Bias = inherently unreliable. Applies to any situation, not just in a legal setting.

I think overall he is saying that more studio support trumpets whatever other advantages HD-DVD has. I don't think that he is partial from his post. He doesn't seem to say "HD-DVD sucks BD is king!," and he is basically saying that studio support is going to be the deciding factor.

If Universal really wanted HD-DVD to win, they would be releasing titles left and right which is not the case. I mean if I were Universal I would do exactly that. Now with combo discs on the horizon, I think they are effectively going to kill HD-DVD. Well kill might be to strong of a word, but I think that combos are going to be a major hit to HD-DVD. I know some of you love them, but the price is ultimately going to be a deciding factor.

I definitely don't think porn is going to be a major factor as it was during the DVD era because most people get their porn from the Internet now.

Ultra cheap players will do nothing if there are no titles for people to buy. I mean people aren't that stupid even J6P. You don't think they are going to ask what the player does? If they are told it plays HD-DVD, and they check out the smaller library compared to BD they will most likely pass.

This is nothing new though and the article is something he could have and probably did write a year ago. Since day one we knew that BD had the studio and hardware advantage and that HD DVD was a major underdog. Nothing has changed in this war and nothing has happened that we didn't expect.

The reason for all of this was HD DVD releases suddenly dropping off. Big BD supporters like Bill Hunt have been waiting patiently for nearly a year to finally write their HD DVD is dead articles and this gave them reason to start doing it. I expect to see more and more articles in the media announcing the death of HD DVD. Maybe in 2-3 years they will finally be right.

True. I could understand his bias if every other month he kept on saying BD is going to be the winner, but I think this is only the second right up, correct me if I'm wrong. I just don't get all the bashing that he's getting.

:hscratch:

I wish this was true, I would win every trial. ;)

On topic, there's a term that applies when one argues the positive facts while downplaying the negative ones, its called "advocacy" and, based on his article/editorial, I think there is no question that Bill is an advocate of BD.

But he's not. He saying that BD COULD do certain things and THEREFORE, BD wins. He's also refusing to concede those same things to HDD without any justification for doing so. It's not advocacy, it's shilling.

I don't think bias is 'inherently unreliable'. EVERYONE has bias on most topics and in most situations, even those they know little to nothing about. It's very difficult if not impossible to totally remove bias. If bias = inherently unreliable, then network news is worthless. I saw a headline on CNN the other day: "Courthouse Shooting". The actual story was that a defendant, going in for trial, got away from his handlers, and hauled ass away. One of the guards shot him as he was escaping. The news network was biased in formulating the headline rather than something like "Escaped Suspect Caught", I was biased in thinking 'courthouse shooting' means someone inside goes postal or whatever.
And is there any legal ruling on 'biased witnesses'? I can see witnesses with too much bias, and sometimes their testimony might not be given the weight as a 'nonbiased' witness, but I can't see them being excluded just because they're "biased".

Wow, this is so off-topic, but last question first - YES, they can be excluded. It is within the judge's discretion to exclude evidence that is not relevant, prejudicial, or would confuse the jury. Biased witnesses generally fall under #2, and yes, can be excluded for that reason.

As for the first part, that's the whole point of this. If this guy is just some dude on the street's opinion, then fine, he's entitled. But some are making this out like it's big news and has some relevance in the greater debate. In that case, he absolutely should be discounted.

