Why Blu-ray will win - by Ben Drawbaugh

[Dave]

People love to bet on the favorite, ask any Vegas Bookie and they will tell you. Sure, there are some who bet on the underdog, but overwhelmingly week in and week out, the favorite sees more action. The current format war is somewhat like an event to bet on. People choose sides and put their money where their mouth is, then sit back and hope their horse comes in. The difference is that in a format war the more people who bet on a format actually leads to that format winning. But just like in gambling there are professionals who have more money than anyone else and they bet big. In the format war these are the consumer electronic companies and the movie studios and this is why I, Ben Drawbaugh, *know* they will win.

[My explanation after the jump]
Price
No doubt some will buy into HD DVD because it's cheaper, but most will see it as a generic version. Those consumer who go to Best Buy and buy the cheapest TV, the cheapest AV receiver will flock to HD DVD. Those who have the money to buy the $6000 rear projection will buy Blu-ray. The sales person will help them make that purchase, because unlike HD DVD there is enough margin in the product to motivate retailers to sell the item. Sure they will put HD DVD on the front of weekly ad with the rest of the inexpensive products, but when you get in the store they will be well versed in the merits of Blu-ray.

Perception
Blu-ray will be perceived as better because it costs more, we all know this. I mean seriously is a Rolex really worth all that money? Is the Sony XBR really that much better than the non-XBR? People perceive expensive item as being better and if they compare their favorite brand player to the Toshiba there is no way that they would choose HD DVD based on the way the player looks. It looks generic and I know it's what is inside that counts, but we know how that goes. People will see HD DVD as an incremental inexpensive alternative to the next generation HD movie format. People will recognize that all their favorite CE companies and favorite movies are available on Blu-ray and see the value, after all content is king.

Head Start
HD DVD was out 2 months before Blu-ray, what day was Beta released? How about VHS? Anyone? Of course, no one knows and no one cares, what people care about is the here and now. Part of the reason HD DVD has the lead now and was able to come to market sooner was the lack of support. It is much easier to quality control one player and three studios than eight players and approximately seven studios. Sure, HD DVD has the lead now, but who really believes they can keep it never the less stop Blu-ray once all the companies pledging support actually fulfill that promise. More on promises later.

Technology
A dual layer Blu-ray has more capacity that HD DVD and three layer HD DVDs are not even in the spec. Blu-ray might be behind HD DVD today because of their reluctance to use more advanced CODECs, but in the long run they will support all the same CODECs and the extra space and throughput is going to make the difference. By the time Disney's first titles are released or Warner's second wave, VC1 vs MPEG2 will be a non-issue. HD DVD is currently the best that it can get, it is maxing out it's capacity as well as it 30Mbs throughput, this is why there are no 1.85:1 movies with TureHD and enhanced features(IME). Even if Blu-ray were to fail as a packaged media format (anything can happen), it would live on as a data storage format. In the world of data storage there is never enough and this simply makes Blu-ray better.

Conclusion
HD DVD Fanboys everywhere are emailing me death threats and yelling blasphemy because I choose to ignore the fact that HD DVD is better TODAY and that every picture quality comparison has been in HD DVD favors, or that most Blu-ray titles don't get a good review. We all like to think that everyone is like us, we like to think that everyone will choose picture or sound quality above all else, but it just isn't true. To a certain degree picture and sound quality are important to everyone, but some can't tell the difference between HBO HD and DVDs and they sure won't be able to see the difference between HD DVD and Blu-ray. All the Blu-ray movies I have seen look better than HBO HD. No, I haven't watched every single Blu-ray title and no, I am not going to go rent that one movie that everyone knows looks bad. Blu-ray movies look great, do they look as good as they could? Maybe not, will they get better? Sure, and you know what, his war isn't going to be won in the first three or even six months. At this point it is all speculation and only time will tell, but I for one am putting my money on Blu-ray.

Never say never
As much as I am convinced that Blu-ray will win, much of this is based on promises. Promises made by the BDA (notice I don't say Sony) and promises made by all the supporting companies. Although it's early to start calling them out, if Blu-ray doesn't ever release 50GB discs or if the CE companies and studios switch sides we have a whole new ball game. Of course this is what every HD DVD fanboy is predicting, at this point it is all a dream that the studios will switch because HD DVD out sells Blu-ray. In the meantime go over to Amazon and write a bad review of the BD-P1000 or join the rest of 'em bashing Blu-ray at the AVSForum and convince yourself that you can make a difference. I believe Blu-ray can and will deliver the ultimate HD picture and sound quality and don't care if HD DVD is a little better right now.

