Audioholics: Reasons Why HD-DVD Formats Have Already Failed
#26
Retired
Originally Posted by Josh Z
HD DVD players are compatible with standard DVDs. So replacing the player with a new HD model isn't going to harm anyone with a significant DVD collection.
As for software, there are Combo discs that will work on either type of player.
As for software, there are Combo discs that will work on either type of player.
My point was just that studios aren't going to stop making regular DVDs as soon as they can make HD discs for the same or less if people are still buying vastly more SD-DVDs--and that will be the case for a LONG time.
This issue is really not applicable to those with significant collections, but more for casual owners who just buy/rent DVDs here and there. People with big collections tend to be tech savy and will be more likely to upgrade to an HD format. These people won't hold back the adoption of of HD disc formats, the casual buyers will.
But the fact is those casual viewers shopping at wal-mart and renting at blockbuster and hollywood video are the biggest segment of the DVD market.
The new formats are great, but I don't see them achieving more than a Laserdisc like niche market. Most people just dont' care about HD content period, much less new HD disc formats. Hell, most don't even know what they are.
Personally, that's fine. I'll upgrade eventually and would be ok with a niche market (other than prices probably never getting as low as DVDs are now). I just think people are overly optimistic if they think HD-DVD or Bluray will ever wipe out DVD the way DVDs wiped out VHS. It's just not going to happen with these formats, and DVDs are going to stick around for a LONG time just like CDs have.
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Besides price being a big factor whether the common consumer will ever accept either HD formats over SD, the fact that studios are releasing HD disks with missing extras that are found on SD, it just sends the wrong message. Consumers want to feel that they're getting more in HD, and I'm not talking about just improved video and audio quality. Most of the HD disks are only marginally better than their SD counterpart in this area.
Now, if they start putting out "special" sets in HD with way more content and don't charge an arm and a leg for it ($30 per HD disk is way too expensive for the common consumer), people will eventually jump on the bandwagon. I know I would.
Now, if they start putting out "special" sets in HD with way more content and don't charge an arm and a leg for it ($30 per HD disk is way too expensive for the common consumer), people will eventually jump on the bandwagon. I know I would.
#28
Retired
I doubt that matters much to Joe Six Pack though, as they aren't going to be reading up on extras before buying a movie regardless of the format its on.
But it can hurt sales among the more informed, like members on this site that haven't bought into the new formats yet etc.
But it can hurt sales among the more informed, like members on this site that haven't bought into the new formats yet etc.
#29
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was given a first-hand experience of the absolute apathy consumers have towards the new high definition formats when I invited my father-in-law and brother-in-law over for a movie night. We watched Batman Begins on HD DVD, arguably a reference disc. We watched it on an ISF-calibrated 1080p projector (a Mitsubishi HC5000, in for review from ProjectorPeople.com) and the results were amazing. Even though I told them they were watching it in true high definition they never seemed to understand the significance. You see, to the average consumer, DVDs are high definition.
In my opinon, it wasn't the video quality that sold DVD, it was the fact you didn't rewind it and they was cheap enough to collect. A lot of people ran thru DVD players thru RCA's and still loved the format.
#30
Retired
Originally Posted by LivingINClip
In my opinon, it wasn't the video quality that sold DVD, it was the fact you didn't rewind it and they was cheap enough to collect. A lot of people ran thru DVD players thru RCA's and still loved the format.
The PQ was just the icing on the cake. I wasn't, and still am not, an audio or videophile. I just like movies.
Last edited by Josh H; 06-16-07 at 09:13 PM.
#31
DVD Talk Hero
Originally Posted by kvrdave
3. HD DVD and Blu-ray are NOT Quantum Leaps in Technology
That is absolutely true. Most don't have a tv big enough to take advantage, and DVDs still look pretty dang good, especially if you have a good upconverting player. So spend you money on HD-DVD/BR or on the new ipod, cell phone, computer, etc.?
