Umm, thats not the fault of the DVD medium. Thats the fault of the companies that produce the discs - and guess what - they are going to produce HD-DVD's and Blu Ray also. So all of the things that pissed you off about DVD's is going to continue - in fact, it will probably get worse as companies have more space to put idiotic ads, demos, for related content.

And what, exactly, does Mr. Blair or the alleged "quite extreme political bias" have to do with the issue at hand? Did Mr. Blair write this article (under an alias)? Are you suggesting that HD-DVD is a <i>political</i> issue?

Feel free to express your opinions along with the rest of us, but most of us would appreciate it if you did so in the proper context and when they actually contribute to the discussion.

Meanwhile ....

I think a lot of people are going to pause before jumping into a new format, especially the millions who <i>do not</i> have home theater setups, but simply watch DVDs on their less-than-35" TVs. It may very well be that the new formats will simply becone a niche market for a small percentage of homes, much as was the case with laserdiscs.

I think they'll be forced to buy HD-DVDs (or Blu-Ray) eventually just like some people are now forced to buy DVDs instead of VHS tapes.

DVDs will be phased out in favor of HD-DVD (or BR). They can continue to watch DVDs forever (just like there are people today that still watch their VHS tapes).

HD is being pushed by the studios because of peaking DVD sales. I don't see it being a niche product (like LD). I believe the adoption rate will be much faster than most people think.

Agreed.

UNlike VHS, DVD's can be played on the same machine and will help people convert. I could see something like this being sold bundled WITH an HDTV.

This helped my purchase.
If, for some reason, HD-DVD isn't the winner in a few years, I still have a great upconverting player for my parents or whomever wants it.

I think the mods are very level-headed about the whole thing. Note that the first "shot" fired was by one of the Sony acolytes.

I think the original rebuttal by Adam to the article says it best. Reading the article, it doesn't say that "HD-DVD is unneccesary" but that ANY HD format is unneccesary. Just because they are moderators does not mean they are not entitled to an opinion.

It wasn't until someone tried to turn this into HD vs. BR with an ignorant remark that the mods stepped in.

Absolutely. I have a clipping somewhere from Time magazine questioning Nintendo's logic in releasing a new system (SNES) when the NES was so successful.

It's very quite simple for me. High Definition DVD has better sound quality and better picture quality than DVD. :clap:

My feelings exactly!

I would say this is one of the best articles about HD-DVD that's been written in the mainstream press. It list some very reasonable and noted problems, but also makes it quite clear that the quality is far beyond DVD quality, unlike what our friend at the LA Times had to say.

Even though we may not all be earlier adopters, we're knowledgable, so mentioning that ones needs an HDTV to see the difference seems like a big "DUH!" to us, it might not to the general public.

ok.

soooooooooooo...

who's writing to the editor about this one? :)

I think it's articles like this that highlight the main problem. It's not hd dvd vs. blu-ray; it's convincing the rest of the world that high def dvd (whatever format) is worth it.

Who needs hd dvd?

Answer: people who care about movies, about experiencing movies as close as possible to the film maker's artistic vision.

Isn't dvd good enough?

Answer: on a relatively large high definition set, not even close. If you want to experience full film like impact, dvd is not enough.

How could high def dvd ever go beyond niche? There is no way it could ever match the success of dvd.

Answer: I heard similar objections nine years ago when I bought my first dvd player. I heard how dvd was never going to take off, because it doesn't record, and that 'vhs is good enough'. We tend to idealize the success of dvd as though it was a foregone conclusion.

I try to convince as many people as are interested in listening, because like it or not, we will need mass market in order to get all the goodies that we want on high def dvd.

I also only buy hd dvds (and will buy blu-ray discs when I choose to get blu-ray or universal player), but I won't buy regular dvds, just rent them. Besides the fact that this is where I enjoy spending my money, I figure that everything we do can be multiplied by many movie fans making similar decisions.

This is the precise definition of threadcrapping. Why do you comment at all on this topic if you don't care?

First: the topic is "who needs HDDVD".
Second: that phrase was in response to another's post on the relative qualities of commentaries, which are features on both SDVD and HD/BR, as measured by their use in film schools [which is not directly related to the topic either]. Stating that that's not a priority feature to me would be relevant in a topic discussing the dvd or hd/br formats and acceptability of such, which this topic is.

