Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Majority Of Customers Prefer Blu-Ray

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the we-have-a-winnah dept.

Media 413

bonch writes "A poll shows Blu-ray as the preferred choice, as conducted by Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates. Customers were given a side-by-side comparison of HD-DVD and Blu-ray. The results were that 58 percent of the 1,200 polled chose Blu-ray, and 26 percent were undecided. Generally speaking, HD-DVD is preferred by those seeking to reduce manufacturing costs while Blu-ray is preferred by those more interested in features and data storage." Sony's PS3 is to use the Blu-Ray format.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Uh-huh. (5, Insightful)

Musteval (817324) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071899)

And what percentage were convinced by the cool name and blueness, rather than the fact that one is slightly different?

Re:Uh-huh. (4, Insightful)

agraupe (769778) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071949)

Umm... probably 80-100%. That's the point of marketing. Whatever speeds its adoption is a good thing, because it is technically superior.

Re:Uh-huh. (2, Funny)

Musteval (817324) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071976)

You're telling me that it's a good thing that 80-100% of people support a technology because of its name? Hey, I've got a new DVD format! It's called "Free porn!" It's identical to a floppy disk, but anybody using it has to pay ten thousand dollars to me.

Re:Uh-huh. (1)

DarkEdgeX (212110) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072050)

The problem is that they're not identical. BluRay is technically superior. It can hold more content at the same bitrate HD-DVD uses, or it can hold the same amount of content at a higher bitrate than HD-DVD uses. I imagine that'll be especially useful for long movies like any of the Lord of the Rings films in their Extended Edition form.

How much of it is just the name? (4, Interesting)

AtariAmarok (451306) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071902)

How much of this customer preference is just the name? "Blu-Ray" is easy to remember, and does not sound like much anything else. "HD-DVD" sounds like just more tech alphabet soup, or part of a features list string for a Dell desktop ad.

Re:How much of it is just the name? (4, Insightful)

DigitumDei (578031) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071926)

Yes, and right now its just the name of the hardware.

I bet whichever format gets more of the "cool stuff" to begin with will more than likely be the format that wins, regardless of the actual technology.

Exactly the same codecs on both (2, Interesting)

SgtChaireBourne (457691) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071964)

Probably most of it, in the consumer poll. Most people don't know much other than the name. That said, the two variants are basically the same except for the storage capacity and manufacturing process.

On the software side, they encompass the same codecs [pcworld.com] . It'd be nice if the BBC or some consortium of similar institutions could get the proprietary codec off the Blu-Ray spec and put an open standard on there instead. Dirac or Theora could do for video what the web (HTML+HTTP) did for the net.

Last I heard, the audio codec was not selected. That would be a prime use for Vorbis.

Maybe true, but the capacity is important (4, Interesting)

tkrotchko (124118) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072150)

The capacity of HD-DVD is not enough to hold movies and extras at 1080i.

So it seems to me if studios favor HD-DVD its because they want to sell us all the movies on HD-DVD, and sell us the movies again on HD-DVD mkII which will have more capacity.

From my narrow perspective, Blu-Ray would make a good medium for backup now that 300-500G hard drives are increasingly common.

Re:How much of it is just the name? (4, Insightful)

theNote (319197) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071990)

Kind of reminds of when you had to decide whether you were going to get DVD+R or DVD-R discs.
Now you can get a dual format drive for less than $50 and not have to worry about it.
I'm guessing after a little while we'll see the same thing happen with the new formats and nobody will care which one you're using.

Re:How much of it is just the name? (5, Insightful)

dsginter (104154) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072045)

"Blu-Ray" is easy to remember, and does not sound like much anything else.

Unfortunately, the plan is to call it a "BD-ROM" or "BD-RAM", depending on rewritability. I can see it now:

CD-ROM
CD-R
CD-RW
DVD-ROM
DVD-R
DVD-RW
DVD +R
DVD+RW
BD-ROM
BD-R
BD-RW
BD+RW
HD-DVD
HD -DVD-R
HD-DVD-RW
HD-DVD+RW

I think the plan is to get the consumer to actually pass out when shopping for media. Then, the store clerks will just steal their wallets.