I don't see it as 'news'. I see it as someone, who has more intimate knowledge of the industry than I, expressing an opinion or conclusion based on the current state of HD and BD. Sort of like getting stock market advice--educated guesses based on history and status quo.
In his Post 2, he does seem to be pushing toward BD, especially with "Write Universal and tell them to go BD", but I honestly don't see the rest of it being 'anti-HD' or BD shilling. I don't know if I agree with his point that multiformat players would not be a good thing, and/or would cost a lot more.
Most of his posts are somewhat egocentric comments about 'they wish they could say this' but ultimately the facts as he states them break down to these:
* quality of HD and BD is reasonably equivalent overall;
* studio support is 5 exclusive/12 total for BD, 2 exclusive/6 total for HD;
* standalone hardware support is 9 to 2;
* BD software sales currently outselling HD (not sure what time frame or what source he's using for this);
* Sony's arrogant, but so is Microsoft;
* cheap players aren't profitable, so the only reason he can see to drive prices down is a last minute push (the latter is certainly opinion, and the former might be as well, or you could use the Gillette model as a counterargument);
* universal players will likely be more expensive and won't "end" the format war (again, the latter is conjecture, and while early adopters will get burned when combo players come out, they could make the whole HD/BD thing more attractive to the more mainstream consumer, depending on pricing);
* porn - there are multitudes of easily-accessible alternative channels for cheap/free porn, so that segment of the market will likely not drive HD;
* if Universal jumps ship to BD or releases in both, HD will then have no unique selling point and will fade out.
* For HD to 'win', they need to pull some of the BD specific publishers to their side.
I'm omitting the comments on the Japanese and Australian markets, because the markets are not totally equivalent, and I don't know much about them (although he doesn't mention Europe).

The rest of his posts were fluff.

Anyway:
* Are those facts, as I restated them, correct?
* Are there any meaningful "pro-HD" facts or counterarguments that he omitted, purposefully or not?
* If "yes" and "no", then his conclusion, that BD is "already winning", almost makes itself. Of course, given sales numbers compared to DVD, that's sort of like saying 2nd place in a marathon is "winning" over 3rd place, when they're both 19 miles behind first place (dvd). And any level of bias in his article or his history do not negate the facts. No, it's not "news". It's commentary. Taken as such, it's perfectly valid.
I think some of the more pro-HD people aren't necessarily taking it as news, they're sort of willfully resisting 'bad news'.

The 'guy on the street' is more entitled to his opinion, and sharing it, than an "industry expert" or at least aficionado?

Best post in this whole thread by a mile.

Stop shilling for dtcarson. ;)

:lol:

Of course it is, for you. It's BD-positive.

Am I the only one that doesn't really care one way or the other which format wins EXCEPT for the fact that I have aleady purchased an HD-DVD player, so that's the one I am pulling for?

Both formats are essentially the same. One does not have any huge deal breaking advantage over the other, except for the fact that I bought an HD-DVD player, so the HD-DVD group has that advantage going for them...me.

But even after saying that, the HD-DVD group doesn't have THAT big of an ally with me because I have only bought 5 discs. They need to get some content out there that I want. Until then, having Cornflakeguy in their corner ain't doing them much good.

I have admitted before and will admit again. Except for the initial player purchase price, Blu-Ray looks better to me.

There are titles that I will buy no matter what, and so far, HD-DVD has presented me with 5 of those titles. I will need to look at a Blu-Ray title list and see which of those I would buy no matter what.

I'll bet it's more than 5.

I don't care which way it goes but I still hope it's not BD (even though I own both).

Unfortunately, they're NOT the same. BD still has pretty severe issues, IMHO.

Having read all of these postings in an effort to understand where some of you are coming from in regards to the format war, I've come to the conclusion that too many people are entrenched in their support of a specific format; especially people that are otherwise intelligent, thoughtful, and educated. I hadn't read The Digital Bits in years (as much for lack of time as the tone of the material there) and I'm sure not Mr. Hunt's biggest supporter given some of the stances he has taken over the years but some of you seem all too willing to jump down his throat for the perceived slight he gave your format of choice. Using him as an example of why BD will succeed is silly in the opposite way (insiders and insider wannabe's always seem too willing to appease their friends) but making it personal isn't going to change the outcome of the "war" in question.

From the Op-ed piece in question:
"Frankly, I wish this format war had never happened. I am SO sick and tired of endlessly debating the merits of one of these formats versus the other. I'm tired of talking to reps for studios that are sitting on the fence or straddling both formats, who gamely spout the diplomatic company line about how great both formats are on the record, but off the record tell you how sick they all are of the situation and how much more hassle and headache it's caused them having to support THREE formats (including standard DVD). And I'm tired of watching early adopters backbiting each other at every turn. I'd rather just be talking about all the great films being released on disc in high-definition. I truly don't care which format wins, as long as one wins. But as long as there are two competing formats, we ALL lose. Period. The home video industry is not like videogaming. People do not have the patience for two or even three separate formats. They want to go to the store, buy a disc and know that it's going to work when they get home. It's that simple. They don't want to have to worry about having to buy the red box, or the blue box... or even the red AND blue box." (emphasis mine)

