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!

HP No Longer Exclusively Supporting Blue-Ray

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the hard-to-pick dept.

HP 134

linumax wrote to mention an MSNBC article stating that HP is dropping its exclusive support for Blue-Ray. They'll be offering support to the HD-DVD format as well. From the article: "The decision is the latest sign of a looming 'format war' between the competing standards for a new generation of digital video players that can record high-definition films and video games. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD-compatible devices are expected to hit stores worldwide early next year."

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

Dead on arrival. (4, Insightful)

croddy (659025) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280335)

This trumped-up format war is going to be dead on arrival -- because 90% of U.S. televisions won't be anywhere near an HDTV signal until 2015. It's going to be DVD right up to the holocubes.

Re:Dead on arrival. (2, Informative)

interiot (50685) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280390)

So generations overlap, film at 11. Despite the huge take-up of DVDs, they just stopped selling VCR tapes like... last year, right?

HD movies are already being transmitted on cable and satellite channels... if people want to keep HD movies around, their only (legal) option is to keep them on a PVR's hard drive. Are HDTV owners satisfied with that? No.

Re:Dead on arrival. (2, Informative)

interiot (50685) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280419)

* VHS tapes

Re:Dead on arrival. (4, Interesting)

calibanDNS (32250) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280428)

It's kind of a silly option, but there is a HiDef VHS format out there that will let you record HD content to a D-VHS tape (or whatever they're calling it this week). It supports 480p up to 1080i (no 1080p, but honestly where are you getting a 1080p signal from anyway?).

1080p (3, Insightful)

HalAtWork (926717) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280501)

(no 1080p, but honestly where are you getting a 1080p signal from anyway?)



From people building support into their products like these people. Hopefully nobody will have the same attitude in thinking "What's the point, 1080p isn't so common" because I don't want to see another fucking interlaced display in my lifetime ever again! There is no reason we should have to put up with visual garbage such as interlacing. Holy crap, it's horrid. I'd rather watch 480p (or 720p) than 1080i, but I'm sure 1080i would be the most supported option just because it's the biggest number (notice how many don't support 720p and jump straight from 480p to 1080i).

Re:1080p (1)

interiot (50685) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280667)

1080i isn't total rubbish. HDNet does a lot of quality work, they always transmit their films in the original aspect ratio, for instance, and they transmit in 1080i [hd.net] , and their stuff looks great.

But yes, HD-newbies may not initially realize that 720p and 1080i should co-exist as equals... high-quality sports games are usually transmitted in 720p, for instance.

I'll take 1080i, thanks... (1)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281220)

CBS uses 1080i, ABC and ESPN uses 720p. And there's no comparison. CBS (CSI) looks far far better).

The only TVs that don't support 720p are cheapo CRT TVs that don't want to convert the signal. 720p requires a vertical frequency of 60Hz and a horizontal frequency of 43.2KHz. Whipping the electron beam right to left between lines 43,000 times per second is a tall order.

1080i only requires a vertical frequency of 30Hz and a horizontal frequency of 16.2KHz. That's a lot easier to do on a tube.

I do have to go back to the original poster's question: where are you getting a 1080p signal anyway? I have nothing against 1080p, but there is no standard for broadcast 1080p. That means you can't get it over the air (OTA), off cable or from DirectTV. There's no HD optical disc format, and D-VHS doesn't support it. So that really makes it difficult to find any 1080p content.

Virtually every (non-CRT) HDTV will support 1080p input by the end of the year, so source material will migrate that way over time I suppose.

Re:1080p (1)

calibanDNS (32250) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281669)

I didn't mean to imply that 1080p was bad, just that it wasn't readily available yet - and I agree with you that it's terrible that it's not. Interlacing really isn't necessary anymore, and I wish 1080i hadn't been included as an HD resolution. Now that it's out there, I see it being touted a lot more than 720p just because it sounds better to the un-informed. I've started seeing some DLPs in stores that support 1080p, but I don't want to upgrade to a new display until I feel like there's enough content out there to make it worthwhile.

Theres a difference (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281897)

"What's the point, 1080p isn't so common" because I don't want to see another fucking interlaced display in my lifetime ever again! There is no reason we should have to put up with visual garbage such as interlacing.

You can't just make blanket statements like that. 1080i is superior to 720p if your subject is relatively low-motion. 720p is superior if your subject is relativly high motion.

If you watch a lot of sports or play video games, 720p is better. If you watch a lot of dramas and non-action cinema, 1080p is far better.

Personally for me, I don't give two shits about sports, and prefer 1080i in 95% of the situations. Only if I am watching an action flick do I like to have a 720p source.

It also depends a lot on the native resolution of your display.

Re:Dead on arrival. (1)

Scruffeh (867141) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280780)

I do think that HDTV uptake is going to be very slow though. Unlike the USA, UK broadcasters aren't doing HDTV until the middle of next year. I'd be interested to see how many (if any) other countries have started it yet.

Re:Dead on arrival. (2, Insightful)

zaphod8829 (754076) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280408)

Right, and no one sees any reason to store more than 4.5GB on a disc anytime soon either.