Twikki (4, Funny)

AtariAmarok (451306) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072064)

"Unfortunately, the plan is to call it a "BD-ROM" or "BD-RAM","

And now Sony will dust off that damn pan-faced robot from "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century" for commercials: "BD BD BD BD BD BD".

Re:How much of it is just the name? (1)

Golias (176380) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072269)

Heh. Your post reminded me of the old "Arkansas Literacy Test" joke:

MR Snakes
R Not
OSAR. CMBDIs?
L All B...
MR Snakes!

Re:How much of it is just the name? (5, Insightful)

jacexpo069 (521719) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072139)

Right, like how the name FIREWIRE blew the jumble of letters USB2 right out of the water, even if it was technically superior

Re:How much of it is just the name? (1)

afd8856 (700296) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072238)

Are you refering to iLink or to IEEE1394?

Re:How much of it is just the name? (2, Insightful)

AtariAmarok (451306) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072264)

"Right, like how the name FIREWIRE blew the jumble of letters USB2 right out of the water, even if it was technically superior"

You are comparing apples and oranges. These are two entirely DIFFERENT interfaces.

More relevant is how the "better name" Firewire really eclipsed Sony's name for the same thing (something like IEEE-1394, I think).

Pepsi Challenge (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13071910)

This isn't like one of those setup Pepsi challenges where they would shake up a bottle of Coke making it flat so the people would choose Pepsi is it?

Now why is it I think that all side-by-side comparisons can be equated to the Pepsi challenge? Well with a rhetorical question I'll be the one that answers it for you. If you're seeking a certain result you will find it; thus, whatever side-by-side comparison done always seems like a Pepsi challenge whereby the results are skewed by either a deliberate or unconscious malicious act in some way.

That's the one (2, Funny)

AtariAmarok (451306) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071927)

That's the one where the Pepsi rep makes sure that he pees in the Coke bottles before each and every "Taste Challenge".

Re:Pepsi Challenge (4, Interesting)

sbrown123 (229895) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071963)

I liken this to more how TV resellers adjust the color and contrast settings on televisions so customers think one has a better picture compared to one next to it.

Re:Pepsi Challenge (1)

ergo98 (9391) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072300)

This isn't like one of those setup Pepsi challenges where they would shake up a bottle of Coke...

Good bit of conspiracy theory there, however Pepsi wins taste tests quite soundly - for many people the sweet flatness of Pepsi is more enjoyable than Coke for a single taste. These same people might find Pepsi vile and disgusting after drinking a whole can, or on a hot day multiple cans, but in the taste test they'd often flag Pepsi as being the superior product under unrealistic conditions.

History Repeats... (5, Insightful)

Manip (656104) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071912)

If history of technology has shown us anything, in a two horse race the cheapest normally wins unless their is a VERY good reason for it not to.

This might be one of those cases; HD-DVD seems perfectly capable as a higher capacity DVD; why would people want to pay a premium for a few more features about 10% higher quality?

Re:History Repeats... (2, Interesting)

DarkEdgeX (212110) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071998)

I think the economics argument is a red herring though. AFAIK the big argument against BluRay is that duplicators would need to purchase all-new equipment to produce BluRay discs. HD-DVD's claim to fame is that you can retrofit production onto existing DVD duplication hardware.

The thing is, the hardware purchase is a single expense. AFAIK the media/materials used cost the same. Once you start manufacturing hundreds of thousands or millions of discs, the cost per disc of the all-new hardware quickly approaches zero.

Left with that reality, it comes down to which is technologically superior and offers the most bang for the buck, and the answer to that is BluRay.

I don't think Sony is about to repeat their Beta experience. :P

I'm not so sure about Sony (4, Insightful)

tkrotchko (124118) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072188)

"I don't think Sony is about to repeat their Beta experience."

They certainly haven't learned from their ATRAC experience.

Re:I'm not so sure about Sony (2, Informative)

DarkEdgeX (212110) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072322)

Sure, but that was a CODEC. ;) I don't think they're going to drop the ball with BluRay; and unlike ATRAC [MP3, etc], MemoryStick [CompactFlash] or MiniDisc [Compact Disc], the existing alternative(s) for BluRay [HD-DVD] are inferior.