Here: http://www.hdbeat.com/2006/08/16/why-blu-ray-will-win/
Thats true!

[thunderhawk]

if Blu-ray doesn't ever release 50GB discs

Sony already started shipping BDs @ 50 GB so that's already from the table.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/st...4417195&EDATE=

[zombie]

The question isn't when BD50s will be available but when they will be used for prerecorded content.

[AV_Integrated]

I think the "RIGHT NOW" part is what so many struggle with. Some very specific people use every arguement in the book to defend HD-DVD and only ask that nobody look three inches beyond their face as to what is coming.

I am continually called a fanboy for making posts that actually consider that Blu-ray has in its camp Panasonic, Pioneer, Sony, Phillips, LG, Samsung and other VERY major CE manufacturers that aren't just bigger than Toshiba, but are much more popular and more easily recognized by US consumers. For some reason, people think this doesn't matter because HD-DVD looks better right now.

HD-DVD still only has two things going for it:
It costs less
It looks better

Both of those things matter, but only in the very - VERY - short term.

As long as Blu-ray supports the same codecs and carries a higher thruput, it will have the potential to allow higher video/audio quality if (big if) 50GB discs are put into play. Yet, by this holiday season we will (not should) see AVC/VC-1 movies from some major studios.

The things Blu-ray has aren't technological advantages, but are more core features: They have the CE support and they have the studio support. Appropriate mark-up pricing also will help them with retail support at the national level. Those 3 things aren't going away quickly and are not 'short term' items that HD-DVD can easily deal with or counter.

The only way HD-DVD can hope to couter them is by wooing companies from Blu-ray to HD-DVD. Yet, this hasn't occurred yet with any company.

I like HD-DVD - I think it looks great. But, I don't think it has a chance in this world to be a sole survivor in this format war unless significant changes happen relatively quickly in their camp.

I hope those who are considering to buy are fully aware of all the issues and the reaility that either format could fail. If you buy a losing format, you better be prepared to eat the costs involved. $500 or $1,000 or whatever it is - it may be worthless in a few years.

[zombie]

Originally Posted by AV_Integrated

I hope those who are considering to buy are fully aware of all the issues and the reaility that either format could fail. If you buy a losing format, you better be prepared to eat the costs involved. $500 or $1,000 or whatever it is - it may be worthless in a few years.

I am fully aware that HD DVD may not last long but I do believe if Blu-ray ends up killing it off that some BD hardware supporters will put out a BD player with legacy HD DVD support thus preventing my HD DVD discs from being worthless.

[hmurchison]

Originally Posted by AV_Integrated

HD-DVD still only has two things going for it:
It costs less
It looks better

I tend to think the specification is better. Not only does HD DVD cost less to produce discs and hardware but it offers a more efficient Interactive Layer and the players have more mandatory features like TrueHD and Ethernet on each player. The Samsung BD player is twice the price of the A1 and comes up short on "useful" features IMO. Not many people need a card reader in a disc player IMO.

Originally Posted by AV_Integrated

The things Blu-ray has aren't technological advantages, but are more core features: They have the CE support and they have the studio support. Appropriate mark-up pricing also will help them with retail support at the national level. Those 3 things aren't going away quickly and are not 'short term' items that HD-DVD can easily deal with or counter.

CE support and vendor support are NOT "Core Features" the typical definition of a Core Feature is something that is intrinisc and deeply embedded within a defined structure. You cannot/should not be able to remove a core feature without encountering difficulty. CE and studio support are bound to change and thus cannot be considered Core Features under most definitions of the term.

Originally Posted by AV_Integrated

I hope those who are considering to buy are fully aware of all the issues and the reaility that either format could fail. If you buy a losing format, you better be prepared to eat the costs involved. $500 or $1,000 or whatever it is - it may be worthless in a few years.

Also and incorrect statement. Both formats should offer good backwards compatibility with DVD and with open codecs like MPEG2, AVC and VC-1 even if you have a player that no longer has prerecorded video available it will play back your own HD content. People with D-VHS are already enjoying their content transcoded into a format that HD DVD can play. Neither format will ever be truly obsolete.

[AV_Integrated]

I used some incorrect terminology for sure. I personally believe that if HD-DVD had the industry and studio support... Not sure what to call that as a 'feature'... But, the value of those items, if they were equal, or more in the favor of HD-DVD, I think HD-DVD would at least have a chance to win the format war. Unfortunately, without those items, HD-DVD doesn't have a chance (IMO). Not that it can't co-exist, it just has been shown time and time again how difficult to near impossible it is for a format to win when backed by a single manufacturer unless it offers something significantly superior or different for the cash.