Wasn't this the very reason they changed the DVD acronym to stand for Digital Versatile Disc rather than Digital Video disc?

Re:Dead on arrival. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280438)

Yeah, it's a good thing DVDs store 9GB and not 4.5GB.

Re:Dead on arrival. (2, Funny)

croddy (659025) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280462)

I saw floppy drives at Fry's yesterday.

Re:Dead on arrival. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280598)


  I saw floppy drives at Fry's yesterday.
... where you work!
haa ha ha haha ha haaaa

Great! Bargains!! on broken everything! Think of the savings!!!

Sure we will! (3, Funny)

Anyd (625939) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280471)

But DRM and copyright flags will prohibit us from watching it with our eyes open.

Re:Dead on arrival. (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280479)

Maybe 90% of televisions will still be SD simply because of the installed base and that they last so long, but currently about 10% of current US households already have at least one high definition capable TV set. HD sets are getting a lot cheaper every year as well, I would not be surprised to see a 720p LCD available early next year for $500, it would probably be around 27" or so.

Re:Dead on arrival. (1)

DDLKermit007 (911046) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281031)

Saw one over at Walmart last night (don't ask why I was there...thats the first time I was in there in 6 months) that was a 27" for $700 so your not far off. It was a piece of crap, but none the less close to your $500.

Re:Dead on arrival. (1)

kesuki (321456) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281660)

you know some people are still using black and white tv sets.

but seriously the 1950's called they want their 'color tv's are too expensive' bit back.

HDtv will continue to grow, people don't always wait for stuff to break to replace it, they wait until it makes sense for them to shell out the $$ to get a new tv

Re:Dead on arrival. (2, Insightful)

badasscat (563442) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280486)

This trumped-up format war is going to be dead on arrival -- because 90% of U.S. televisions won't be anywhere near an HDTV signal until 2015.

News flash: they already are.

Even "wait and see" articles like this one [siliconvalley.com] admit that there are already 16 million HDTV's in the US, which makes for greater than 10% market share (more like 15%). And that's as a percentage of all TV's currently in use - if you realize that there are more TV's in use than households in this country, then you can also make the assumption that many HDTV-enabled homes also have standard TV's in secondary rooms. So the total household penetration is probably more like 20%.

And the adoption rate is increasing, especially now that there's more of a reason to buy an HDTV - we've got the Xbox 360, we've got all prime time programming (except reality TV) in HD, we've got Blu-Ray and HD-DVD coming next year. At the same time, prices for HDTV's are falling through the floor - they have been well below the $500 mark for a couple of years now. You can buy a 26" HDTV for $299 at Best Buy. People who say HDTV's are expensive are focusing exclusively on the high end - but high-end TV's have always been expensive, HDTV or not.

Maybe you literally meant that most TV's wouldn't be near an HDTV signal until 2015 (that's what you actually said) - I kinda doubt you meant that but I may as well address that too just in case. All major metropolitan areas that I know of in the United States have access to over-the-air HDTV, cable HDTV and satellite. Rural areas have access to at least satellite. 100% of the US is covered by an HDTV signal of some sort, and most of the US is covered by several options.

You people who think the world is going to be stuck with standard-def analog TV forever are literally living in the past. Your friends probably have HDTV. A lot of people on this site have HDTV. Most new network programming is in HD, the new game consoles are in HD, the new optical disc formats are HD. It's already an HD world, and at some point, you'll join us.

Re:Dead on arrival. (1)

HD Webdev (247266) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280750)

Even "wait and see" articles like this one [siliconvalley.com] admit that there are already 16 million HDTV's in the US, which makes for greater than 10% market share (more like 15%). And that's as a percentage of all TV's currently in use - if you realize that there are more TV's in use than households in this country, then you can also make the assumption that many HDTV-enabled homes also have standard TV's in secondary rooms. So the total household penetration is probably more like 20%.

Be careful when assuming. The percentage is much lower than that using the same statistic source.

If you look at the web site for in-stat (the company that came up with the 16,000,000 HDTVs number), you'll see mention that they estimate that is HDTv in over 10,000,000 homes. Where did the other 5-6,000,000 HDTVs go?

Many of the HDTVs are purchased for businesses who use them for training, sales, bars (sports/etc), and other activities. Not only that, there is a small group of bleeding-edge types who replace equipment like TVs more regularly than the majority of the population. Most people wait for TVs to malfunction before replacing them so it's likely that the bleeding-edge types often have more than 1 HDTV.

Re:Dead on arrival. (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280487)

90% of U.S. televisions won't be anywhere near an HDTV signal until 2015

I see satellite dishes everywhere, HD on digital cable, four American and three Canadian border stations broadcasting in HD right now.

Re:Dead on arrival. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280690)

Last I checked, the USA is not the entire world.

Re:Dead on arrival. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280831)

Check again.

Oh, that's right. We take over the world tomorrow. After church, of course.

Might want to mark your calendar.

