CNET recommends on HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray and chooses.....

jpuma1

jpuma1

CAGiversary!
Feedback
1 (100%)
NEITHER!!

Arguable the biggest tech site has advised anyone wondering whether to pick HD-DVD or Blu-ray to steer clear of BOTH technologies at the moment.

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6463_7-6462511-1.html?tag=lnav

I'm not sure if this would affect the PS3 or the 360, but I know that I usually go by how CNET reviews things. But at the same time, they may be just repeating what a lot of us were thinking anyway.
 
AFAIK HD-DVDs will be cheaper to produce and most likely cost less money to the consumer, therefore HD-DVD wins. If it goes the other way I'll be surprised.
 
[quote name='SpazX']AFAIK HD-DVDs will be cheaper to produce and most likely cost less money to the consumer, therefore HD-DVD wins. If it goes the other way I'll be surprised.[/QUOTE]

That's what I've heard. Blu-Ray is arguably the better technology because (I think) it has higher storage capacity and data transfer rates, but HD-DVD's can be manufactured using the same or similar equipment that is currently used to make regular DVD's, hence the cost being lower.

As for the CNET article, I agree 100%. I may get on board when I know which one is going to be the winner and I can pick a player up for $150 or less. All I know is that I've never really had a problem with the way my current DVD's look, and I'm sure as hell not re-buying them all for Blu-Ray or HD-DVD.
 
[quote name='SpazX']AFAIK HD-DVDs will be cheaper to produce and most likely cost less money to the consumer, therefore HD-DVD wins. If it goes the other way I'll be surprised.[/QUOTE]

It still needs more than three of the major seven studios to support it. Blue-Ray has more exclusive studios under them and if the PS3 still retains a lot of Sony's current market share in consoles, BR could breeze by HD-DVD.
 
I see, but if they both deliver similar results, IMO the one that costs less will likely win. Also, given Sony's track record on their own media formats...well, we'll see I suppose.
 
eventually, there will obviously be a winner, but I think the bigger question is how fast the tech is adopted.

as was said before, DVD's are dirt cheap, so I don't think that people (myself included) will want to re-buy their DVD collections, ESP. when the difference btw. DVD and Hi-def isn't as startling as when we jumped from VHS to DVD
 
[quote name='jpuma1']eventually, there will obviously be a winner, but I think the bigger question is how fast the tech is adopted.

as was said before, DVD's are dirt cheap, so I don't think that people (myself included) will want to re-buy their DVD collections, ESP. when the difference btw. DVD and Hi-def isn't as startling as when we jumped from VHS to DVD[/QUOTE]
There doesn't have to be. If DVDs outsell BD and HD discs for the next 5 years or so, I have a feeling they'll both fade away or morph into something else.

The only way there HAS to be a winner is if the studios eventually stop producing regular DVDs to force people to upgrade. But that won't be met with much enthusiasm unless costs of players are down in the $100-$200 range.

The nice thing is, there's no reason to move until that time comes. If it takes 5 years for BD or HD to become the accepted format, that's fine... I'll just take my time buying the $5-$10 hi-def movies that are on clearance by that time.
 
Beta was better than the VCR -
8 Track was better than the Cassette -
Minidisc was better than the CD -

But they were too radically different for manufactures to change or buy new machines to produce it.

The Blue-Ray will flop, just like everything else Sony has tried to monopolize the media market.
 
[quote name='jpuma1']
I'm not sure if this would affect the PS3 or the 360, but I know that I usually go by how CNET reviews things. But at the same time, they may be just repeating what a lot of us were thinking anyway.[/QUOTE]

Since PS3 seems to be banking alot more on BR than 360 is HD, I'd say it reflects worse for Sony than MS.
Then again, I've been more concerned with what games I want to play on the PS3 than what movies, it just helps to further justify my urge to wait for a price drop.
While I don't see myself spending 600 bucks, I'm sure not buying the PS2.8 version.

I don't know, I still see Blu-Ray as Divix: The Revenge. Remember, that's the format that was supposed to take the digital movie disc world by storm, with the big studios backing it....
 
