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!

Microsoft To Drop HD DVD

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the quelle-surprise dept.

Media 246

HockeyPuck writes to let us know that Microsoft has decided to stop making HD DVD players for the Xbox 360. No word on supporting Blu-ray on the platform though. "Microsoft said Saturday it would continue to provide standard warranty support for its HD DVD players. Toshiba President Atsutoshi Nishida last week estimated about 300,000 people own the Microsoft video player, sold as a separate $130 add-on for the Xbox 360."

cancel ×

246 comments

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

Poop (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22538838)

It always floats to the top.

Re:Poop (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539118)

CmdrTaco here. Any hung young studs looking for an "experienced" asshole to receive your fuck stick? Let me no...

Re:Poop (-1, Troll)

The Ultimate Fartkno (756456) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539604)

Considering it's Sony and Blu-Ray that won, I think at least one person should have the stones to mod the parent +1 insightful.

1st post (-1, Offtopic)

Computershack (1143409) | more than 6 years ago | (#22538842)

Woohoo...finally..

Re:1st post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22538970)

you're actually the second post. HAH!

Now that that's over (5, Interesting)

JackieBrown (987087) | more than 6 years ago | (#22538844)

Will the new ones come with blueray?

Re:Now that that's over (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22538874)

No, rather than give into the accepted winner of a de facto standard, MSFT will introduce their own proprietary HD disc that only plays on an XBOX360.

Re:Now that that's over (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539670)

And it will be a total pile of fucking shite.

Re:Now that that's over (4, Funny)

GigaplexNZ (1233886) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539744)

You mean like HD DVD?

Re:Now that that's over (5, Interesting)

Loadmaster (720754) | more than 6 years ago | (#22538878)

Why would they? The old ones didn't come with HD-DVD. If you mean will MS make a Blu-Ray add on then maybe. They said back in 2006 they'd think about it if Blu-Ray won. I doubt it, though. MS said that before the Video Marketplace had much content. It's been speculated that MS adopted HD-DVD simply to confuse the market and indirectly push digital download services. Face it, MS wants DD to win because that's where they make the most money.

Re:Now that that's over (4, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539826)

A case could be made that Microsoft dreaded a dead video format stinking up their console. So they produced an add on that could be discarded if it came to it but never produced consoles with an internal HD DVD player. They didn't even stick an HD DVD player in the Elite where it would have made sense. Now that Blu Ray is the winner of this war, the concern of backing the wrong horse should no longer be an issue.

I think you are right about digital downloads though and they only saw HD DVD as a means to an end. They're probably in an interesting quandary right now - ignore Blu Ray and risk suffering by comparison to the PS3 (it's already happening) or embrace it and risk diluting their digital download message.

Re:Now that that's over (2, Insightful)

Smoke2Joints (915787) | more than 6 years ago | (#22538896)

No word on supporting Blu-ray on the platform though.

does noone even read the summary anymore?

Re:Now that that's over (1)

JackieBrown (987087) | more than 6 years ago | (#22538938)

I know I don't

Re:Now that that's over (4, Funny)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539090)

if the background isn't geen then it doesn't need to be read.

Re:Now that that's over (1)

spintriae (958955) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539196)

This is where a "RTFA" would normally be appropriate, but in this case, the second sentence of the summary should suffice.

Re:Now that that's over (1)

vertinox (846076) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539242)

Will the new ones come with blueray?

That depends on if the Microsoft Negotiator doesn't hang up on the Sony Rep when hears a maniacal laughter and "100 BILLION DOLLARS!" on discussing terms of the BluRay license.

Re:Now that that's over (1)

RalphSleigh (899929) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539460)

Would be such a pity if say, you suddenly had to start paying retail prices for all the copies of vista you ship on those laptops..

Re:Now that that's over (1)

shades66 (571498) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539752)

Not a problem we will put Ubuntu on our laptops instead.. Now about that 100 Billion dollar blue-ray license you need for your entertainment system..

LOL

Re:Now that that's over (1)

devman (1163205) | more than 6 years ago | (#22540188)

Good thing Sony doesn't control Blu-ray licenses.

Re:Now that that's over (1)

alex4u2nv (869827) | more than 6 years ago | (#22540142)

I don't know, but strangely enough my HD-DVD for the xbox malfunctioned the very same day Blueray won, and HD-DVD was dropped.!

anybody else notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22538854)

how AC posts seem to have been disabled? this was posted as AC, yet it really wasn't now was it? i have no problem with Slash disabling AC posts, but to misrepresent them as enabled/available and then not actually do it is dishonest.

Re:anybody else notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22538898)

Wrong.

Re:anybody else notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539116)

perhaps, but on the preview it used to show an anonymous post as written by Anonymous Coward. without a word, they changed this so now, the preview of an anonymous post still shows your username and userid, with sig and everything. i wrote the GP as a test post to see if the resulting post would be true to the preview, as it has always been in the past. i am glad to see that it was not and did honor my choice to be anonymous, but I'd still like to know why this change was made and what the point was supposed to be of quietly fucking up the preview's ability to show you exactly how the resulting post will look. why "fix" what was never broken? and especially, why not openly announce "we changed this functionality because of XYZ"? something about this doesn't seem right to me.