Re:Dead on arrival. (1)

harlows_monkeys (106428) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280916)

This trumped-up format war is going to be dead on arrival -- because 90% of U.S. televisions won't be anywhere near an HDTV signal until 2015. It's going to be DVD right up to the holocubes.

A significant chunk of DVD sales is for TV series, which are usually sold by the season on multi-disc sets. HD-DVD or Blu-Ray or both will be quite popular regardless of whether people have TVs that can display HDTV, simply because they'll be able to get a whole season of a show on far fewer discs.

Re:Dead on arrival. (1)

croddy (659025) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280977)

TV series on DVD have already shown us that pricing of shows on disc has nothing to do with the cost of making copies. Even assuming that they are encoded at the same bitrates we see today, making it possible to cram whole seasons onto 1 or 2 discs, pricing will not change and people will not be flocking to a new format that costs the same -- or, more realistically, costs even more.

Looming format war? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280337)

It already happened. It's a draw, just like for DVDs. We'll have both formats on the market with most players handling both formats.

BB? (1)

connah0047 (850585) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280340)

HP No Longer Exclusively Supporting Blue-Ray Saturday December 17, @02:53AM
Journey Towards The Center of the Earth Friday December 16, @10:59AM
Windows Gets Independent Security Certification Thursday December 15, @07:14AM
 


linumax is getting to be like BB.

Zonk Sucks (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280342)

In other news today, HP supporting both HD-DVD and Blue-Ray.

Zonk sucks.

Who cares? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280345)

It's better we decided anyway.

Disingenuous Headline (3, Informative)

ClickOnThis (137803) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280347)

The article headline says that HP has dropped support for Blu-Ray, implying that it has dropped all support. Whereas the article text makes it clear that HP has only dropped exclusive support.

A bit of fact-spinning going on at MSNBC?

Depends on your definition of support (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280361)

Not to sound like Bill Clinton, but there's support in the sense of "backing" and support in the sense of "working with." For example, you could say Apple iPods support mp3, but in reality Apple backs AAC while still working with MP3.

Re:Depends on your definition of support (1)

ClickOnThis (137803) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280377)

I see your point. However, "support" ought to have a consistent definition within the article.

Re:Depends on your definition of support (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280783)

But it would be very misleading to say "Apple drops support for mp3s", which is the point of the GP.

Depends on you definition of "Drop", too... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280481)

Yes, drop could mean to totally dump something. But it could also be "drop" as in "a drop in volume", which simply means a reduction. So Sony "dropping" support for Blu-Ray could also be interpreted as "reducing" support. Similar to how Pat Robertson's, "I think we should take him out", doesn't necessarily refer to assassination. It sometimes comes in handy to know how to simultaneously say things and not say them.

Uh ... depends on your definition of "definition"? (1)

ClickOnThis (137803) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280546)

It sometimes comes in handy to know how to simultaneously say things and not say them.

Well, my original point was that MSNBC appears to be doing exactly that, and that they might have a dishonest motive for doing so.

Re:Disingenuous Headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280602)

The article headline says "HP No Longer Exclusively Supporting Blue-Ray". What's wrong with that? (Apart from the fact that it should be Blu-ray, not Blue-Ray.)
Maybe the headline got changed after you posted and before I looked, or maybe you didn't look at it carefully.

You're looking at the wrong headline (1)

ClickOnThis (137803) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280629)

The MSNBC article's headline is HP drops support for Sony video format.

Re:Disingenuous Headline (1)

HD Webdev (247266) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280789)

A bit of fact-spinning going on at MSNBC?

Microsoft is backing the competing format.

That said, it's much more likely that they just used a shorter headline with smaller words as is SOP for most news organization headlines.

Re:Disingenuous Headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280850)

I agree.. just wait for the MS appologists to come out in throngs.

But it's clear what their intentions were when you look at the way they phrased it:

[HP] would abandon its exclusive support for Sony's Blu-Ray next-generation format for digital video discs and move to embrace Toshiba's competing HD-DVD format as well.

It's doubleplus good speak for implying HP thinks HD-DVD is defeating BLU-Ray. When the real news is merely that HP is going to support both formats.

Same technique is used with phrases like "Genuine imitation naughahyde".

It's "Blu-ray" (3, Informative)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280349)

It's not Blue-ray, since it was considered too generic to be trademarked.
Hmm... "Blue-rays" less generic than... Windows?

Re:It's "Blu-ray" (1)

Scarblac (122480) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280497)

Windows isn't trademarked either. Microsoft Windows is.

Great (2, Interesting)

42Penguins (861511) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280350)

DVD burners can now do DVD+R and DVD-R in one, and are finally getting down in price.

And now we have the next turn around, with Blu-ray and HD-DVD.
So place your bets, gentlemen. Will one die, as in Betamax?
Or will they eventually be combined in a single machine? (Is that possible?)

Re:Great (1)

calibanDNS (32250) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280416)

Samsung announced plans to produce a dual-format player a while back, so that will be an option. Personally, I'd rather just sit back and wait for the 'format war' to be over (and prices to start falling on players) before picking one up.