Re:History Repeats... (2, Insightful)

jimbolauski (882977) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072056)

"why would people want to pay a premium for a few more features about 10% higher quality" Where did you get your 10% it's more like 60%. Blue Ray can hold 50Gb and HD-DVD can hold 30Gb. If I were asked in a poll which disk do I prefer a $5 50Gb or a $4 30Gb I would choose the 50Gb disk. Most other features are similar so this is the only real difference.

Re:History Repeats... (1)

baadger (764884) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072172)

Actually after a quick visit to Wikipedia and a Google search it seems HD-DVD will be triple layered and may be able to hold a capacity of 45GB - Source [theregister.co.uk]

Not to mention the consumer appeal of having a standard DVD compatible layer.

Re:History Repeats... (1)

DarkEdgeX (212110) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072248)

There has already been talk of four layer [theregister.co.uk] (100 GB capacity) and eight layer (200 GB capacity) BluRay discs. (Search Google for the eight layer stories, I think The Register reported on that as well, and it was actually sometime last year I believe).

The thing to keep in mind is the capacity per layer and BluRay has that over HD-DVD. BluRay seems to be getting 25 GB per layer to HD-DVD's 15 GB per layer. If HD-DVD did manage to have eight layers they'd only realize 120 GB capacity to BluRay's 200 GB capacity.

If the cheapest wins, then I vote for DVD (1)

expro (597113) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072120)

There are not just two competing standards. If I am looking for something to replace DVD, the biggest competition seems to be DVD, which itself has not really replaced CDs for many uses and will clearly be the cheaper price. The better the standard, the more compelling it could be to make inroads against CDs and DVDs. Who is going to buy either one? There needs to be more-compeling features, better capacity, more robust, etc., especially since there are so many other issues that are even less-well defined on the new media than the older media, such as how long it will last. How about a standard that at least allows me to back up, just in case? I bet that this would be far more compelling to users.

Re:History Repeats... (1)

Transplant (535283) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072162)

Your argument is true only if the reduction in production costs is passed on to the consumer. If history is anything to go on, it won't be. CD's and DVD's are much cheaper to manufacture than casettes and VHS tapes, but which cost more when you walk into your local hypermart?

My bet is that if both of these formats hit the market, they'll be priced so similarly that consumers will make their choice based on features, not cost.

Re:History Repeats... (1)

Pablo El Vagabundo (775863) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072265)

" If history of technology has shown us anything, in a two horse race the cheapest normally wins unless their is a VERY good reason for it not to.

This might be one of those cases; HD-DVD seems perfectly capable as a higher capacity DVD; why would people want to pay a premium for a few more features about 10% higher quality?"

Histroically it is the format that the porn industry chooses.

But in this case the clear winner is Blue-Ray, becuase of the PS3. Why would the indsutry choose anything else once there is that many players out there???

Re:History Repeats... (4, Insightful)

Keebler71 (520908) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072285)

You are right on. What people "want" or "prefer" is largely irrelevant. What they will pay for is all that matters.

For instance, almost everyone I know complains about Southwest Airlines - particularly the dreaded "Cattle Call" seating assignments... yet when push comes to shove (pun) their planes are full of paying passengers and they are the only major airline to post a profit every quarter since 9-11.

Re:History Repeats... (2, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072340)

Well, the primary reason it's not quite like that is that the low-end is already covered by DVDs. HiDef DVD is only for those that have bought HDTV equipment, which is sort of pricy.

The real decider here is indirect deployment. XBox 360 will have DVD. PS3 will have Blue-Ray. Revolution will have DVD. That makes me very comfortable that Blue-Ray is a format that will remain supported for a very long time. If HD-DVD flops, MS chooses BD for their next console after 360, what is left?

When I buy a movie on Blue-Ray now, I expect it to be pretty much as good as it gets for several decades. I don't expect any "SuperHDTV" or "SuperHD-DVDs" for a very long time. That makes me very interested in making it last. And I'm still waiting until the dust settles regarding DRM before I buy a HDTV screen, it's no good if I can't play content on it. I was looking at the Westinghouse 37" LCD, but it has DVI-HDCP which has some incompatibilities with HDMI-HDCP. Great.

Kjella

Bluray (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13071915)

First

From the very start of TFA (5, Insightful)

Lord of the Wazz (636849) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071917)

A poll conducted by the group backing the Blu-ray next-generation DVD standard shows that the technology is supported by a majority of consumers, putting rival HD DVD on the defensive.