That is absolutely true. Most don't have a tv big enough to take advantage, and DVDs still look pretty dang good, especially if you have a good upconverting player. So spend you money on HD-DVD/BR or on the new ipod, cell phone, computer, etc.?
Even when I had my X1 with "only" a cheap progressive scan tv, folks were amazed at the size, picture quality.
I have moved to a HD70 projector (HD) and have blu-ray and most folks clearly still just see a "big image".
However, when I try to tell people that "big" makes more of a difference then ultimate resolution, I get laughed at. People seemed convienced by marketing that a 40" 1080p set is the ONLY way to go. While I think...what a waste.
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Sydney / Australia !!!
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's my 2 cents worth - from down under ....
I quite like reading all these discussions about HD.... Blu-ray .. . HDDVD....TrueDolby.... and any other acronyms you wish to throw about !!
From a 'down under' POV, these HD discussions have always seem to be from a U.S perspective only. Its all about YOU - its the US market ONLY !!
Hey guys - there's a world outside of the US that ALSO purchases and plays DVDs - and a huge audience that really don't care so much about HD quality - and I'm not just referring to this country, Australia. The DVD market in a lot of the Asian countries of course flourishes with pirate discs - why ?? - because its 'cheap' and easy to copy a disc. Why also - because these people have a cheap source of entertainment - and don't exactly have the funds to splurge on a 50in HD TV - they barely have enough for just a standard 4x3. (Not that i'm advocating piracy here - but the point is that a sizable group of people in these countries view their 'entertainment' via SD DVD)
Do you ever think that there are 'other' people who will be 'influential' in the SD vs HD 'war' ? The cost of standard TVs in this world - are pretty cheap. The cost of buying a 50in plasma is quite the opposite.
Sure - the US market is quite huge - but there's also the China, Indian, South American and South East Asian markets as well. These are HUGE MARKETS. DVDs have been able to get into these markets because of : 1 - a single product (instead of two for HD) - and 2 - its relative cheapness, 3 - ability to produce high 'quality' and volumes - and 4 - the ease of access and little degrading of the product (as compared to VHS) - NOT because everyone has a FULL 5.1 sound system - and a huge plasma or LCD screen. This large group of people aren't buying them for their special editions - extras - 5.1.... DTS... but largely that its costs little.
Guys - you sometimes need to think a little beyond your own borders.
I quite like reading all these discussions about HD.... Blu-ray .. . HDDVD....TrueDolby.... and any other acronyms you wish to throw about !!
From a 'down under' POV, these HD discussions have always seem to be from a U.S perspective only. Its all about YOU - its the US market ONLY !!
Hey guys - there's a world outside of the US that ALSO purchases and plays DVDs - and a huge audience that really don't care so much about HD quality - and I'm not just referring to this country, Australia. The DVD market in a lot of the Asian countries of course flourishes with pirate discs - why ?? - because its 'cheap' and easy to copy a disc. Why also - because these people have a cheap source of entertainment - and don't exactly have the funds to splurge on a 50in HD TV - they barely have enough for just a standard 4x3. (Not that i'm advocating piracy here - but the point is that a sizable group of people in these countries view their 'entertainment' via SD DVD)
Do you ever think that there are 'other' people who will be 'influential' in the SD vs HD 'war' ? The cost of standard TVs in this world - are pretty cheap. The cost of buying a 50in plasma is quite the opposite.
Sure - the US market is quite huge - but there's also the China, Indian, South American and South East Asian markets as well. These are HUGE MARKETS. DVDs have been able to get into these markets because of : 1 - a single product (instead of two for HD) - and 2 - its relative cheapness, 3 - ability to produce high 'quality' and volumes - and 4 - the ease of access and little degrading of the product (as compared to VHS) - NOT because everyone has a FULL 5.1 sound system - and a huge plasma or LCD screen. This large group of people aren't buying them for their special editions - extras - 5.1.... DTS... but largely that its costs little.
Guys - you sometimes need to think a little beyond your own borders.
Last edited by tonyjg; 06-16-07 at 08:56 PM.