[quote name='vinhjdao']It still needs more than three of the major seven studios to support it. Blue-Ray has more exclusive studios under them and if the PS3 still retains a lot of Sony's current market share in consoles, BR could breeze by HD-DVD.[/quote]
That definitely factors into it, but generally the lower cost format comes out ahead. And if HD-DVD outsells BD at a steady pace, support will eventually shift. All the studios but Sony have nothing major at stake if the format they support goes the way of the dodo. They might lose a little money on unsold media if one format completely tanks right out of the gate, but I predict BDs and HD-DVDs will be produced in relatively small numbers until player prices hit $300 or less. If I was a betting man, I'd bet on HD-DVD right now, despite the installed userbase of PS3 owners when that happens.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']Beta was better than the VCR -
8 Track was better than the Cassette -
Minidisc was better than the CD -

But they were too radically different for manufactures to change or buy new machines to produce it.

The Blue-Ray will flop, just like everything else Sony has tried to monopolize the media market.[/QUOTE]

As much as i'd like that to happen........... those never had the factor of the PS3 or Sony's extensive involment in the entertainment industry like today.
 
Blu-ray discs don't cost that much to produce, I believe they're the same price as HD-DVD's. DeepDiscountDVD is selling them pretty "cheap."
 
they are already making players that can play both format. It is possible both format will be sticking around. It is sort of like how we got like 5 different kinds of memory card without one being the standard format.
 
The biggest selling point Blu-Ray has made so far is better image quality that HD-DVD. Fact of the matter is, it's very hard to tell the different between 720p and 1080p, and even harder when comparing 1080i to 1080p.

While it would be great to have complete seasons of TVs shows on one disc (it would be cheaper to produce), I think that DVDs still look great and I already know it won't become vaporware.
 
I wish the cable/satellite companies would hury up with HD on demand. I could care less to buy HD movies but I want to rent them :D
 
[quote name='Zoglog']As much as i'd like that to happen........... those never had the factor of the PS3 or Sony's extensive involment in the entertainment industry like today.[/quote]

Trust me, VCRs were making more money in the 70's than gaming is now if you even up the inflation. Being on CAG, its understandable that you believe gaming is really big... but on the many other scales, especially scales of gaming in the early 80's - this is small time.
 
[quote name='spoo']I wish the cable/satellite companies would hury up with HD on demand. I could care less to buy HD movies but I want to rent them :D[/QUOTE]

Comcast has about 10-12 HD movies on demand right now. About 3-4 of them are older free rentals, with the others being new releases. Its awesome being able to press a button and instantly have a movie playing in HD.
 
[quote name='Vinny']The biggest selling point Blu-Ray has made so far is better image quality that HD-DVD. Fact of the matter is, it's very hard to tell the different between 720p and 1080p, and even harder when comparing 1080i to 1080p.
[/QUOTE]

Actually the HD-DVD format is capable of 1080p, it's just that the players out on the market aren't using it right now. So it's not really a selling point right now because niether team has their best players on the field (HD-DVD has no 1080p players and Blu-ray just has none at all). Also, the biggest difference (and selling point) between the two is overall storage capacity, which IMO will have big implications not in the home entertainment dept, but rather in the PC and home recording market.
 
[quote name='Vinny']The biggest selling point Blu-Ray has made so far is better image quality that HD-DVD. Fact of the matter is, it's very hard to tell the different between 720p and 1080p, and even harder when comparing 1080i to 1080p.

While it would be great to have complete seasons of TVs shows on one disc (it would be cheaper to produce), I think that DVDs still look great and I already know it won't become vaporware.[/quote]

Actually, most HD-DVDs I've seen advertised are in 1080p. Check here and look at the pics of the back of the package. All HD-DVDs list 1080p as the main video resolution from what I saw. One thing that does piss me off though is I don't think I saw a single one that has DTS, much less full bitrate DTS. WHAT THE fuck?! They've got plenty of space for it and I could have sworn I read somewhere that full bitrate DTS would be standard on both Blu-Ray and HDDVD. Motherfucking cheap ass studios. I'll give Sony that that they use DTS, even if only usually for Super Bit discs which they charge extra for.

The one major positive left for me of HDDVD/BD over DVD is that since all HDTVs are 1.78:1 aspect ration (i.e. widescreen) that all the movies will be formatted as such, i.e. NO MORE NON-ANAMORPHIC WIDESCREEN TRANSFERS. There will be absolutely no reason to do one (as if there ever was) and that is a beautiful thing.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']
Minidisc was better than the CD -
[/QUOTE]

Wait, what? was there a significant amount of people who thought MDs were more useful than CDs? MDs were put out to replace cassettes. The fact that it was primarily used for audio when CDs were used significantly for both data and audio should be enough reason to disprove this.