Shock horror, the Blu-ray guys have come up with a poll that says their product is better. Next story please...

Re:From the very start of TFA (2, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071992)

Be careful, they might come after you with their blu-rayguns.

-Eric

But what do the pornmongers think?` (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13071920)

As we all know from the VHS-beta wars, which format wins out depends not on what consumers want, but what the pornography industry prefers.

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?` (4, Informative)

jurt1235 (834677) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072042)

Small error there: What does Sony (biggest backer of blu-ray)allow? is the better question. Philips (the inventors of Beta) did not allow porn to be published on their format. The VHS people did allow this, thus the public nicely bought the VHS (sex sells).

So if Sony allows porn on the blu-ray, they are at least equal in competition (on that level).

The price will come down with volume, and ps3 will mean volume enough to be competitive

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?` (3, Informative)

_Spirit (23983) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072268)

Small correction:

Sony invented Beta, Philips invented Video2000, both were technically superior to VHS.

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?` (1)

goodcow (654816) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072360)

Sony allows porn on their new UMD format for PSP, so I don't think they'll have a problem about porn on Blu-Ray.

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?` (1)

OBeardedOne (700849) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072085)

I agree, but that was in the days when the porn industry was just getting on its feet. Porn used to be relegated to dingy peep show haunts on the strip but then this amazing new technology came along (cheap video cassettes) and allowed people to easily distribute the porn and even make it at home. As you quite rightly pointed out, Betamax won because it was preferred by the pornographers.

With the veritable mass of new media formats available today, it is unlikely that the porn industry will have such an influence on the dominant new formats. More likely it will be whichever company can drum up the most 3rd party support and the generic hardware manufacturers will be a major target. In line with your Betamax v VHS argument, history has proven that it won't necessarily be the best technology that wins.

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?` (2, Funny)

OBeardedOne (700849) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072167)

"Betamax won" Uh, I choose to disregard this reality and substitute my own.

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?` (1, Insightful)

ceeam (39911) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072095)

Stop the fuck modding this shit "Insightful". I guess I've read this sentence almost verbatim at least 100 times here on slashdot (and I tend to browse at +4 or +5).

Some reasons:
1) Unlike VHS/beta these media is not only used for movies. Far from it. I guess most BR discs for PS3 would be games. And I guess at least half of my discs at home are not video (and most of the others are filled with *.avi but I digress).
2) VHS was more practical. Really.
3) Sony are nuts about their proprietary formats.
4) Most of the people do _not_ purchase porno. If you're past-teen single loser that does not mean you are typical. In fact we are minority (and even then _I_ do not purchase porno).

Well - really - I was a bit young to remember when beta had a chance and may not know all the details but claiming that new universal media format would be decided by _porno_industry_ is a bit silly, no?

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?` (1)

PhilHibbs (4537) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072225)

According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] , it was the capacity of the early tapes that led pornographers to use VHS. I can't imagine Sony being able to block the sales of tapes based on their content back in those days. Maybe they could have used trademark law to prevent them from being labelled as Betamax.

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?` (2, Insightful)

Golias (176380) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072308)

Most of the people do _not_ purchase porno. If you're past-teen single loser

Psst: Porno is sometimes purchaces by married people, including women. Shhhh! Don't tell anyone, though. It's important that we pretend the entire multi-million-dollar industry is driven by skeevy 40-something single pervs in yellow trenchcoats, so we can all continue to be morally outraged about it.

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?` (4, Interesting)

Kjella (173770) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072098)

The porn industry prefers SD over HD so you can't see the boob job scars, unclean skin and that the "20yos" are actually 30 and a thick layer of make-up. That is the norm. I'm sure a few high-enders like Playboy and such will come out with solid HDTV releases, but most of the industry don't want to. It screws up both the "cheap equipment" and "cheap actors" bit, the price of the DVD platter isn't the real issue.

Kjella

Re:But what do the pornmongers think?` (1)

oneandoneis2 (777721) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072214)

Apparently a thin film of Vaseline on the camera lens will still fix most of those problems ;o)

Biased polls are useless (-1, Redundant)

Underholdning (758194) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071922)

"A poll conducted by the group backing the Blu-ray next-generation DVD standard shows that the technology is supported by a majority of consumers"

Dude - that's just wrong. You can't trust a poll made by someone who's biased.