I seriously hope the ability to post anonymously hasn't been compromised (in however subtle a way, to however small or great a degree) just because a few people like to use it to say the "n-word".

Re:anybody else notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539184)

When I hit reply it shows it looking anonymous except adding my signature. My guess is that it is a bug.

Re:anybody else notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539392)

the point is, there can't be a new bug recently introduced into that section of code unless someone was revising that section of code (or something related to it). so again I want to know, why fix what wasn't broken, especially in a way that appears to break it, and especially without saying one word about it? do you not see how that doesn't look right? i'm not asking what you want to believe or whether you trust slashdot staff, I'm asking whether this looks fishy to you as well when it is viewed with a critical eye.

Re:anybody else notice (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539566)

To me, it looks like someone else's site, and you're getting a mite bit uppity over it.

But if it's that important to you, go browse the source.

Re:anybody else notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539822)

a site that would have never amounted to anything, would have never gotten off the ground, if not for the fact that people use and enjoy it. amazing how quickly people forget that when they decide who is "uppity". but then there are always myrmidons like you who pipe up when someone questions any organization, all the while never really addressing what was being questioned. if you actually read what I posted, you would know that I never once indicated that someone can't do whatever they wish to do with their own site. what I said was that if what they are doing is kosher, then they should do it openly and stand behind their decision. this is especially true of a site that generally favors openness.

my question had to do with the capacity to post anonymously; if the change to the site were cosmetic only then I would not have said anything, but that issue of whether anonymous is now less anonymous is an important one, particularly for those users who reside in countries that don't respect the basic rights of free speech. i notice you did not answer the question I posed, so I will assume you see exactly what I mean and don't like it or the possible implications and are deciding to play a little shoot-the-messenger. that is the hallmark of shallow people, by the way -- they can't handle and will not address anything they don't like. i'm glad that shortsighted fucks like you are always so eager to reveal their true nature, much like the fool whom everyone would assume to be average except that he insists on opening his mouth and proving that assumption wrong.

now, if you're man enough, try addressing what I actually said. tell me why you think I'm wrong. do something other than stating what was plainly obvious (that Slashdot is not my Web site) and trying to tell me what I should speak about (as though I would ever value your opinion of that - don't flatter yourself) while pretending that you've somehow done anything useful. really your attitude of "don't bother me with this" in response to something you had to go out of your way to read is childish and stupid, especially in response to a legitimate question.

Re:anybody else notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22540230)

You're a fucking idiot.

Re:anybody else notice (1)

The End Of Days (1243248) | more than 6 years ago | (#22540280)

Okay, I'll address what you said - it's a bug that could have been caused by literally millions of things that I am not in a position to enumerate because I don't know the codebase.

Your reaction demonstrates a serious imbalance in your social understanding of other people, by the way. You aren't nearly as important as you seem to believe you are. You certainly aren't important enough to garner the sort of reaction from me that you seem to believe took place. All I was saying is: who knows? Slashdot is buggy, always has been, and the code is available to peruse. I don't care about you or your message.

Re:anybody else notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539608)

The comment display or reply code could've been revised for any number of legitimate reasons such as adding new functionality or simply cleaning it up. Slashcode is public, so lots of people look at it, and I'm sure it'll be fixed in an upcoming version if it hasn't already. File a bug!

Re:anybody else notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539770)

Workaround: Log out, post as AC, then log back in again.

Worked for me.

Geez- They're not HD-DVD players anymore! (5, Funny)

THESuperShawn (764971) | more than 6 years ago | (#22538872)

They are now called "Upconverting DVD players". And I hear they are all the rage these days. Didn't you read the fliers in todays paper?

Re:Geez- They're not HD-DVD players anymore! (1)

ucblockhead (63650) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539510)

What I find frightening is that they are still on sale at Best Buy.

Re:Geez- They're not HD-DVD players anymore! (0)

madsenj37 (612413) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539526)

Although I do find your comment funny, in truth, HD-DVD players are not yet obsolete. Even if the HD-DVD format is dead, people are still buying DVDs and many have big collections.

don't buy into formats backed by microsoft (-1, Troll)

hxnwix (652290) | more than 6 years ago | (#22538886)

any questions?

Re:don't buy into formats backed by microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539180)

What do I do with my FAT32-using USB mass storage mp3 player?

Re:don't buy into formats backed by microsoft (5, Funny)

causality (777677) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539200)

As the saying goes, "if you get into bed with Microsoft, you're going to get fucked."

This won't help the xbox (5, Interesting)

mgv (198488) | more than 6 years ago | (#22538890)

I think that this isn't a good sign for the xbox either. Existing owners feeling that they have obsolete hardware, and a clear advantage to the playstation.

Microsoft has damaged its whole gaming platform by getting into a sparring match with Sony over video formats.

Michael

Re:This won't help the xbox (5, Insightful)

Chabil Ha' (875116) | more than 6 years ago | (#22538948)

I don't know that they had a choice for the same reason.

