ins and outs of maximizing a Columbia House membership to people.

All most people will see is dollar signs.

if MS plays it's cards right, they can really stick it to sony because of the delay. Just like Sony flooded the market with PS games back when they were the underdog.

I really am interested in Blu-Ray personally. I was never interested in Sony's previous formats. I am also interested in HD-DVD for certain titles. But, as a whole I am definately interested in Blu-Ray as a technology more.

You are right. Beta blew VHS out of the water in ways.

But, your average restaurant worker/post office employee does not care about audio and video. They care about cheap, cheap, cheap and convenience.

People have literally beat each other up over those horribly cheap DVD players at Sears on the day after Thanksgiving sale. The $29 early bird specials. Just watching one of those players play a movie is an Video/Audiophiles worst nightmare. But, most people are not interested in video/audio.

What will help whoever wins to actually win? Cheaper prices first most. People are also lazy. It's what we base our advertising on. Peoples pure laziness. It's why diet pills are such a huge market and why the diet sector makes an utter fortune. People want easy over quality, work, and doing the right things for your body. If any of these items actually worked, we wouldn't keep seeing more of them. It's a never ending repeating cycle and always will be. Very few people learn the right things to do to really succeed. It's why 95% of people fail on diets. They don't work. A healthy lifestyle is what works forever. But, laziness helps marketers to make utter fortunes.

So, the easier something is to work, the better. Convenience is another. Quality has always taken a backseat to these other issues. It's nothing new.

Not saying HD-DVD is of poor quality. Neither format seems of poor quality at this point. But, if talking from a future standpoint, Blu-ray has more to offer IMO.

HD-DVD can get a foothold because of the price. It's actually not bad at all for a brand new item of this magnitude. Most new items always start above $1000. So, a $480 price range is really actually pretty good and affordable to a lot of people for a new item like this. Prices will drop even more in the coming months.

Many HDTV owners paid $500 for the first upconverting players. But, with this you get something to play true HD discs as well as upconvert your whole current collection. It's a great idea.

Sony is launching it's price too high. This is a mistake. If they also launched at $500? That would have been the best option and things would be more fair.

Sony is playing the greed game again. They should have leaned their lesson the last time.

It's common knowledge that Sony will be taking huge hits on Playstation 3. Playstation 3 is likely to be a best seller for the holidays. It's kind of guaranteed. It will be like Playstation 2 all over again and no one will be able to get one who doesn't plan ahead.

I feel Playstation 3 will be a big hit which really will be good for Blu-Ray. Playstation 2 really helped the DVD format along. So, this could happen again.

At most, I feel these formats will co-exist for several years. If HD-DVD wins, I still feel Blu-Ray will be supported for awhile. Only because of it's Playstation 3/ future Computer usage.

HD-DVD advantages: Price, Quantity, Computer Drive usage, Microsoft

Blu-Ray advantages: Technology advancement, Quality (upcoming video/audio options), Gaming, Playstation 3

Movies are aside to both because they will both offer movies.

What would have been the best option is of course a hybrid using the best technologies of both. The best of both worlds. But, if we lived in the perfect world where everyone could just agree on these things, we wouldn't have war either.

People get greedy (especially major businesses). That's the bottom line. But, someone always looses in the end.

Sony is stubborn? Yes, they are. But, they have always been. They don't want to share. They are like that kid you knew growing up who never wanted to share any of their toys. But, was their quality better and more appealing from a technology standpoint? Yes. Just as it was with Beta. But, that doesn't guarantee you will win.

Toshiba/Microsoft have not been too friendly themselves. They have actually been really playing at a scummy level. Insulting Blu-ray at every turn, trying to throw it's existance under the carpet, badmouthing studio heads, etc. Dirty playing. I don't like it and it really questions their respectability to me. Not that I even liked Microsoft. I don't like Bill Gates. Not because he is rich. I like rich people depending on who they are. I don't like his character and never have. But, I did like Toshiba for a long time. Until the past several years where their quality has been going in the can since branching off.

Sony is greedy, but their approach has at least been more normal rivalry/competition.

Neither side is an angel is disguise. They are all out to make money.

Funny you mentioned the Porn industry.

For starters, more of the porn companies will be supporting Blu-Ray. I just read about it this week. I will try to find the article.

Not that I personally want to see hairy vaginas waving in the wind on Hi-Def, but, I know others do.

I am probably the only person around who gets annoyed by all that moaning from the woman. Other people get turned on by these things. I more just want to slap the bit"" and tell her to shut the hell up. She gives me a headache and kills the mood.