That's "Blu-Ray", not "Blue-Ray" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280351)

Not that I'm being pedantic ...

I wonder what happened... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280356)

I wonder what happened... Did the President of HP find Sony's Rootkit on his computer?

The modern day laserdiscs, both will flop. (2, Insightful)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280368)

Only the most open solution can win. Consumers will realize if they can't copy (to some other medium) or if either one angles them in DRM, that it just isn't worth it.

AFAIK, both of them drown in DRM features and there's no real buzz for them outside some in the video-phile community, DVDs will prevail - they are good enough and neither new offering offer killer must-have features for the majority of people.

Since either medium doesn't give me a significantly big boost in GBs that I was expecting, it will probably flop on the computer side as a gotta have (as a burner) because Holographic storage will blow it away by the time burners come out.

Re:The modern day laserdiscs, both will flop. (3, Insightful)

jerw134 (409531) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280446)

Consumers will realize if they can't copy (to some other medium) or if either one angles them in DRM, that it just isn't worth it.

Right, because consumers everywhere are copying DVDs to other mediums.

With DVDs, you have NO (legal) ability to do anything with the DVD aside from playing it. With the new formats, they will have managed copy systems to allow some copying. So your argument makes absolutely no sense.

Re:The modern day laserdiscs, both will flop. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280616)

Right, because consumers everywhere are copying DVDs to other mediums.


All my favorite DVDs I own are backed up on my harddrive. It's also rather convenient to play without looking for the disk. I only have on my drive (in movies) what I own.

With DVDs, you have NO (legal) ability to do anything with the DVD aside from playing it. With the new formats, they will have managed copy systems to allow some copying. So your argument makes absolutely no sense.


There's legal and then there's reality.

Re:The modern day laserdiscs, both will flop. (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280531)

both of them drown in DRM features

As I understand it, both formats allow "one click" transfers to hard disk drives, distribution through home networks and standard-definition downloads to portable devices.

That sounds like "Fair Use" to me. I would like the option to stream low-res video over IM chat links and the like. But that is not a deal-breaker.

Re:The modern day laserdiscs, both will flop. (1)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280669)

That's not good enough. Entertainment wants to be free!

Re:The modern day laserdiscs, both will flop. (1)

gabebear (251933) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280734)

"As I understand it, both formats allow "one click" transfers to hard disk drives, distribution through home networks and standard-definition downloads to portable devices."

The "Managed Copy" feature only gaurantees that you will be able to make a copy to send over a network, not that it will be free. Arstechnica explains it pretty well: "all content provided on HD DVD must give users the option of making at least one copy. Jordi Ribas, director of technical strategy for the Windows Digital Media Division, told me that while the feature is mandatory, the studios will have the option of charging for it. [arstechnica.com] "

Your player will have to be connected to the internet to allow for copies, and it's likely you will have to pay for any copy you make, even temporary ones.

DRM ? (1)

DrYak (748999) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281008)

Because, of course, Joe Six Pack knows perfectly well what "DRM" means.
And in 2006, he is of course aware the one can copy movie ? He hasn't seen VCR for ages, and the only thing he can think of when you speak about recording to him is either Camcoder, TiVO, or downloading from Kazaa.

I've actually seen portable music player beeing advertised as "MP3, WMA, and DRM" compatible. As if DRM was something to be proud of.
And I've seen the average joes *buying* them, not because they understand anything, but just because it has one more TLA, so for sure this *must* be better.

Industry : Here. I have this shiny, new, useless, overpriced, crapastic technology called "Z.U.T.".
Joe Six Pack : You said shiny ? Gimme ! Gimme ! Gimme ! Here's my money !


If the industry pushes BD and HD-DVD as new standart, with intelligently determined price, with enough expensive marketing campaign, and menace to discontinue the DVDs, you'll sure everybody will be switching to the new standart (and will buy one more time the movies they already own in VHS and DVD format...)

Industry : Look, there's this shiny new format, that provides True-Vision Immersion (tm) (c) (r), Enrivenmental-Sound Plus (tm) (c), and wonderful Power Remote (tm) (c) that has 20 buttons (of which 2 functions 100% of the time, the other being blocked by DRM anti-skipping flags in the movies). Every fucking Holywood star has already installed a such custom installation in their home (didn't you see it on MTV ?). Complete plug-n-play systems in-a-box starting at $699 (even if it costs us $100 to produce in our chineese out-sourced plant. But we've determined that your ready to pay that much). Every disc will provide 7 different language audio tracks and 20 subtitles track, we swear (We swear. The first year until enough people are attracted, then will segment the market like hell). Your neighbore has already one, don't be the last looser to acquire one, run to the mall NOW !
Joe Six Pack : You said shiny ? Gimme ! Gimme ! Gimme ! Here's my money !


Be ready, for one, to welcome you future BD/HD-DVD faring, DRM enforcing, internet connected, MS-Windows MPC powerered, virus ridden Media PC zombie botnets overlords.

looming? (4, Funny)

customs (236182) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280375)

a looming format war? what have you called the last year? minor consistent back and forth skirmishes?

sorry folks, the format war has been going on.

