Fox News makes up Blu Ray facts

[ianirvin]

Ulanoff: Blu-ray Is Doomed to Lose DVD Format War

I came to this conclusion shortly after reading John Dvorak's thoughtful dissection of the HD DVD versus Blu-ray imbroglio.

It was right on the money in all ways but one: Dvorak didn't anoint a winner; he thinks it'll take a couple of years to shake out.

I think he's wrong.

I didn't always feel this way about the high-def wars. HD DVD and Blu-ray are, in some ways, so similar that I assumed no self-respecting consumer would notice or care about the minute differences.

Both store, on a dual-layer disc, between 45 and 50 GB of data. Both will offer enhanced end-user interaction. Both, but especially Blu-ray, will offer improved content protection (no copies, please).

But as the fracture between the HD DVD-ites and Blu-ray-ees continued, I realized that consumers would be forced to make a choice.

Most of my coworkers and fellow tech watchers handicap the race at dead even.

Each technology has suffered its own series of setbacks and delays. The players are only just now arriving, and content is virtually nonexistent. They also see good chances for big HD content success because people have been buying HD TV sets for years, with little good content to play on them.

This is only partially true. While HD sets have been around for years, early devices were inordinately expensive, and HD TV stations began showing up only in the past two years.

I'd argue that 2005 was the breakthrough year for HD sets. So while demand for HD content may be pent up, there aren't that many consumers in the pen.

Late last month, Toshiba finally shipped the very first HD DVD drive. From what I hear, the first run was in the thousands. Those players disappeared almost instantly.

I guess those 10,000 consumers also bought all six of the HD DVD titles available from Warner and Universal. This does not sound like a resounding success.

But let's look at Blu-ray.

Sony's first players (from Samsung, Toshiba, and others) have yet to arrive. There still isn't even one publicly available Blu-ray content disc.

In mid-May, Sony announced that we wouldn't see any until late June. This is, ostensibly, to synchronize the release with the availability of those first players.

That's a pretty flimsy reason.

Warner is smart enough to know that it can sneak HD DVD content into the hands of consumers by burning it onto the back of regular DVD discs. Dvorak noted in his column that Blu-ray technology can't achieve this same feat (not without jumping through some significant technical hurdles).

Even so, the first HD DVD discs are not hybrids, so what's really holding back the Blu-ray content?

Perhaps Sony is stuck on the "chicken and egg" concept. Which comes first — the players or the content?

In a horse race like this, you take both the chickens and eggs and throw them at consumers. Holding anything back is a huge mistake on Sony's (and its partners') part.

Still, others expect Sony and Blu-ray to pull the rabbit out of the hat with one critical hardware release: The PlayStation 3.

As most people know by now, the PS3 will feature a built-in Blu-ray drive. It was originally slated for a spring ship, but was pulled back when Sony ran into Blu-ray delivery problems. Now we expect to see the eagerly anticipated gaming console in the fall.

Dvorak also made this point, but he's less certain of the PS3's success. I'm not.

The PS3 will be a blockbuster. Early supplies will sell out. And these gamers will, by default, get a brand new Blu-ray drive.

Gamers already expect a lot from their consoles, so the "extra interaction" Blu-ray offers may not mean much to them. But the PS3's success will not help Blu-ray win in the marketplace. This is because Sony's aiming at the wrong target audience.

HD DVD and Blu-ray will achieve success only if they reach critical mass in the general consumer marketplace.

The gaming market is not the general market. The vast majority of consumers who watch DVDs and even own HD sets are not 12- to 25-year-old die-hard gamers. Instead, they're 25- to 55-year-old adults with children who have better things to do than play games.

To be fair, HD DVD and Blu-ray both face a similar uphill battle; consumers are not itching to replace or upgrade their current DVDs or DVD players.

It will take a huge marketing and education effort to make consumers understand why they want either standard. Experiencing HD movies will help, but for the next two months, they'll be able to do this only with HD DVD.

In our lightning-fast, high-tech world, two months is like the first two lengths of a four-length horse race.