[quote name='Mookyjooky']
Trust me, VCRs were making more money in the 70's than gaming is now if you even up the inflation. Being on CAG, its understandable that you believe gaming is really big... but on the many other scales, especially scales of gaming in the early 80's - this is small time.
[/QUOTE]

VCRs debuted in the mid 70s. By the mid 80s, there were about 23 million units sold. The PlayStation 2 sold 25 million units in North America by 2004, four years after it was released. Now, I didn't take inflation into the account, but the raw numbers makes it look like the economy of gaming now isn't 'small time' when compared to VCRs back then.
 
[quote name='Stuka']Actually, most HD-DVDs I've seen advertised are in 1080p. Check here and look at the pics of the back of the package. All HD-DVDs list 1080p as the main video resolution from what I saw. One thing that does piss me off though is I don't think I saw a single one that has DTS, much less full bitrate DTS. WHAT THE fuck?! They've got plenty of space for it and I could have sworn I read somewhere that full bitrate DTS would be standard on both Blu-Ray and HDDVD. [/quote] I thought the HD DVDs had Dolby TrueHD, which was lossless just like DTS HD.

[quote name='Stuka']The one major positive left for me of HDDVD/BD over DVD is that since all HDTVs are 1.78:1 aspect ration (i.e. widescreen) that all the movies will be formatted as such, i.e. NO MORE NON-ANAMORPHIC WIDESCREEN TRANSFERS. There will be absolutely no reason to do one (as if there ever was) and that is a beautiful thing.[/quote] Did you see that the new Star Wars DVDs aren't going to be anamorphic (at least with the orginal OT. The Special Editions will be the same disks released in 2004). :puke:
 
[quote name='Kaijufan']I thought the HD DVDs had Dolby TrueHD, which was lossless just like DTS HD.

Did you see that the new Star Wars DVDs aren't going to be anamorphic (at least with the orginal OT. The Special Editions will be the same disks released in 2004). :puke:[/quote]

Not sure about the Dolby TrueHD. Some of those discs I linked to said Dolby Digital Plus. I can't say I've heard a Dolby TrueHD track, but between current DD and DTS, I'll take full bitrate DTS. The LFE is usually stronger with DTS and full bitrate DTS sounds amazing.

As for the Stars Wars DVDs, HOLY SHIT! I thought you were just trying to give me a heart attack until I went to originaltrilogy.com What the shit is Lucas thinking?! Oh Christ, what an asshole.
 
[quote name='Stuka']Not sure about the Dolby TrueHD. Some of those discs I linked to said Dolby Digital Plus. I can't say I've heard a Dolby TrueHD track, but between current DD and DTS, I'll take full bitrate DTS. The LFE is usually stronger with DTS and full bitrate DTS sounds amazing.

As for the Stars Wars DVDs, HOLY SHIT! I thought you were just trying to give me a heart attack until I went to originaltrilogy.com What the shit is Lucas thinking?! Oh Christ, what an asshole.[/QUOTE]
I can't tell the difference between DD & DTS. If I have a choice I will use DTS but I can't tell the difference.
 
[quote name='vinhjdao']Wait, what? was there a significant amount of people who thought MDs were more useful than CDs? MDs were put out to replace cassettes. The fact that it was primarily used for audio when CDs were used significantly for both data and audio should be enough reason to disprove this.



VCRs debuted in the mid 70s. By the mid 80s, there were about 23 million units sold. The PlayStation 2 sold 25 million units in North America by 2004, four years after it was released. Now, I didn't take inflation into the account, but the raw numbers makes it look like the economy of gaming now isn't 'small time' when compared to VCRs back then.[/quote]

Your numbers are correct but they fail to account for the huge increase in population. You might want to check the figures but I believe the world's population has doubled since the mid 70's.
 
[quote name='Vinny']The biggest selling point Blu-Ray has made so far is better image quality that HD-DVD. Fact of the matter is, it's very hard to tell the different between 720p and 1080p, and even harder when comparing 1080i to 1080p.

While it would be great to have complete seasons of TVs shows on one disc (it would be cheaper to produce), I think that DVDs still look great and I already know it won't become vaporware.[/QUOTE]

Two points:

First, HD-DVD does 1080p. The only difference is that HD-DVD doesn't mandate 1080p, which Blu-Ray does. Most studios printing on both disc formats I assume would do their HD-DVDs in 1080p as well, because the content is already prepared.