And I, for one, welcome our blu-ray overlords (2, Funny)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071971)

You can't trust a poll made by someone who's biased.

Hey, 2 out of three are accurate. So just wait until they're three and hope that two of them agree.

-Eric

Re:Biased polls are useless (1)

I confirm I'm not a (720413) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071987)

You can't trust a poll made by someone who's biased.

You can't trust polls anyway - a third [theregister.co.uk] of participants tell porkies. (Mind you, this was reported in El Reg right next to an article saying that 1/3 of medical studies were bogus, and 1/3 of Americans believe in Ghosts - maybe this article is the 1 in 3 that's accuracy-challenged...)

I'm going to start non-believing 1 thing in every 3 I'm told. That'll fix it!

Re:Biased polls are useless (1)

hilaryduff (894727) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072324)

apart from the clear bias in this 'poll' it makes me laugh out loud to imagine anyone seriously caring for one moment what 1200 people think of two products costing vast amounts of money to develop. if blu-ray seriously think a little 'first blood' in the unfortunate format war theyre entering into is going to make any difference to the outcome, theyre in even more trouble than i thought.

I prefer 8" floppy disks (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13071925)

But that doesn't mean anything, since I'm a classic/vintage computer user (PDP-11)
Seriously, though...how do surveys this early in the technology curve for the next-DVD-replacement mean anything?

Re:I prefer 8" floppy disks (2, Funny)

BronxBomber (633404) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071954)

They dont mean anything.

Their only purpose is to keep the tech buzzwords fresh in the minds of the consumer in between Jerry Springer reruns.

Re:I prefer 8" floppy disks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13072176)

Well which one'll record Springer 'n my stories easier? This VCR thingy is too hard to figure out.

If it were up to the customers... (4, Insightful)

Jjeff1 (636051) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071929)

On DVD's we wouldn't have to sit thru FBI warnings or have region restrictions, or not allowed to fast forward thru scenes.
That survey is good to make people think they're being listened to. They're not.

Re:If it were up to the customers... (2, Insightful)

DarkEdgeX (212110) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072118)

Actually, only certain studios seem to do that. I've found that most of the movies I watch don't have that problem (20th Century Fox and Miramax don't, while I seem to recall every Paramount or Disney movie insists on you seeing everything before reaching the main menu).

You're not suggesting boycotting the competing formats at least, but if you want to complain, complain to the individual studios who can't seem to accept that you actually bought (and now own, or did I license it?) their product and just want to see what you bought.

Re:If it were up to the customers... (2, Insightful)

oneandoneis2 (777721) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072169)

That's one of the biggest things that tempts me to build a Linux media center to replace my current DVD player: mplayer lets me skip all that crap at the start of the disc.

Maybe it's unreasonable of me, but I resent being forced to play some "Don't download DVD's, it's theft" crap before I can watch the movie that I bloody paid for.

On a rental disc, I can accept it. I can even accept mandatory adverts on hired discs. But not on my own, paid-for discs, thanks very much.

To be expected (5, Interesting)

saterdaies (842986) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071946)

Blu Ray discs hold more data. Anyone hearing a run down comparison is going to go with blu ray. Personally, I'm still a bit scared about potentially loosing data because the layer of protection is so small. Of course, I'm sure the comparison didn't say "the protection layer is almost non-existant in blu ray discs".

It might be an unfounded fear, but I won't know that for at least a year after I get blu ray stuff.

Re:To be expected (2, Interesting)

Blkdeath (530393) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072092)

Anyone hearing a run down comparison is going to go with blu ray. Personally, I'm still a bit scared about potentially loosing data because the layer of protection is so small.

Based on personal and professional experience (friends and clients) this may be a misnomer. They could make the protection layer 2mm thick and customers would still use their discs as coasters (or skating rinks for mice).

HD-DVD is retarded (0, Redundant)

DarkEdgeX (212110) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071948)

Honestly, it's an inferior format to Blu-Ray. I can't understand why these studios and companies are lining up behind HD-DVD when something vastly better is available and won't significantly affect costs (especially if production is in volume, economies of scale will take over and pretty much eradicate any concerns with having to use all-new equipment).