#33
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally Posted by LivingINClip
This is the main one. I've had family and friends over to watch Batman Begins, The Corpse Bride and other so called "reference disc", and while they notice a difference, it's a small difference. Nothing that they truly care about.
In my opinon, it wasn't the video quality that sold DVD, it was the fact you didn't rewind it and they was cheap enough to collect. A lot of people ran thru DVD players thru RCA's and still loved the format.
In my opinon, it wasn't the video quality that sold DVD, it was the fact you didn't rewind it and they was cheap enough to collect. A lot of people ran thru DVD players thru RCA's and still loved the format.
Most people that are not tech savvy, regard having to learn and become familiar with new acronyms to be very inconvienent.
#34
DVD Talk Legend
I'll speak as an outsider on HD.
I find both formats (Blu-ray and HD DVD) interesting. I notice a slight difference in quality (of films) and like the new special features. I've seen HD DVD demo'd professionally (in one of those mobile trucks). It was impressive, but not awe-inspiring. I saw King Kong on a huge TV. It looked nicer than DVD, but didn't wow me. In fact, I was more wowed by FATF: Tokyo Drift's extras than I was any of the video quality shown.
So... where do I stand? I own a 27" standard def tv and cannot afford to upgrade to a HD set. I probably won't be able to upgrade for a year or more. I can't afford a $300-500 player (or don't want to pay that much for one) and I probably wouldn't buy a player, even if I had a HD set unless it was under $200.
I'm largely unimpressed with the video quality. I just dont see a substantial difference --certainly not enough to spend several hundred dollars. Better? Yes. Awesome? Not really. I think HD for some things (sports) is visually impressive, but find most films to be on par with DVD.
I'd be more likely to buy a HD TV for the larger, light-weight screen than for it's ability to show high definition dvds,
I find both formats (Blu-ray and HD DVD) interesting. I notice a slight difference in quality (of films) and like the new special features. I've seen HD DVD demo'd professionally (in one of those mobile trucks). It was impressive, but not awe-inspiring. I saw King Kong on a huge TV. It looked nicer than DVD, but didn't wow me. In fact, I was more wowed by FATF: Tokyo Drift's extras than I was any of the video quality shown.
So... where do I stand? I own a 27" standard def tv and cannot afford to upgrade to a HD set. I probably won't be able to upgrade for a year or more. I can't afford a $300-500 player (or don't want to pay that much for one) and I probably wouldn't buy a player, even if I had a HD set unless it was under $200.
I'm largely unimpressed with the video quality. I just dont see a substantial difference --certainly not enough to spend several hundred dollars. Better? Yes. Awesome? Not really. I think HD for some things (sports) is visually impressive, but find most films to be on par with DVD.
I'd be more likely to buy a HD TV for the larger, light-weight screen than for it's ability to show high definition dvds,
#35
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by tonyjg
Guys - you sometimes need to think a little beyond your own borders.
#37
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mpls, MN
Posts: 6,830
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I doubt it very much. Europe has had widescreen for more years, but not HD resolution. Still didn't have the French Open in HD this year, because France doesn't really have HD. And you better be a little more specific about Asia. 2 billion people in China, 1.5 in India....I think market penetration might be a little behind the USA in terms of %. Japan may have an edge, but they seem to be gadget freaks as a whole (ooh, meanie stereotyping!), so that is pretty typical for them to be ahead on %.
#38
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by LivingINClip
In my opinon, it wasn't the video quality that sold DVD, it was the fact you didn't rewind it and they was cheap enough to collect. A lot of people ran thru DVD players thru RCA's and still loved the format.
The big deal with DVD was that every title was priced to own. This was the major factor in getting people used to buying movies rather than renting. It was compelling and liberating after years of having to wait six months or so for sell-through pricing. I (and many of you, admit it) would often blind buy new movies, in some cases just to see them and get through the extras, whereas in years past rentals would be the norm. Some have gotten away from this and are now using Netflix, but there's got to be a healthy number of people who are just buying new movies they're not sure they like.