His advocacy of BD is not that much different than the advocacy of HD DVD by some of you (including a few of our talented reviewers; something I've been asked about more than a couple of times by the way) and I think that for all the flaws in early format advocacy (on both sides), the key point is that the masses of people out there aren't buying either of them. Stand alone player sales suck, and while those with gaming add ons are certainly going to buy a handful or two of titles initially, price and content will rule. The oft-maligned "Joe Six Pack" consumer is what will make or break the format war, not the online format shills/advocates with high end systems and industry contacts (at least a few of us here qualifying for the title) and right now, most people are sitting it out while the sides fight.

PS: As the "porn guy", I feel compelled to say that while I don't think the genre will have a huge impact, it has already sold some players for HD DVD (including the one I bought for reviewing purposes). Because of smaller sales expectations, a porn title can sell relatively few copies and still be a huge hit for a company under HD DVD.

I think you will find that on a site like this 99% of us are perfectly willing to support both formats. Many of us have frustration with the Blu-ray group, but it is not just because we are entrenched in a format. Sony and the Blu-ray group have worked very hard over the last year to piss most of us off.

That said Blu-ray has really done a lot to improve in the last 3-4 months. More and more releases are matching the HD DVDs in features, they have shifted to better codecs and are using BD-50 more and more. They still put out the ocassional idiotic press release, but overall I think most of us are now comfortable with supporting Blu-ray. I've been very close to buying in a few times myself, but really don't want to do it with a video game machine as my main player. I'm personally socking away money on hope for a future combo player worth buying.

We all know that mainstream success if what will win the war, however, at this point I think mainstream success for either one is on very shaky ground. When two video game consoles are pushing the hardware sales it really doesn't bode well for a balanced library of movies. Hopefully the standalone prices for both formats drops a lot by the end of the year. We need the average consumers to buy in to one soon. The longer this goes the greater the odds of HD video staying a niche item.

By posting stuff like this, you're clearly showing your bias. Then, by your own words, none of your words are unreliable? -wink-

Anyway, I too am very tired of watching early adopters backbiting each other at every turn. In this forum, it's been the HD DVD backers doing most of the backbiting. Please chill so that we won't have to take further mod actions.



BTW, I'm in a similar boat as cornflakeguy (4 posts above).

Agree on the first part.

Regarding the 2nd, that's bullshit. The only BD-only studio that has made strides with extras is Disney. Fox and Sony could still give a shit about "value."

Agree on the last part.

No offense but what are you talking about?

If there's any bias, it's in your post.

To be fair, both Stranger Than Fiction and Casino Royale port over all the DVD features and have uncompressed audio.

digi,

Basically you, DVD Josh and some of the others are wanting to discount the original article because you disagree with it. Your bias is just as clear as the article's bias.

Bias doesn't necessarily make something unreliable. You guys reprint a ton of HD DVD news as though it's gospel when they're pretty much ALL from biased sources. And when there is a pro-BD piece, you're ready to pounce on it.

If you think I have pro-BD bias based on my posts, then clearly you can't read. You conveniently left out the last sentence of my last post when you quoted me. That should indicate what my bias really is, although you may never know from my posts.

If you read MY posts, you would know I'm not trying to discount anything. In fact, I never read Bill's entire posting in the first place.

Of course I have a bias. I don't believe BD is as good as HD DVD. I think that's perfectly logical.

And I don't pounce on "pro-BD" articles unless they're a) bullshit or b) sony wagging it's big dick around (see point a).

Right. I didn't mean to imply that Blu-ray was already perfect just that we are seeing steady improvement and even Sony is looking better. Fox is the one that frustrates me the most personally as I wanted several of those films, but refuse to pay $30 for bare bones discs.

By your definition of bullshit, we tolerate a shitload of bullshit HD DVD articles (many of them posted by you). So I say you leave these bullshit BD articles alone.