Re:looming? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280429)

It's not a war until both are actually in the shops and people have to choose between them when buying. So far HAS just been skirmishes.

I'm quite looking forward to the real war part, it should be a lot more vicious and public.

what a dilemma (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280379)

We're supposed to be boycotting both Sony and Microsoft right now!

Microsoft is at the root of this (3, Insightful)

Kohath (38547) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280380)

HP wants to support HD-DVD because Windows Vista will have support for HD-DVD, but add-ons like Java will be required for Blu-ray. Microsoft won't ship Java with Windows Vista.

This only matters for PCs and laptops, not stand-alone Blu-ray players. The makers of stand-alone players are happy to ship Java.

I plan on buying the PS3 as my high-def disc player. It will support Blu-ray and it runs Linux. Plus I can play games on it.

Re:Microsoft is at the root of this (2, Interesting)

Rosyna (80334) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280534)

This seems to be very true. HP even made a request [vnunet.com] that the Blu-ray group include iHD (microsoft's non java interactivity "language") support. However, iHD isn't even "Tested". I can't find any information on it. Compare this with java with has many years of being tried and tested. Also consider the fact that either way, Blu-Ray or HD DVD implementors will have to pay MS for the VC-1 license.

It almost seems as if MS is "convincing" HP to make this move. I don't know if it has anything to do with java itself since MS paid sun $2 billion but more of a "all media technology must only work well on windows" type of thing.

Re:Microsoft is at the root of this (1)

Vr6dub (813447) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280542)

"and it runs Linux"

That's a pretty confident statement. You talk as if it is already out and have it running right now

Re:Microsoft is at the root of this (1)

Kohath (38547) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280736)

"and it runs Linux"

That's a pretty confident statement. You talk as if it is already out and have it running right now


it runs Linux [wikipedia.org] .

Better?

Re:Microsoft is at the root of this (1)

DeadScreenSky (666442) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280852)

I'm not sure if linking to a Wikipedia entry with clear misinformation in it (most PS3 games require the hard disk? WTF?) is any kind of actual argument. Especially since the (dead) linked evidence suggests that only the hard disk add-on may use Linux.

And why would a gaming console run Linux anyway? I could maybe see a seriously stripped down and modified Linux kernel (though that's still pretty unlikely), but that wouldn't remotely really be the kind of Linux that people think of when they hear that word.

But since a real PS3 doesn't actually exist yet it's hard to believe even if there was stronger evidence or even justification. Sony has put out too much BS about the PS3 for the last couple years to believe anything they say. Remember how the PS3 would take advantage of the processing power in the Cells inside your refrigerator and neighbor's PS3? Wonder why Sony isn't talking about that anymore...

Re:Microsoft is at the root of this (1)

zlogic (892404) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280679)

Java will be needed for menus, titles, etc. - everything needed for watching movies. Microsoft may simply not ship this stuff, and rely on third-party offers (e.g. Windows XP/Media Player cannot play DVDs out-of-the box, but only after installing a third-party decoder).

Re:Microsoft is at the root of this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14281535)

HP wants to support HD-DVD because Windows Vista will have support for HD-DVD, but add-ons like Java will be required for Blu-ray. Microsoft won't ship Java with Windows Vista.

Microsoft won't ship Windows Vista to HP customers either. Microsoft ships Vista to HP, who ships it to their customers. So, HP can always add Java and other Blu-ray support on after installing Vista, and before shipping it to their customers. I think that this the same thing that happens today with DVD players--Microsoft leaves the DVD support up to the manufacturer.

Re:Microsoft is at the root of this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14281793)

Insightful?? And what, exactly, is stopping HP from loading the JRE on the computers they sell?

HP just making noise to get HP friendly features (3, Interesting)

DumbSwede (521261) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280406)

HP is just trying to strong-arm some more concessions out of Sony on Blu-Ray features like managed copy. With 90% support from movie studios and HD-DVD delayed until 2006 the battle is already over. Even Microsoft has quit making noise about a possible HD-DVD X-Box 360. As far as low cost manufacture of discs, Blu-Ray can win there too with mpeg-4 on conventional DVD-9 for low bar entry into HD production -- can you aay porn? I know you could.

Re:HP just making noise to get HP friendly feature (1)

HD Webdev (247266) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280807)

HP is just trying to strong-arm some more concessions out of Sony on Blu-Ray features like managed copy.

Actually, that has already happened.

Nov 16, 2005 - Blu-ray Disc to Support Mandatory Managed Copy [blu-ray.com]

Re:HP just making noise to get HP friendly feature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280843)

Do people really *want* high definition porn?

Rumors of HD-DVD death are greatly exaggerated. (1)

phriedom (561200) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280892)

Because nobody has a HD-DVD or a Blu-Ray player available for purchase, and won't for at least a year, it is FAR, FAR too early to declare anyone the winner in this format war.