#39
Retired
Originally Posted by DodgingCars
It really means as much as the price of tea in China. Why do I care how successful this is in any other country but the one I reside --- 'cept maybe the ability to import. I'm sorry, but the non-U.S means little to nothing to me
If its only a niche market, and only in the US, then they'll be lucky to stick around IMO.
#40
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by Josh H
Probably because it's a worldwide market. If companies can make a profit on HD-DVD or Bluray around the world, they'll be much more likely to keep making them.
If its only a niche market, and only in the US, then they'll be lucky to stick around IMO.
If its only a niche market, and only in the US, then they'll be lucky to stick around IMO.
#41
Retired
Originally Posted by DodgingCars
Yeah, but if it's a niche market in the US and popular in Europe... How does that help me... other than imports? There's no reason why studios wouldn't shut down their U.S. distribution and continue selling just overseas. I'm not sure but I believe most of the foreign products (DVDs, HD-DVDs) are already manufactured outside of the U.S.
If they are successful elsewhere and a Niche in the US, we should still get movies released here. They just won't make as many copies.
If it's a niche everywhere, the formats may die or get less support.
The fact of the matter is its a global economy now, and worldwide sales determine whether a product succeeds or fails. Ignoring that is just like the people who say a film is a failure when it doesn't make back it's budget in the US, ignoring the fact that it made several $100 million dollars in profits when you look at the world wide box office.
#42
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mpls, MN
Posts: 6,830
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the point people are trying to make is that US consumers are not affected by worldwide sales. Companies' profits ARE affected by worldwide sales, but that still doesn't translate to availability.
So if it (any product) fails in the US but not in other countries, the only good that comes from it is that the company will still exist. Failure in the US still means it won't be sold in the US. You are assuming that marketing/sales will still be done in a country that doesn't want it. That is not usually the case.
For a real example, look at Minidisc. A complete success story in Japan, but can you even find blank discs on store shelves in the US today? Barely. Sony made 2 or more pushes on the US market, all of them failed and did little but waste money. US consumers settled on CD and then MP3 players as their recording/portable format for music.
So if it (any product) fails in the US but not in other countries, the only good that comes from it is that the company will still exist. Failure in the US still means it won't be sold in the US. You are assuming that marketing/sales will still be done in a country that doesn't want it. That is not usually the case.
For a real example, look at Minidisc. A complete success story in Japan, but can you even find blank discs on store shelves in the US today? Barely. Sony made 2 or more pushes on the US market, all of them failed and did little but waste money. US consumers settled on CD and then MP3 players as their recording/portable format for music.
#43
Retired
Of course it can't outright fail like minidisc in the US--if that's the case, then sales elsewhere will have no effect.
But if it's a successful niche market ONLY in the US, it may not make enough profits for the companies to bother with. However, if its a successful niche in the US AND in other countries (and even more so if its more than a niche success some place), then companies make more profits and are more likely to keep producing the formats and shipping them to all markets where they are at least making a profit in a niche market--including the US.
But if it's a successful niche market ONLY in the US, it may not make enough profits for the companies to bother with. However, if its a successful niche in the US AND in other countries (and even more so if its more than a niche success some place), then companies make more profits and are more likely to keep producing the formats and shipping them to all markets where they are at least making a profit in a niche market--including the US.
#44
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 9,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a 42 Samsung Plasma 1080i with an upconverting Sony DVD player. I enjoy watching the movies on HDNET Movies, and can see that is really clear - its a joy to watch All the President's Men in HD. However, the clarity I get from most upconverted seems only negligble and not worth the investment. I would rather spend money on something else. I guess a disclosure - I'm not buying regular DVDs either..so this format war/ high prices is really hurting both types of sales (SD and high def)
#45
New Member
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Traverse City, MI USA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Laserdisc was a failure in the US. It had relatively zero mass appeal.
#46
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think point #3 is the most important.
If I had to grade formats on an arbitrary 1-10 scale, VHS is a 1, regular NTSC would be a generous 2, DVD a 7, HDTV a 9, and HighDef DVDs a 10.