Sadly, it seems Miramax (the company behind Lord of the Rings) is in the HD-DVD camp. I just hope their relationship with HD-DVD isn't an exclusive one...

Re:HD-DVD is retarded (0)

harlingtoxad (798873) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072013)

HD-DVD holds more hours of HD video despite Blu-Ray holding more raw data.

Re:HD-DVD is retarded (1)

DarkEdgeX (212110) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072027)

They utilize the same video CODEC's, so, I'm sorry, that's impossible.

Re:HD-DVD is retarded (1)

dbfruth (707400) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072142)

And Beta was better than VHS. It is all about the money, if HD-DVD alows them get by with a minimum amount of retooling they will choose HD-DVD. It dosen't matter that it will cost abouth the same in the long run (royalties excluded). Unfortunatly the way most major companies look at things today is "how will this increase shareholder value TODAY" Screw the long term.

Re:HD-DVD is retarded (1)

DarkEdgeX (212110) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072155)

Only someone who was naive about economics would buy into the argument that HD-DVD was superior because it could utilize existing duplication equipment. When you're dealing with hundreds of thousands or tens of millions of discs duplicated each month/year/whatever, the cost of buying new hardware vs. retooling existing hardware becomes nearly non-existant.

Re:HD-DVD is retarded (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13072144)

Apparently you're retarded as well. New Line Cinema was responsible for LoTR. NLC is owned by Time Warner. Miramax is a Disney owned studio (although they are soon to split ways).

Re:HD-DVD is retarded (1)

DarkEdgeX (212110) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072359)

You're right, I'm retarded. It is of course NLC not Miramax that was behind LoTR.

Of course they prefer it. (5, Insightful)

91degrees (207121) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071950)

Blu Ray has a sexier name. HD-DVD sounds like somethign for an IBM PC.

Re:Of course they prefer it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13072031)

Conversely, "Blu Ray" sounds like something Marvin the Martian would use. "Now I shall zap you with my Blu Ray. A hahahahahaha."

Re:Of course they prefer it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13072063)

Sounds cool. Bugs Bunny then turns bright blue and gets very depressed.

Re:Of course they prefer it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13072200)

You are confusing smart people with Apple vanity. If it was named iRay then maybe you have a point.

Not to be confused with... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13071951)

The study's editor insightfully removed the "death-ray" option from the final results, despite an 82% preference rate among the 12-32 demographic.

Polls (-1, Flamebait)

Luscious868 (679143) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071960)

I trust polls just about as much as I trust W on WMD issues.

Consider the source (1)

Anonymous User 2000 (597007) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071985)

If you bother to RTFA it says in the first paragraph this poll was commissioned by a pro Blu-ray group.

I wonder how a HD-DVD backed poll would have turned out (oh wait, no I don't).

Blu-ray loses big time (2, Insightful)

mrRay720 (874710) | more than 9 years ago | (#13071994)

Seriously, if you're running your own biased survey, you've loaded the dice in your favour, and you still only get 58% of the vote for something most people can't tell apart anyway, something is wrong.

What isn't said there, is that all 1200 of these consumers work for Sony.

Re:Blu-ray loses big time (1)

kannibal_klown (531544) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072148)

Seriously, if you're running your own biased survey, you've loaded the dice in your favour, and you still only get 58% of the vote for something most people can't tell apart anyway, something is wrong.


Wow, I know people don't usually read the article, but at least read the post. You're forgetting the hefty "undecided" number.

According to the survey:
Blu-Ray: 58%
HD-DVD: 16%
Undecided: 26%

58 trounces 16 no matter how you cut it.

Then again, you being skepticaly of an unbiased survey isn't exactly wrong.

Well, I'm convinced (3, Funny)

BaudKarma (868193) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072004)

Sounds like the Blu-Ray people have the clearly superior product. I guess I'll be stopping by Frys on my way home from work to pick one up.

On second thought, they'll probably all be gone if I wait that long. I'd better swing by during lunch.

the geeks will decide (2, Insightful)

aoty (533561) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072005)

Seeing how most consumers don't own televisions that support hi-def content, the only people who will care about Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD are the geeks, folks who are likely to understand the difference and who will extract benefit from one format over the other. Joe Sixpack is perfectly happy watching his full frame flicks that he rents from Blockbuster on his 27" set.