Second, they won't have complete seasons of TV on a single disc. It won't be cheaper to produce. They'll still charge $90 for HD-Sopranos and put it on 6 Blu-Ray or HD-DVD discs. The content will grow exponentially with the increase in resolution. And, unfortunately, neither format incorporates any level of compression on video or audio.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']Trust me, VCRs were making more money in the 70's than gaming is now if you even up the inflation. Being on CAG, its understandable that you believe gaming is really big... but on the many other scales, especially scales of gaming in the early 80's - this is small time.[/QUOTE]

Actually when you examine the # of people likely to go next gen in the format initially, the PS3 offers quite a bargain for early adopters. You underestimate the # of PS2 owners out there and how selling PS3s could force a signifigant change in the adoption of the new technology. Just because games are not as large as the latter market does not mean it could provide a distinct advantage. You're just looking at it from the wrong angle and assume you need 100% boost in order to gain huge market over HD-DVD. It's the gathering of elements thta provide the boost needed. If you notice on the list Bluray currently has the majority of support and cheaper discs. The Ps3's price point of 600 is extremely comparible to HD-DVD players.

Also you ignored the other point that now Sony has a huge stake in the film industry. Ever heard of sony columbia tristar? or maybe that MGM is owned by Sony now? You're just taking a previous formula of the betamax failure and assuming it'll apply here without looking at the current evironmental factors. The best HD-DVD can hope for at this point is some sort of hybrid. Of course Cnet would restrain from making predictions since making a correct one would provide them with nothing, but falsely assuming could result in major loss of credibility.
 
I think he meant if you used 480p video, you could fit a full season on one disc. If you use a 50GB dual layer Blu-Ray disc you could fit a season of pretty much any show in 480p on one disc. Then again, I don't think most people would rebuy seasons of their favorite shows in 480p just to get it on one disc. Besides, HBO and all of them don't charge $90 for Sopranos or any of those shows because the discs cost them a lot. Even 4 DVDs probably costs them about $1, maybe less. Shit, I buy blank ones for like $0.30 each. Factor in maybe $5 per set for packaging and extras, and the rest is all profit.
 
[quote name='Zoglog']Actually when you examine the # of people likely to go next gen in the format initially, the PS3 offers quite a bargain for early adopters. You underestimate the # of PS2 owners out there and how selling PS3s could force a signifigant change in the adoption of the new technology. Just because games are not as large as the latter market does not mean it could provide a distinct advantage. You're just looking at it from the wrong angle and assume you need 100% boost in order to gain huge market over HD-DVD. It's the gathering of elements thta provide the boost needed. If you notice on the list Bluray currently has the majority of support and cheaper discs. The Ps3's price point of 600 is extremely comparible to HD-DVD players.

Also you ignored the other point that now Sony has a huge stake in the film industry. Ever heard of sony columbia tristar? or maybe that MGM is owned by Sony now? You're just taking a previous formula of the betamax failure and assuming it'll apply here without looking at the current evironmental factors. The best HD-DVD can hope for at this point is some sort of hybrid. Of course Cnet would restrain from making predictions since making a correct one would provide them with nothing, but falsely assuming could result in major loss of credibility.[/quote]
First of all, since when are Blu-Ray discs cheaper than HD-DVD discs? Looking at Amazon.com Blu-Ray movie prices range from $20-27 and HD-DVD movies range from $20-25. It's also well known that Blu-Ray discs cost more to manufacture simply because current DVD manufacturing technology can be tweaked cheaply to make HD-DVD whereas Blu-Ray requires new equipment.

Secondly, I think your over estimating the effect of PS3 on Blu-Ray sales. Like I've said before, uptake of both formats will be slower this time because for most of the population (at least in the US) it will require purchasing a new TV. Most people are not going to buy a new TV AND a PS3 and a bunch of Blu-Ray movies at the same time. I'm willing to bet most PS3s will be played on SDTVs just like probably most 360s are right now, and will be for a while. I can't speak on Japan because I don't know for sure HDTV uptake over there, but it's irrelevant because the format war, probably unlike the console war, WILL be decided in the US. Whatever takes off here first will be the dominant format for the world. Japan is the center of power for videogames, no doubt, but the US is undoubtedly the center of power for the worldwide movie industry.

Third, I think your also over estimating the clout of Columbia Pictures. Spiderman and a couple other movies aside, they've been releasing commercial flop after commercial flop. MGM isn't much better off, unfortunately for them. Then again, if MGM was doing good, Sony wouldn't have been able to buy them out.

This is all not to say that Blu-Ray is already down for the count, but just that I disagree with you on these three points. I think this 'format war' is closer than any industry person is willing to admit.
 