DVD added widescreen and a much nicer palette over component inputs and 5.1 audio. DVDs completely blow away standard TV. The chapter skip feature kills VHS (as well as lack of degradation of the media).
HD-DVDs have better audio and 1080p instead of 720p/1080i but those improvements are minor, IMO, relative to HDTV. HDTV gets me a lot more choices right now. With a DVR, I can record HBO, Showtime, HDNEt Movies, Discovery, etc. and get far more programming than I can spending $25+ for a movie (which commonly has less features than a standard DVD). No matter how good the hardware is, it really isn't worth jumping in if the software isn't there.
When Amazon had the HD-A2, plus the Matrix trilogy, plus 7 free disks for < $340 and I still couldn't pull the trigger I realized that I was going to be on the sidelines for a while. I learned my lesson from owning D-VHS (one dead niche format with limited software to play).
If I had to grade formats on an arbitrary 1-10 scale, VHS is a 1, regular NTSC would be a generous 2, DVD a 7, HDTV a 9, and HighDef DVDs a 10.
DVD added widescreen and a much nicer palette over component inputs and 5.1 audio. DVDs completely blow away standard TV. The chapter skip feature kills VHS (as well as lack of degradation of the media).
HD-DVDs have better audio and 1080p instead of 720p/1080i but those improvements are minor, IMO, relative to HDTV. HDTV gets me a lot more choices right now. With a DVR, I can record HBO, Showtime, HDNEt Movies, Discovery, etc. and get far more programming than I can spending $25+ for a movie (which commonly has less features than a standard DVD). No matter how good the hardware is, it really isn't worth jumping in if the software isn't there.
When Amazon had the HD-A2, plus the Matrix trilogy, plus 7 free disks for < $340 and I still couldn't pull the trigger I realized that I was going to be on the sidelines for a while. I learned my lesson from owning D-VHS (one dead niche format with limited software to play).
#48
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: I have always been here.
Posts: 1,917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have the new Sony S300 and love it. I have 7 BR titles. The titles I have on BR are not repeated in SD-DVD. I am very specific about what I will purchase in BR but will still purchase TV shows and comedy in SD-DVD. My only double dips may be some of my Disney Animation and BBC/Discovery Walking w/Dinosaurs collection and big SciFi movies.
First, you have to get the HDTV into the house. I think this is happening. I myself had an HDTV 6 months before I had my player. Then you have to have movies that people want at a decent price. Right now HD/BR disc are too expensive and other than the 3 or 5 you get with the player I think sales will be slow. With DVD we got a lot of discounts the first years and this is something the studios are not doing this time around. The intense mark down of player may be a start of them realizing this. They have to get the public addicted first. I expect since they put so much money on this they may start cutting the prices on HD/BR fast. They have to do it in time for holiday shopping season.
First, you have to get the HDTV into the house. I think this is happening. I myself had an HDTV 6 months before I had my player. Then you have to have movies that people want at a decent price. Right now HD/BR disc are too expensive and other than the 3 or 5 you get with the player I think sales will be slow. With DVD we got a lot of discounts the first years and this is something the studios are not doing this time around. The intense mark down of player may be a start of them realizing this. They have to get the public addicted first. I expect since they put so much money on this they may start cutting the prices on HD/BR fast. They have to do it in time for holiday shopping season.
#50
DVD Talk Hero
Originally Posted by Josh Z
No, "success" is defined as the company making enough profit to justify continuing to produce the product. The laserdisc format lasted for 20 years. It wouldn't have lasted that long if the companies involved weren't making enough profit to consider it successful.
Laserdisc was a success for the expectations set out for it. It just wasn't a mass market item.
Laserdisc was a success for the expectations set out for it. It just wasn't a mass market item.
LD was a successful niche format... sort of like vinyl is now for certain music fans... they were apparently making enough money to keep the format going, realizing that were enough enthusiasts out there who would buy up software in that format even though it wasn't going to a mass market item.