This may be one format war where the best product actually wins.

Re:the geeks will decide (1)

cyxxon (773198) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072068)

And for the same reasons I predict neither wins. Joe Sixpack is just not interested in either since he already can pay all the movies on his DVD player and would probably rather boycott studios who discontinued the DVD in favor of either HD-DVD or Blu Ray.

Re:the geeks will decide (5, Insightful)

Blkdeath (530393) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072140)

Seeing how most consumers don't own televisions that support hi-def content, the only people who will care about Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD are the geeks, folks who are likely to understand the difference and who will extract benefit from one format over the other. Joe Sixpack is perfectly happy watching his full frame flicks that he rents from Blockbuster on his 27" set.

I'd be careful there; with no payments until 200x, no interest equal payments for 24/36 months, etc. you'd be surprised what kind of home theatre Joe Sixpack has in his house. 52" Hi-Def screen, 7.1 digital receiver with pre-amp, 1000w tower mains, 100w sub-woofer, 5-disc DVD player connected with Monster Component video and digital optical audio cables, XBox and PS2 with A/V upgrade pack, RFI filtering power centre, ...

In short Joe Sixpack has a better theatre setup than I do.

Will be obsolete before the dust settles... (2, Interesting)

dpbsmith (263124) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072011)

Sigh... not again...

...the early adopters who back the wrong horse will be punished and will learn a life lesson that will make them reluctant to embrace new technology...

...the general public will sit back waiting for the dust to settle...

...it will take five years before you can walk into a video store and see which format is the "normal" one, and see a choice of models at low prices stacked up in the local K-Mart or Costco...

...and just as I buy one, they announce the next pair of competing, incompatible (or compatible-in-"many"-but-not-mine) standards.

As Theotocopulos says in the H. G. Wells movie Things to Come: "Stop this 'progress!' Stop it, I say!"

Semi-Meme (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13072038)

Blue-Ray confirms it: HD-DVD is dead

Feature List (4, Insightful)

bigmurd (884582) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072052)

Sounds like they missed the price tag out of the feature list. If you compared the feature list of Fords and Ferraris, you'd expect people to want the Ferrari more - but what do people buy? Getting slowly annoyed with these skewed PR surveys. Surely press hacks must be getting bored of filling space with meaningless copy?

I think they'd want a ford (1)

tkrotchko (124118) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072258)

"If you compared the feature list of Fords and Ferraris, you'd expect people to want the Ferrari more "

Since most people since to prefer SUV's and pickups, I think Ford just might win that comparo...

Marketing does it all (1)

cazzazullu (645423) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072061)

Since when are "the customers" supposed to select the "best" alternative? Isn't it almost always the one with the biggest publicity budget that wins? "oh yeah, I have heard somewhere about that thingy, but look at this! It is everywhere! It must be good!" Even here on my desk I have several things which are here only because of publicity/public acceptance and which have alternatives that are cheaper and better in quality (coca cola, dell computer, imation cdr's, macdonalds lunch, ...)

Blue Ray (3, Funny)

KrunZ (247479) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072065)

Maybe people who voted actually wanted these rays: http://www.crystalinks.com/bluecrystals.html [crystalinks.com]

FYI: Google gives a ration 1:3 for "blue-ray" vs "blu-ray".

HUH? (0, Redundant)

torpedo20 (823399) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072080)

Quote from TFA: "A poll conducted by the group backing the Blu-ray next-generation DVD standard shows..." I stopped reading right there..

Consumers also thought beta was better than VHS (2, Informative)

voss (52565) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072086)

So what...

VHS didnt win because it had a better picture, VHS won because it was less costly.

HD-DVD has better backwards compatibility(hd-DVD players play older DVDs more easily)

Re:Consumers also thought beta was better than VHS (1)

shidoshi (567151) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072147)

What exactly does "more easily" mean? DVD compatibility will be in every Blu Ray player, and the end user - you - won't see any difference.

VHS won due to cheaper licensing. (2, Informative)

MtViewGuy (197597) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072302)

The biggest reason why VHS won was the fact that JVC (the developer of the Video Home System format) and its majority shareholder Matsushita Electric offered extremely low licensing terms for other companies to manufacture VHS recorders--far lower than that of what Sony wanted for the Betamax format.