I'm not sure how the HD-DVD vs. Blu-ray interactive layers will really prove to be much different... in the long run. I'm not sure how mandatory ethernet, etc. are bonuses... in the long run. I think the reality of both formats, should they survive beyond a couple of years, is that they will be priced very similarly, and will both include standard features on the 'average' player that far exceed the expectations, and limitations of those players which are coming out this first year.

Then we are left with 2 things...

More studio support.
More CE support.

Obsolete is obviously a relative term. Those who have VCRs don't have something obsolete, because they can still play back their old home movies that they shot a decade ago and they can record new shows onto blank tapes and buy new players in their store. Yet, fewer and fewer people are buying or using VCRs anymore. In comparison, if either HD disc format fails completely, you won't be backing up to that format from D-VHS or using encoding programs to master to HD-DVD or Blu-ray (depending on which fails). With no support, you don't fix a broken player, you don't buy recordable discs for back ups... You simply play what movies you have and search eBay for ones you may not have which people are dumping (and they will DUMP them) at a great price.

This specifically is not to knock HD-DVD, but just my opinion of how I see things unfolding because if CE/studio support shifts, the entire picture changes very quickly in my eyes.

[hmurchison]

mandatory features are huge for developer support.

For instance the Sammy player doesn't have an ethernet port and chances are you could see many lowerend players in the future jettison the port. This means that developers cannot assume that the port is there and produce their discs accordingly. Same with TrueHD.

If I'm authoring a disc for HD DVD I "know" those ports and TrueHD will be there in every player. I'm more likely to use it then.

For being a more expensive format Blu-Ray should have mandated network connectivity and some sort lossless audio whether it be TrueHD or DTS-HD. These are indeed core features that are lacking in the Blu-Ray player spec. I'm not a fanboy of either format but when someone whips out a dissertation about one winning I'd like something a bit more concrete than more CE vendors and more studios as a bedrock for building the theory.

I think the gap will close in hardware costs (not including the PS3) for Blu-Ray and HD DVD players but I think that HD DVD will enjoy a %10-20 advantage. Will that be enough to sway people? We'll see.

I honestly think that if any format wins because of studio support it is a loss for consumers. The studios should leave it up to the consumers. After all aren't they preaching to us about the morals of stealing movies in theatres and on discs and then have the nerve to engage in partisan politics with movies? The irony is thick.

[BTBuck1]

Far more blu ray players will be connected to the internet than HDDVD by the ps3 alone, not including the stand alone players like the pioneer that will.

[phloyd]

I don't think that mandating codecs is really necessary - market forces will ensure compatibility.

DTS is not mandated on DVD players but you ever see one that does not have it?

Over time these things will become commonplace on the players - one of the reasons that I am going to be very wary of the first gen players and will probably stick with PS3 as a player for quite some time.

[hmurchison]

Originally Posted by phloyd

I don't think that mandating codecs is really necessary - market forces will ensure compatibility.

DTS is not mandated on DVD players but you ever see one that does not have it?

Over time these things will become commonplace on the players - one of the reasons that I am going to be very wary of the first gen players and will probably stick with PS3 as a player for quite some time.

DTS isn't mandated and that's precisly why it plays second fiddle to Dolby Digital which "is" mandated.

They shouldn't be commonplace over time if Blu-Ray is indeed "Beyond HD". This is exactly the hangup that many people have with Blu-Ray...it promises me the world yet holds the licencees to nothing. Don't want to put on TrueHD ...then don't. Don't want to utilize persistent stores? No problem No ethernet? No big deal.

For a format that some were claiming was vastly superior I"m a bit nonplussed about how I'm being told that mandating features or codecs isn't something I should be worried about as a consumer.

Why should I have to purchase a game console to get connectivity? Codec or feature mandates are the ONLY way to ensure developer support. It's hard to sell a producer on utilizing some featueres if not all players will support it. It's a compromise that the BDA simply didn't have to make but did and that leaves US with a format that is iffy featurewise.

[BTBuck1]

once 50gb DL & or vc-1/avc comes into play...who cares what compressed audio Blu Ray has....I'll take uncompressed linear PCM thanks!

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Brian@BBY

once 50gb DL & or vc-1/avc comes into play...who cares what compressed audio Blu Ray has....I'll take uncompressed linear PCM thanks!

Agreed...but when will that be?

[phloyd]

Originally Posted by hmurchison

Don't want to put on TrueHD ...then don't. Don't want to utilize persistent stores? No problem No ethernet? No big deal.

I don't see why I should have to pay for features that you want. As a consumer I can choose the player that has the features that I want and you can do likewise.