And the fact is that both camps have a reason to lie to you and tell you they are going to be ready as soon as or sooner than the competition to keep supporters from leaving them. At this point there is no way to know when either product is really going to be available. Although HD-DVD may seem to be behind right now because Hollywood prefers the more-restrictive Blu-Ray, IF (and that is a big IF) HD-DVD comes to market significantly earlier than Blu-Ray, then there will be content producers that put stuff out on it (not Sony of course but their competitors who wish to get a leg up on them.) And if there is a critical mass of content available, then all those people who have spent $1300 on a big-screen and want something, anything HD to watch on it will buy HD-DVD players. Once that market is established the studios HAVE to follow, because they can't tell stockholders "yeah would could make lots of money selling HD-DVDs, but its icky so we're not going to."

Now if all the content producers stick together and don't release anything on HD-DVD, then it will be just as dead as Divx (the Circuit City format, not the codec). So will the studios all stick together? Will some of them be afraid to be on the wrong side of Microsoft and Intel? Will Dell start putting HD-DVD drives in all their computers as soon as they are available? Will Apple?

Of course? (2, Funny)

darkmeridian (119044) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280417)

Who would support Blue-Ray anyway? I mean it isn't even a standard like Blu-Ray is.

Irrelevant before hitting the market. (4, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280423)

The decision is the latest sign of a looming 'format war' between the competing standards for a new generation

First of all, only those of us who actually want to use this stuff will "lose" this war. As with the DVD +/- "war", we'll just end up seeing every device need to license both formats, boosting prices and causing massive incompatibilities where people argue about which brand of media works best in which brand of drive. And Grandma still won't understand why she can't burn her now-in-HD soaps to a plain ordinary CD ("But it fits in the drive!").



These industry groups REALLY needs to suck up their pride, and just play a hand of poker to decide which format wins. The winner will agree to buy out the loser's R&D costs (perhaps with a bit extra as a deal-sweetener), and the loser will in turn refrain from unnecessarily fragmenting the market. Then we all win. Even the industry groups.



But more importantly, I see the whole Blu-Ray vs HD-HVD issue as all but moot. Regardless of who wins, we'll only see at best a roughly 10x increase in optical storage capacity per disc, and even that only at the tail end of the effective lifetime of the media (ie, look at writeable dual-layer DVDs - Oh wait, I can't, I've never even seen one in person, and they cost a few bucks each).

The "home theater" market does not have the same requirements as the data storage market. For home theater, just switching the existing DVD standard to allow MPEG-4 would allow for HD movies. But for data storage, particularly backups, we now have desktop PCs with 500GB drives - Which will still take 20 first-gen Blu-Ray discs, or 34 HD-DVDs, to completely back up. And many of us who appreciate the need for good backups have home file servers in excess of a terabyte.

What we really need, we won't get out of simple industry greed in pushing incremental upgrades on us - We need everyone to say "screw the sub-100GB optical formats, let's finally get one of these multi-TB holographic techs we keep hearing about, to market".

Re:Irrelevant before hitting the market. (1)

ShaneThePain (929627) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280472)

I agree, HVD has a capability of 3.9 Terabytes, and i really wish they would get them out yesterday. However, 4 and 8 layer versions of blu-ray are possible, so thats 100 GB and 200 GB respectivly. As long as we get Blu-ray and no HD-DVD i will be happy, but holographic formats are of course preferable.

Re:Irrelevant before hitting the market. (1)

Lesrahpem (687242) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280747)

But more importantly, I see the whole Blu-Ray vs HD-HVD issue as all but moot. Regardless of who wins, we'll only see at best a roughly 10x increase in optical storage capacity per disc, and even that only at the tail end of the effective lifetime of the media (ie, look at writeable dual-layer DVDs - Oh wait, I can't, I've never even seen one in person, and they cost a few bucks each).

I used one once to back up a movie for a friend. We had to drive to walmart to buy them, and they only had one brand. The box was clear on the top shelf behind stuff, and it cost 12.99 or so for 3 of them. The only reason we even needed it was because he wanted a full backup of a whole DVD movie (the lion in winter) and the asshats at the movie label decided to put it on a dual-layer disk so they could fit all kinds of stupid commentary and the like. I halfway think the whole dual-layer thing is just an indirect way to make it too expensive for people to copy DVD's.

Re:Irrelevant before hitting the market. (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281255)

I used to promote the idea of using the HD optical discs as backups, but frankly, they haven't kept up with hard drive capacities, I had a 600GB hard drive when the first writable CDs came out, a 9GB drive when the earliest writable 4GB DVDs came out, and now I have 400GB drives and even 100GB media is simply inadequate. I just sucked it up and bought external hard drives for backup purposes instead. Using CDs and DVDs no longer makes much sense for backups, they are too slow and save for a changer, require excessive manual intervention.

I am NOT counting on any form holographic, magneto-optical or whatever form large optical disc to do jack. They've been promised for decades now by many companies, but they get nowhere, and I don't think it's because of greed but because they were just vapor or too expensive save for certain niche commercial or industry uses. C3D's FMD idea was the last one I was aware of, and even had Dell, HP and the like officially interested but it died.