Can Blue-ray catch up? I don't think so.

[ianirvin]

You will notice I bolded and highlighted the line about the device capacity. Both store 45-50 on a dual layer? is HD dvd not 30 and blu ray 50?

This is why journalists s hould be experts in thier field not people who listin to rumors and assume facts.

[ianirvin]

Article is here, aswell as a link to the other fox article I posted in the "HD has already won" thread.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,195275,00.html

[hmurchison]

He's assuming the Triple Layer 45GB HD-DVD is actually a reality. It isn't.

[zombie]

Fox News makes up political news so I'm sure it means even less to them to make up technology news.

[thunderhawk]

I've seen 50 GB BD discs, but no 45 GB HD DVD discs...

I know both have been demonstrated, but only the BD's have actually reached the packageing.

[das_uberdog]

Hi, I'm new to this blog, but check it frequently. I posted this discussion earlier on another blog, pertaining to the discussion of the fox news report.

Consider this article originally posted in pcmag.com entitled "Blu-ray is Doomed." The author is having a little trouble with his facts, particularly with the respective capacities of HDDVD and Blu-ray, stating that 'each holds between 30 and 50GB of data.' The fact is HDDVD has 30GB capacity and Blu-ray 50GB. At this point, I don't know whether the author was intending to obscure the fact or if it was just poor research. Now consider the same article reposted on Foxnews.com where the above fudged fact was altered slightly where the author states that each format holds between 45 and 50GB of data. Again, the upcoming Blu-ray discs will hold 50GB, HDDVD 30GB, not 45GB. The 45GB triple layer HDDVD is still in prototype stage, (the new prototype Blu-ray quadruple layer boasts 100GB.)

Next the assertion about who will buy the PS3 is just plain wrong. Exact statistics do vary, but they generally agree that 60% of all gamers are 25-44 years old, not 12-25 years old, as the auhtor asserts. Additionally, 87% of people who purchase game consoles are over 18. The author conlcudes the article with a blatant misspelling, "Blue-ray" (sic). The same article appearing in two separate publications with competing facts (in favor of HDDVD) seems a bit spurious. At best, it's sloppy reporting and will not pass as journalism.

The next tidibit came to me the same day Sony announced its new Blu-ray Vaio, claiming that Sony was faking the Blu-ray demonstration. Not coincidently, this fabrication came from the very same person who wrote the "Blu-ray is doomed" article cited above. The only fake is the reporter. There was actually a side by side comparison of a standard DVD and a Blu-ray movie at this event, of which this "reporter" only showed you the standard DVD. Here is an actual review of the debut by notebookreview.com.

Whatever the agenda of this "reporter" who has been deliberately spreading false information, one hopes that this is not a reflection on the reporting integrity of gearlog, pcmag.com or foxnews.com. Their credibility is now in question on the topic of HDDVD v. Blu-ray. This kind of obfuscation will only hurt sales of both formats in the short run.

[JTK]

^^ The author of that article is a well known BR FUD-meister to say the least.

[georgir]

What's that about Bluray not being able to achieve "hybrid" (well, actually just dual-sided) discs, or having some technical hurdles to it? Is there anything atleast remotely like truth to it?

[zombie]

Originally Posted by georgir

What's that about Bluray not being able to achieve "hybrid" (well, actually just dual-sided) discs, or having some technical hurdles to it? Is there anything atleast remotely like truth to it?

From what I've read previously it's true. Thus the reason Sony plans to bundle the regular DVD with the BD version for some movies.

[georgir]

Any idea why?
Sounds weird to me. Sticking two discs back to back, what's easier than that?

They did have even true one-side-fits-all hybrid prototypes, no? Did they scrap that idea?

[ianirvin]

it would mean shipping the blu ray disks to another plant or purchasing new mechines to add onto an assembly line, it could be done, but it would be more expensive with blu ray. Its a valid point I supose but why not simply include two disks in a case? the price difference between 2 one sided disk and 1 dual sided disk is marginal.

[thunderhawk]

I asked not so long ago, where the hybrids were in the announced titles... Nobody knew...