Otherwise they will all be the same and cost like the Pioneer Elite.

Bluray has enough CE support to give you the choice. HDDVD has the Toshiba player, the other Toshiba player and the rebadged Toshiba player - so perhaps there was not much argument in the mandated feature list

Reality is if you aren't getting what you want don't buy it. Period. There will be choices, even more so as the cost of these codecs licenses and implementation come down.

All this stuff costs money - if you want to pay for it good for you. Personally I am happy with regular DD and DTS. I don't want to pay for the other stuff (but will take it if it is there).

[BTBuck1]

Originally Posted by JTK

Agreed...but when will that be?

Blu Ray has barely been born. It hasn't even left the hospital yet.
Give Blu Ray some time at home with it's parent's and i'm sure it will be walking and talking in no time...a real boy genius by age 2.

[hmurchison]

Originally Posted by phloyd

I don't see why I should have to pay for features that you want. As a consumer I can choose the player that has the features that I want and you can do likewise.

Otherwise they will all be the same and cost like the Pioneer Elite.

That would make sense if Blu-Ray was the cheaper format. It's not. You pay twice as much for players that have less mandatory features that exist in the compeitors product. But you do have an extra helping of DRM which adds money and complexity. So the question is other than a few movie studios what exactly are you getting in Blu-Ray over HD DVD?

Originally Posted by phloyd

Bluray has enough CE support to give you the choice. HDDVD has the Toshiba player, the other Toshiba player and the rebadged Toshiba player - so perhaps there was not much argument in the mandated feature list

On paper. The only BD players that have shipped exist in a $3500 VAIO laptop and a $1000 Samsung unit with issues. All other BD products are vapor as it stands now.

Originally Posted by xxxxxx

All this stuff costs money - if you want to pay for it good for you. Personally I am happy with regular DD and DTS. I don't want to pay for the other stuff (but will take it if it is there).

Yes it cost $500 but you'd rather spend twice as much and get less. Isn't that a bit daft? To tell people you don't want to pay extra for features but your actions show you do. You want to pay twice the going rate for a player with more appointed features. That strikes me as a bit odd.

What does it cost to add ethernet to a device? An ethernet card car be purchased for $10. A little RAM for persistent storage costs a few bucks. The question is if we are paying a cool grand for Blu-Ray what exactly are we getting that is special that isn't available anywhere else?

[marzetta7]

Originally Posted by hmurchison

That would make sense if Blu-Ray was the cheaper format. It's not. You pay twice as much for players that have less mandatory features that exist in the compeitors product. But you do have an extra helping of DRM which adds money and complexity. So the question is other than a few movie studios what exactly are you getting in Blu-Ray over HD DVD?

On paper. The only BD players that have shipped exist in a $3500 VAIO laptop and a $1000 Samsung unit with issues. All other BD products are vapor as it stands now.

What would make sense is if you didn't shun the realization that we are in an EARLY ADOPTION MARKET. But, you do shun this realization, thus your logic applies in the here and now, given the one player that has been released from Samsung...newsflash, we have 6 other Blu-ray players to go--Sony, Pioneer, Sharp, Panasonic, the PS3, and LG players. And as much as you'd like to think that the HD market is static, and that the BDA will only be able to churn out 1 player from Samsung, the reality is is that in 2 months, you'll be learning, albeit painfully, that what is vaporware is simply just your notion that all other BD products are vapor.

Yes it cost $500 but you'd rather spend twice as much and get less. Isn't that a bit daft? To tell people you don't want to pay extra for features but your actions show you do. You want to pay twice the going rate for a player with more appointed features. That strikes me as a bit odd.

What does it cost to add ethernet to a device? An ethernet card car be purchased for $10. A little RAM for persistent storage costs a few bucks. The question is if we are paying a cool grand for Blu-Ray what exactly are we getting that is special that isn't available anywhere else?

What I find a bit daft is comparing a subsidized standalone player to one that isn't and then turning around and trumpeting the price factor. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know why Toshiba's player is cheaper--other than looking at the slower load time, the cheap PC internals, etc--since it is subsidized.

Again your argument has very little significance when one realizes that the HD market doesn't exist in a vacuum and that other Blu-ray players are very close to their unveiling--and even some equipped with the beloved ethernet jack that you seem to be making a whole stink about.

I can think a couple of things you'd be getting for a cool grand when the other Blu-ray players are unveiled in 2 months, that isn't available anywhere else--more storage, more exclusive content, and more choice when choosing what player you'd like to purchase.

Any more questions involving turning a blind eye to what is to happen in two months, and just focusing on the here and now in an early adoption market while all the while attempting to exploit the price factor when it has the least significance?