It's all just computers (2, Insightful)

Saint Stephen (19450) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280460)

My personal opinion is that "HDTV" and "HD-DVD" or whatever are totally missing the point. There's no point in buying one of these "flat panel televisions" -- just go buy a computer monitor. There's no point in getting hi-def content on a dead-plastic disc or from your dead mainstream media. It's all just going to be files on a computer.

My 2cents.

Re:It's all just computers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280587)

Exactly, the Mac Mini will become the TV's iPod when they put in 500gb HDDs and Verizon's FIOS comes to my area.

Re:It's all just computers (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280605)

Absolutely. Its good to see that more and more displays support VGA/HDMI/DVI as well as Component/Composite/Coax inputs and such. I am glad that the newer media devices like the xbox 360 are supporting VGA output instead of just the standard composite.

Re:It's all just computers (1)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280689)

Yeah, I just love my 50-inch computer monitor... oh wait, those don't exist. I also love downloading HD movies to my computer over the Net... oh wait, nobody has even announced such a thing.

Re:It's all just computers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14280975)

"Yeah, I just love my 50-inch computer monitor... oh wait, those don't exist."

Sit closer.

For the cost of a 50-inch HDTV you could put 6 LCD screens in your living room, one for each seat. Money left over for a couple of Xboxes.

"I also love downloading HD movies to my computer over the Net... oh wait, nobody has even announced such a thing."

I've downloaded HDTV TV from the net - hell, I even got some porn in true 1080p (Bikini destinations: topless edition, or something). No HD movies yet, but once they release some I want me and my bitorrent client will be there. Sure, it's not legal yet, but the technology is here.

Re:It's all just computers (1)

pomo monster (873962) | more than 8 years ago | (#14282107)

"Sit closer. For the cost of a 50-inch HDTV you could put 6 LCD screens in your living room, one for each seat."

Clearly, you have a bright future ahead of you as an interior designer. Just don't come anywhere near my home.

Blu-Ray (2, Informative)

Kickboy12 (913888) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280483)

Blu-Ray is clearly the better format. It can hold more, and has faster read times (theoretically, havn't seen stats yet). The only reason HD-DVD has alot of interest is because it's cheaper to produce, and requires only small modifications to current DVD players. More evidance that in the current capitalist buisness world, quality is the least important factor in anything. Money is the bottom line.

Sour Grapes Much? (1)

DumbSwede (521261) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280523)

Capitalism is always about a balance or compromise between price and quality. Sony could probably have come out with a format that stores double what it does but at 10x times the cost, in which case HD-DVD would be the clear winner. I demand quality as a consumer, but not at any cost. This is the beauty of capitalism, we the consumers get the quality we want (demand) at the price point we are willing to pay.

Re:Sour Grapes Much? (1)

ShaneThePain (929627) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280535)

It still isnt Corporatism. =\

Re:Blu-Ray (1)

gabebear (251933) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280853)

"The only reason HD-DVD has alot of interest is because it's cheaper to produce, and requires only small modifications to current DVD players. More evidance that in the current capitalist buisness world, quality is the least important factor in anything. Money is the bottom line."

HD-DVD drives and disks share a common focal distance with DVDs which makes them easier to produce right now. The players are going to require considerable rework, especially since HD-DVDs are using iHD instead of standard Java MPH/OCAP.

Businesses only care about money, it is really that simple. Higher quality items are only produced if someone can make money off of them.

No faster read times (1)

DeadScreenSky (666442) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280859)

Last time I checked both formats are rated at the same (slow) speed. Blu-ray's only main technical advantage is that it could theoretically hold more than HD-DVD. But since both formats have a lot more space than is necessary even for HD films, it is hard to see that as much a real advantage in comparison to the cheaper and more flexible manufacturing of HD-DVD. (You can have HD-DVD processing lines make normal DVDs too. Manufacturers really like like that.)

Re:Blu-Ray (1)

StillAnonymous (595680) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281486)

Yeah, but it's too bad they go and ruin all that technical superiority with DRM garbage.

I'll wait till both formats are out first, then make my decision. From the looks of things, I won't be buying either of them. Not for movies anyways. They just don't offer me anything that DVD doesn't already (I don't have an HDTV, nor do I find the picture quality difference that significant for my tastes).

HP relevant? (1)

thammoud (193905) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280706)

Whether HP supported Blue-Ray or HD. IT DOES NOT MATTER. The only ones that matter are the content providers. Those have voted for Blue ray exclusively or vowed to support both format. So, HP and MS really do not matter when it comes to this fight. It is over and Blue Ray has won because of the studios.

Holy crap! Blu-ray is winning the hype war... (1)

ivan256 (17499) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280800)

...we better get some major consumer electronics retailer to issue a press release and pay MSNBC to cover it. If Blu-Ray wins, think of all the patent licensing revenue we'll lose!