Besides, VHS had another huge advantage, notably longer recording times at all recording speeds, something highly desirable for recording complete TV seasons, miniseries or sporting events. And VHS easily matched Beta improvements in sound and picture quality with VHS Hi-Fi audio and Super VHS higher-resolution recording.

Seems obvious... (1)

leinhos (143965) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072105)

Sony's PS3 is to use the Blu-Ray format.

Well that should be enough for 85% of the people who read /. -- seems like it's already a done-deal.
The other 15% would probably go with whatever Xbox-360 comes with...

Exactly (1)

cryptochrome (303529) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072294)

It's not just Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD... you also have to include DVD in there, which as far as most consumers think is just fine. They aren't going to upgrade their hardware without a compelling reason - and the only compelling reason considered here is image quality on HDTV. That won't push hardware sales.

Video game console sales will, however. Folks will be a lot more inclined to buy next-generation disks if they've already got a player sitting around and don't have to buy an expensive separate unit.

PC applications might help push things along, but not until we start seeing multiple-DVD programs and filesets. Few applications generate that much data outside of video.

Reminds me of my favorite quote (0)

Gillious (723833) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072117)

"There are three types of lies - lies, damn lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain

actually (1)

rtphokie (518490) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072130)

The majority of consumers have no opinion becuase they have no idea what either technology is and dont really care because they do not own HDTVs

Re:actually (1)

Kumorigoe (816912) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072210)

I was thinking the exact same thing. How do they expect average people to understand this new technology. I frequent these type of seedy web sites, and I still don't completely understand it.

Preferences include costs (1)

_iris (92554) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072187)

58% don't prefer Blu-ray. They prefer the appearance of Blu-ray images. The next question is the more important one: How much more money would you be willing to pay over the HD DVD to get the Blu-ray image. My guess is that ~85% would say less than 20% more money.

Personally, I only buy DVDs on sale, at $10 or less.

I give (2, Insightful)

theantipop (803016) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072191)

Honestly, the two technologies are close enough in features that I would much rather just avoid a format war than have to deal with the bullcrap I put up with to write to a DVD.

Common Sense (1)

TwoTailedFox (894904) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072196)

It really is Common Sense. Blu-Ray *is* the superior format, plus it has a better, more futuristic-sounding name.

Durability? (1)

popcultureicon (556737) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072228)

The only question I have is how tough are these formats? Will they be more resistant to scratching than DVD, or worse? No one seems to be talking about this, instead focusing on the capacity. I assume that both will have adequate space for me to view my future HD videos, but which format will allow me to view those same videos ten years in the future? Or does physical quality even matter any more, and I'm just being a naive optimist? If I'm paying more for each game I buy in the next generation, I don't want to have to pay twice for any of them.

Did they include the player price difference? (1)

m50d (797211) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072232)

That's the main selling point of HD-DVD. Blu-ray has more data storage, but it's cheaper to make players for HD-DVD. If they're looking solely at features, of course blu-ray will win.

What about C3D (5, Interesting)

zlogic (892404) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072274)

Remember the C3D company? They invented a CD which could hold a nearly infinite number of layers because each of them is completely transparent, but if the laser is focused on a layer and shining on it, the layer is self-illuminating.
C3D presented this technology back in 1999 or even earlier, they even had working prototypes.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/ch ronicle/archive/1999/11/29/BU19966.DTL [sfgate.com]
These discs could hold as much as 140 gigabytes of data!
Compared to this, blu-ray looks kind of outdated.
But the company went banckrupt (I think), and now in 2005 we are presented a technology IMHO less advanced than C3D.

Paid advertising? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13072355)

I don't really care what kind of sunglasses other people wear and I don't see how that is either nerd news or that it matters. Yeah, Blu-blockers are ok but so wha

Oh, never mind.

Totally the name... (1)

agentfive (545436) | more than 9 years ago | (#13072361)

We get tons of people who write in at TV Snob.com [tvsnob.com] about whether the HD-DVD format or Blu-Ray is better - we give them the storage answer but I think this poll is way off - it's more in the 75% range for people who know about Blu-Ray because of the name.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?