[quote name='Zoglog']Actually when you examine the # of people likely to go next gen in the format initially, the PS3 offers quite a bargain for early adopters. [/quote]

yeah but early adopters with blu ray in mind are more than likely going to be videophiles and videophiles would never use a gaming system for a movie player. they would imo rather pay an extra $400 for a stand alone player.

early adopters with games in mind will get only if they have access to the appropriate funding.
 
Some of my friends don't even have dvd players yet.. lol. this HD dvd stuff is bound to fail, for all involved.
 
[quote name='gaelan']digital distribution...i already can do 1080p without a fucking disc[/QUOTE]


Actually I think your right. I'd never buy a $15 dollar movie if could watch it for 2 or 3 bucks with on demand or whatever it is.
 
I'm very interested to see how this all pans out. I really don't think the public sees the need or has any desire to upgrade their movie collections.

The VHS to DVD jump was very noticable, even on Aunt Margaret's crummy 19" TV. But if Aunt Margaret needs to buy an HD TV to benefit from this new format, will she bother? I doubt it. I understand most of the ins and outs of the tech, have an HD TV now, and will certainly not be investing in any sort of HD player for years down the road. I think the hardware cost/availablity will be far less of a concern than the media cost. I enjoy owning movies vs. renting them, and I'm certainly not rebuying my 120 or so movies on an HD format. Thus, I really think the PS3 being a Blu-Ray player will have a minimal affect on this war.

Cnet's dead on. Wait and know that standard DVD will be the standard for years to come.
 
[quote name='SpazX']AFAIK HD-DVDs will be cheaper to produce and most likely cost less money to the consumer, therefore HD-DVD wins. If it goes the other way I'll be surprised.[/quote]

Thats one of the problems.
As for consumers it is a big troublesome choice. What should you shoose, if any.
Both will play the current library which is good. But you play on lady luck if your format of choice will win.
Just imagine you buy in one of these formats and invest a signifant amount of money to just see it dissapear.
same happend with laserdisc. I know a lot of people who had a nice library of disc, but had to move to dvd.

Also, i just imagine how chaotic it will look at the retailstore with 4 different formats. -> dvd, umd, hd-dvd and blueray.

One other thing what concerns me a lot, are we seeing also older titles, independent and not so succesful titles? Even on the dvd format you don't get all movies, which is a shame. I don't want to have to own a vhs player just because the industrie is so freaking lame.
 
[quote name='yester']Also, i just imagine how chaotic it will look at the retailstore with 4 different formats. -> dvd, umd, hd-dvd and blueray.[/quote]


UMD isn't a format, it is a fucking joke! Also, Blu-Ray is the better format. I want to read the article that says that HD-DVDs can be made cheaper because of this magic tweaking.
 
I've read on numerous occaisions that the main benefit of HD-DVD over Blu-Ray is because it can be manufactured using existing hardware, therefore driving the cost down.

EDIT: Here's a couple links for you:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050927-5355.html

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,123855,00.asp

Compared to Blu-ray Disc, the HD-DVD format offers less storage space per disc-layer but is simpler and cheaper to manufacture since it is based on the same basic technology as current DVD.
Click to expand...

http://www.dvdtown.com/hddvd/difformatsblueray.php

It can store 15GB on a single layer DVD. It meets manufacturers' needs by enabling use of the same manufacturing infrastructure as current DVD, which minimizes disc production costs.
Click to expand...
 
Why do we need disk drives to play our movies??? I hope that eventually we just have to buy the access to content that we can download to our phones/TV's/IPods, etc... Movie studios shouldn't need Best Buy to get the movies to us. Cut out the middleman(or just replace B&M with an online store...
 
[quote name='hufferstl']Why do we need disk drives to play our movies??? I hope that eventually we just have to buy the access to content that we can download to our phones/TV's/IPods, etc... Movie studios shouldn't need Best Buy to get the movies to us. Cut out the middleman(or just replace B&M with an online store...[/QUOTE]
That sounds good in theory, but I like to have solid media to back up my purchases. Even when I download things off of iTunes, I immediately backup the files, burn an Audio CD, and then rerip them to MP3 so I have a 3-tier defence against some catastrophic hardware failure.
 