Apple is the key. (2, Interesting)

jcr (53032) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280837)

All the filmmakers use Macs, the screenwriters use Macs, the editors use Macs, and the format that Macs can burn is going to be the standard in Hollywood.

-jcr

Re:Apple is the key. (2, Informative)

goMac2500 (741295) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281064)

Apple has already announced support for Blu-Ray.

Re:Apple is the key. (1)

Talikan (655285) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281132)

Reality Check: No, it doesn't matter what Macs can burn because they won't be burning all 50 bajillion copies of King Kong on a couple of Macs..... They're going to press them in a factory. Just to forestall the flamewar, I'm a mac user, most would say fanatic, I'm writing this on an iMac G5, and I can't wait to watch Blu-Ray movies on my iMac G10 or whatever. But what Macs will be able to burn does not matter to the movie industry except maybe in terms of awareness.

Re:Apple is the key. (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281177)

Reality Check: No, it doesn't matter what Macs can burn because they won't be burning all 50 bajillion copies of King Kong on a couple of Macs..... They're going to press them in a factory.

The mass production isn't what matters here. Hollywood uses Macs, and hollywood will decide what on what format the movies are made available.

-jcr

Re:Apple is the key. (1)

stud9920 (236753) | more than 8 years ago | (#14282022)

Why do they use a Mac ? Does MovieFakeOS run on Macs ?

And HP matters how exactly? (2, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280911)

Out of all the players in both the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD camps, I literally cannot think of a more insignificant player.

HP is dropping exclusive support simply because they are acting as a Microsoft shill to try and shoehorn Microsoft's menuing language into the Blu-Ray spec. Undoubtedly it would stick in Microsofts craw to have to develop tools to help people build Java based menus that are going to be a part of Blu-Ray, and simialrily they probably already have tools lined up to support thier own format.

However I don't think HP's slight shift in allegance will have any impact. If Dell had moved it might be a bigger story, although really the players that matter are the consumer electronics manufacturers as whatever player there are the most of are going to be the players computer owners will want burners for to play thier own media.

Currently still the war looks to be over before it began with Sony shipping Blu-Ray players in every PS3. Within a year there are simply going to be an order of magnitude more Blu-Ray players than HD-DVD, and that will be that as much as the monolithc marketing engines behind HD-DVD will try and drag things out.

Re:And HP matters how exactly? (1)

jcr (53032) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281195)

Out of all the players in both the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD camps, I literally cannot think of a more insignificant player.

HP is the #2 PC maker. They're far from insignificant.

-jcr

Except for Xbox 360 and future PS3 owners... (1)

kadathseeker (937789) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280937)

Who cares? In about two-three years, I plan on rigging a slightly older system (P3 probably) up like this: braodband internet +satellite TV +bittorrent client +TV tuner video card +internal holographic hard drive +external holographic hard drive all connected a pair of large flat panel monitors and nice speakers. That's a real home entertainment system (have all TV shows, movies, music, and whatever else you want all together on one disk, and backed up externally for viewing on a laptop on the go), and a chaper one. Why buy an optical system anymore? Optical drives are slower at reading, much slower at writing, and will have much smaller capacities than external hard drives, and won't be chaper over the long run. And as for distributing media, it will be better for companies to go the way of Valve's Steam service or Apple's iTunes music store. Think a phat pipe and a 300GB 2.5 inch external holographic hard drive. What I really can't wait for is a 500GB-1TB 10k (or, god willing, 15k) rpm 16MB cache SATA II (or 2.5) Raptor hard disk. I shudder with anticipation.

A huge war noone cares about (1)

Stan Vassilev (939229) | more than 8 years ago | (#14280958)

I mean, noone actually cares for either of those formats. First of all everyone is turning to Internet for distribution. After iPod for video, the news about various TV networks and studios signing up deals with cellular operators and sites for distribution of content over the net have been flooding all blogs and news channels. When people moved from tapes to CD they had: - lighter/cheaper media - non-degrading sound quality over time (well if you handle it properly) So they gradually moved. But it took years. When DVD hit the market it was: - lighter/cheaper media - non-degrading video quality over time (..) - extras adding quality to the product Again it took years but it was next gen and offering unique benefits so people moved. How about DVD Audio: - ... So people didn't move. Because CD is just good enough and most people can't tell the difference. How about HD DVD / Blu-Ray: - ... It offers same deal like DVD, but higher quality again, but with like 10% of the people having HD enabled TV, they can't enjoy even this. So it offers: nothing. Get it: NOTHING. Except weird DRM that pisses off people in the know like nothing else. So every article about who supports which format makes me laugh. So many resources spent on something doomed to fail before it hits the market.

Just give me an h.264 player (1)

evilninjax (930108) | more than 8 years ago | (#14281636)

Right now, i have a nice dvd player that will play Xvids, but it chokes on hires Xvids and won't recognize Matroska containers at all. Give me a good dvd player that will play h.264 video from MKVs and I'd gladly forget all about Sony's BLUR-ay and HDDVD.

Check out HP's mischief and misdeeds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14281665)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?