[BTBuck1]

Originally Posted by marzetta7

and more choice when choosing what player you'd like to purchase.

One of the biggest reasons i'm not an HDDVD supporter (yet) is because I don't like Toshiba AT ALL.

I don't like samsung much (aside from LCD tv's) and LG is well in the same boat as them, with sharp IMO.

I do really Like Panasonic, Sony & Pioneer...

And guess what? they'll never make HDDVD players atleast not for a long long time as long as their is a format war going on.

Many people might say i'm shallow, or who cares what brand the player is. Well IMO reliable, state of the art electronic components are equally as important as to whats on the screen. If it's big & ugly, has a dumb ass remote, freezes all the time, can't remember where you left off when you power down, has audio drop outs, takes a million years to load up etc. Then I'm not too interested, not at $500 not at $300.

If Toshiba wants to lose money on their players to make avsforum happy & a few stragglers over here, great. But I think if those same people Really wanted to back the format and hope it succeeds, they should buy Toshiba's XA1 so that they can assure a victory rather than speed up their eventual bankruptcy from losing $2-300 per player. The extra $300 is a small price to pay to ensure your favorite format wins, especially when you consider some of those guys have 35-40 movies already.

I will be backing Blu Ray more than HDDVD, I will probably get the HDDVD add on so that I can watch universal movies in High Def also, as I already have a 360. But All other studio's movies will be purchased on Blu Ray. I understand the software is going to be hit or miss until the VC-1/AVC codecs get brought in, the authoring tools get better and the DL discs come available.

What I don't understand is how the HDDVD camp can buy into something only one company is producing players for. There is nothing on tap for a stand alone player from anyone else, just some computer drives and the xbox360 add on. to me this is a little scary and i'd be and am hesitant to bet the farm on a format who has virtually no industry support against a competing format that has virtually all of the industry support.

[phloyd]

Originally Posted by Brian@BBY

One of the biggest reasons i'm not an HDDVD supporter (yet) is because I don't like Toshiba AT ALL.

I am with you there.

Though I guess the $364 was the price point where I figured it was good enough value for money

I have had it for a day now and it is ok. Something to play with while I wait for PS3

[hmurchison]

Originally Posted by marzetta7

What would make sense is if you didn't shun the realization that we are in an EARLY ADOPTION MARKET. But, you do shun this realization,

Of course I'd shun that piece of hype. When comparing the the formats the players are in the "same" market so that normalizes everything and still brings us to the same scenario. HD DVD player $499 Samsung BD player $999 and less featured. There is no empirical evidence that supports the Toshiba being subsidized other than the iSuppli guestimate on part costs. So I believe their could be subsidy involved but its not a fact.

Originally Posted by marzetta7

Again your argument has very little significance when one realizes that the HD market doesn't exist in a vacuum and that other Blu-ray players are very close to their unveiling--and even some equipped with the beloved ethernet jack that you seem to be making a whole stink about.

I just checked on the Sony BDSP1 and the Panasonic. Neither seem to have an ethernet port so it looks like the Pioneer is going to be the first unit with Ethernet. This pretty much seals the deal. Ethernet isn't going to be a factor on most standalone BD players IMO.

Originally Posted by marzetta7

I can think a couple of things you'd be getting for a cool grand when the other Blu-ray players are unveiled in 2 months, that isn't available anywhere else--more storage, more exclusive content, and more choice when choosing what player you'd like to purchase.

I don't think the storage will be a factor. 50GB BD-ROM will be as rare as hen's teeth in 2006 and consumers don't care about size for pre-recorded content. The exclusive content is a bonus...a big one. The CE choices are a bit superfluous as they are all the same price and contain varying levels of tech mediocrity. But he choosing between mediocre players is still a choice nontheless.

Originally Posted by Brian@BBY

What I don't understand is how the HDDVD camp can buy into something only one company is producing players for. There is nothing on tap for a stand alone player from anyone else, just some computer drives and the xbox360 add on. to me this is a little scary and i'd be and am hesitant to bet the farm on a format who has virtually no industry support against a competing format that has virtually all of the industry support.

Because some of us realize that there "will" be other platform vendors. Liteon is making recorders. Acer is shipping laptops with the HD DVD player and recordable media is already available in SL and SL versions. The HD DVD Euro launch is coming and there will be new hardware there. All is well and I'm excited. I'm excited about Blu-Ray as well and I'd like to see more agressive pricing on 2nd generation hardware but long gone are the days where I thought Blu-Ray would run roughshod over HD DVD. They have fumbled enough to give HD DVD every advantage of playing for the win.