[quote name='daroga']That sounds good in theory, but I like to have solid media to back up my purchases. Even when I download things off of iTunes, I immediately backup the files, burn an Audio CD, and then rerip them to MP3 so I have a 3-tier defence against some catastrophic hardware failure.[/quote]

so would you rather pay $30 - $40 for the backup disc (hd dvd or blu ray) which is still succeptible to damage OR would you rather back up movies via your itunes method for free (dl the movie and store it on a hd or compress it to a standard dvd)?

me....whatever is cheaper.
 
[quote name='gaelan']so would you rather pay $30 - $40 for the backup disc (hd dvd or blu ray) which is still succeptible to damage OR would you rather back up movies via your itunes method for free (dl the movie and store it on a hd or compress it to a standard dvd)?

me....whatever is cheaper.[/QUOTE]
Well, if you're talking HD movies, they won't fit on a regular DVD, unless you have access to something that can compress video by a factor of ten or thereabouts. And if your hard drive crashes, you have to buy the movie again. Doesn't seem quite as cheap then, does it?

If a DVD breaks, that's too bad. If you have ten movies on your HD that dies... that sucks.
 
Not sure if it works for HD content but RatDVD can compress DVD video to about 1/5th it's uncompressed size, and I believe the loss of quality is indistinguishable.

Anyway, the easier and superior method, for me would be to just do a RAID1 array to mirror the main hard drive. Very little chance of both hard drives failing at the same time, and this way you always have a backup. On the same note though, depending on the compression it would still be a little crazy to just only have movies on a hard drive. I've downloaded some video in HD (720p mostly) before that used the MPEG2 encoding that a DVD uses, and 2 hours can be anywhere from 8-20GB depending on the quality, the number of audio tracks, ect. Even with a 500GB hard drive that means you can only have max about 50 movies on a hard drive in HD. Even if you erase stuff after a while, it's still a little more of a pain in the ass because to download that much information takes a long time, even with a good connection.
 
[quote name='gaelan']so would you rather pay $30 - $40 for the backup disc (hd dvd or blu ray) which is still succeptible to damage OR would you rather back up movies via your itunes method for free (dl the movie and store it on a hd or compress it to a standard dvd)?

me....whatever is cheaper.[/QUOTE]
The problem is there's no reasonable way to do that for movies, HD or otherwise. You're either going to have to invest in a metric ton of harddrive space or reduce the quality of the movies to the point that it's hardly a 1:1 backup anymore. I do rip some of my DVDs so i can watch them on the computer without having to haul the DVDs around when I travel, but I'd never allow that to be my principle copy of the movie.

I also would be so certain the there will be a huge price differential between downloadble HD movies and their media-written counterparts. iTunes isn't really that big of a jump ($10 for a CD rather that $13 or so).

Also, for me, I'm too anal about my DVD collection to start having backuped downloaded movies on my shelf. ;)
 
Ps3's success is going to make or break this war... hd dvd / blue ray war. The system not only appeals to gamers but to audiophilles as well. Price wise, the blue ray player is a bargin at 600. Sony got us buying two products at one time.
 
ps3 will help blue ray discs be mass produces, thus they'll be immediately cheaper... If Hd-dvd doesn't sell enough players to become mass produced, then it'll still have a high price tag, and thus won't be able to compete with the blue ray.
 
[quote name='Thomas96']Ps3's success is going to make or break this war... hd dvd / blue ray war. The system not only appeals to gamers but to audiophilles as well. Price wise, the blue ray player is a bargin at 600. Sony got us buying two products at one time.[/QUOTE]
The PS3 won't really appeal to audiophiles though. They won't flinch at spending another $400 for a high-end Blu-Ray player... unless the PS3 actually comes out as a stunning Blu-Ray player that fits in with the rest of their high-end electronics setups (oh wait, it's huge and silver, guess not). It will appeal to the cheap audiophiles, but I think that's a small demographic.
 
[quote name='Thomas96']Ps3's success is going to make or break this war... hd dvd / blue ray war. The system not only appeals to gamers but to audiophilles as well. Price wise, the blue ray player is a bargin at 600. Sony got us buying two products at one time.[/quote]

audiophile/videophiles will not consider a gaming system as their primary music/video playing device. they will have a kick ass receiver with kick ass speakers and a kick ass standalone dvd/blu ray/hddvd and a kick ass television. basically each component in their system will be dedicated as in no one in all devices such as packaged home theater systems from bestbuy
 
I can't help but feel that Blu-ray and HDDVD are doomed to fail. There just aren't enough people with HDTVs to really take advantage of their benefits and by the time there are, and there's a real demand for it, something even better is probably going to come along to meet that demand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top