I can agree with this summary:
"High Definition DVD has better sound quality and better picture quality than DVD." Of course it has certain requirements; many people have already satisifed those requirements to some extent. Each consumer has to decide if the money spent investing in one format or the other, one of which may 'win', is worth that improvement. For me, I don't "need HDDVD" yet--not entirely for the reasons given in the article, except for the concern of picking a winning horse [although even should the horse I pick lose, I would still get use of it]--it's primarily content. There's not enough content yet of the types I'm interested in to warrant the expenditure as of now, but as I've said before, I'm going to continue keeping up with the news and see what happens. I do think that many 'average' people will have thought processes similar to that of the article's author, which will have an impact on the acceptance rate of HD/BR.

It's not true that you have to have a large set to see the difference, either.

I've got a 30" Sony Direct View HD set and the difference between SD and HD-DVDs is stunningly obvious.

My point was considering the fradulent stories and (political) bias of this paper, I wouldn't take much of what they (NYT) say to mean anything really --- included HD DVD reviews. There are many other publications and papers with much higher credibility and objectivity.

Regarding HD DVD being a niche -- far more people own HDTVs than people who owned laserdiscs back in the day. No, I don't expect HD DVD/Blu-ray to become "widespread" anytime soon, but I do believe there is a larger market for HD optical formats than there was for laser disc. I think it's encouraging sign of stores like Walmart and Target carrying HD DVD, for example.

Interesting article, but with DVDs going so strong I can afford to wait and see how this format war turns out.....and by then hopefully they would of fixed any problems.

I've got a 50" Sony HDTV and can readliy see the difference between a well mastered DVD and Hi-Def broadcasts. I'm usually all over the latest and greatest tech stuff (heck I paid $700 for my first DVD player after swearing I wouldn't go near DVD). That being the case I have no interest in either BR or HD-DVD since this would be a case of throwing good money after bad (depending on who wins or if they both go under). Once the dust settles (I don't think there's a way for both to exist long term with the splintered support), and there is a clear winner, I'll happily jump on in!


I think the article makes some good points about wether or not the masses are ready for another format. I'm wondering if HD discs will be to DVD what laserdiscs were to VHS while some other crazy format comes along and takes over.

Did you think it was going to "stay" at DVD forever? Obviously so. And I'm sure regular people probably think the same thing. "Smart" is not how I'd describe them. Naive is more accurate.

Let's have them buy pretty much the same thing all over again? I've done that with laserdisc and then DVD already. I'm prepared to do the same with HD-DVD...to an extent.

I can believe that! The difference between 720p WMV-HD and 480p of the same footage on my crappy 17" LCD computer monitor is very noticeable too so I imagine the difference between 480p and 1080p is painfully obvious.

The bold part of that is what's wrong here.

You are obviously threatened by the obsolescence of DVD. That's OK, I find it a little daunting to rebuy my collection.

But it wouldn't be daunting unless I saw an improvement in the product. After all, if HD represented no improvement or only a marginal one that an afficianado could appreciate I would feel no desire to upgrade.

The fact that you repeatedly rail agaist the new HD formats makes me think that you fear that the average consumer will latch onto it. Otherwise, you'd be content to let the futile HD formats die a quiet, humiliating death. If it were not so, you wouldn't feel the need to evangelize those of us who actually do embrace these new formats.

But have no fear, when one of these format does inevitably catch on, all indications are that the price will fall in line with current DVD prices. Then you can thank us because you'll be getting more for the same price. That's progress.

Hehe...Hahaha... HAHAHAHAHAH..... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Stop, yer killin' me!

*gasps for air*

Egads. If you were in charge, 8-track cassettes and VHS would be the current "state of the art".

The difference is not slight. It is profound. It I saw no difference, I would be the first to send my Toshiba back to the store.

HDTVs are being snapped up like hotcakes. Everywhere I turn around, someone has bought another one. It's inevitable that majority of people will eventually have hdtvs and will enjoy high definition dvds.

-notrolls-

In fairness, this is exactly the type of thread where those sorts of views should be posted.