Consumer: If I go with PS3, I get the next generation of digital video players as well.
Consumer: If I go with XBOX I get none.
MSFT: If we don't offer a solution to include consumers in the next generation of digital video players, they may go with our competition.
MSFT: If we go with Blu-Ray, we may give the impression that XBOX is somehow inferior to the PS3 which inherently comes Blu-Ray equipped. Thus, we will go with HD-DVD.

Re:This won't help the xbox (5, Insightful)

ianare (1132971) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539248)

No one would pay extra for a player nobody makes content for. So it also goes something like this:

MSFT: "If HD-DVD wins then the PS3 is basically doomed to failure."

Re:This won't help the xbox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539782)

MSFT: "If HD-DVD wins then the PS3 is basically doomed to failure."
It suprises me that M$ didn't throw their weight into trying to crush Blu-Ray... maybe they were worried about the monopoly implications? hahaha, yeah right....

Re:This won't help the xbox (4, Insightful)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539312)

Oh please. Betting on the losing format would hurt them much more than any perceived inferiority ever could, and they would know that. If they hadn't thought HD-DVD would be more likely to win, they wouldn't have picked it. They just guessed wrong - like all the people who bought a HD-DVD player.

Re:This won't help the xbox (1)

causality (777677) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539554)

This is why I'd like to see all such format wars result in both sides losing a lot of money.

Really now, which of these two scenarios sounds better?


Scenario 1: a format war with two major camps. Camp A and Camp B duke it out in the marketplace until one side eventually loses. If Camp A wins out, all customers who went with Camp B lose because they invested in a now-obsolete standard and vice-versa. Meanwhile, the uptake of new technology suffers since the wiser, more patient customers prudently decide to wait it out until there is a clear winner before they purchase anything. Those customers who purchased early and happened to choose the one that eventually won still suffer because a slower uptake of new technology means that fewer titles are available and the cost per player is more expensive than it would have been since this scenario doesn't take full advantage of economy of scale (that is, if the companies involved could have sold 10x the number of players, the cost per unit could have been lower).

Scenario 2: all companies involved decide that no one really wins a format war (particularly the end-users) and come up with an open standard, like we had with DVDs and CDs. Customers can now be confident that they won't be left holding the bag, so they more rapidly adopt the new technology. Customers get to choose based on things like which company/brand they prefer and who offers superior price/performance. More rapid uptake of the new format means more titles available.


Now, someone tell me why companies who decide to participate in Scenario 1 deserve to have that decision rewarded in any way? I wish we could send a clear message to all corporations that engaging in silly format wars like this is financial suicide, since that seems to be about the only way to discourage this kind of bullshit.

format wars (1)

Comboman (895500) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539880)

Scenario 2: all companies involved decide that no one really wins a format war (particularly the end-users) and come up with an open standard, like we had with DVDs and CDs.

Perhaps you don't remember the DVD / DIVX [wikipedia.org] war or the CD / DAT [wikipedia.org] war. There's always a format war, it's just that sometimes the winner is more obvious and the war doesn't last as long.

Re:format wars (1)

causality (777677) | more than 6 years ago | (#22540084)

Thank you for pointing that out, it helps me to put the current format war in perspective. I do remember that these occurred but for some reason (I'm open to this being a "grass is greener" fallacy on my part) they seem to have been relatively minor squabbles compared to the current HD-DVD v. Blu-Ray deal. For example, DivX had a built-in time-limit (a rather short one, too) that effectively "expired" any discs rented in that format which made it rather unpopular; it also required that the player had a phone line so it could literally phone-home and approve many actions. For these and other reasons I don't remember it having ever been a serious contender for DVD. The last such format war I remember seeing or hearing about that was on the scale of the current one was VHS v. Betamax.

Either way, I am grateful to see someone use genuinely constructive criticism. It's great when someone can make me go back and question what I said, since I usually learn something from that. Congratulations for having the class to do that without a single insult or ad-hominem attack.

Re:This won't help the xbox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539936)

Scenario 3: China comes with Camp C, which is better and cheaper and all the other loose!

Re:This won't help the xbox (1)

CSMatt (1175471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22540238)

The BDA and the DVD Forum knew full well that it would be financial suicide, and they did try to avoid a format war [wikipedia.org] . It was mounting pressure from Sun and Microsoft on both sides over which interactivity layer to use that ultimately caused the negotiations to fall through.

Re:This won't help the xbox (1)

CSMatt (1175471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539906)

If you really think that Microsoft had that much faith in HD-DVD, then why didn't they integrate it into the Xbox 360?

Re:This won't help the xbox (4, Insightful)

Admiral Ag (829695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539494)

Back before either console was released, assorted media aficionados were saying that the 360 was being released too early and that the lack of an integrated HD drive would hurt it in the long run. What they missed is that Microsoft had to do this in order to get a head start over Sony: it was the only way they would avoid taking another beating. Consumers paid for it with poor quality control.

The Blu Ray victory was the tipping point. Now the 360 is just a game console that plays pretty much the same games as Sony's, but which will probably break down, and costs quite a bit more when you include wireless and online gaming to bring it up to spec.

While the format war was still on, blu ray on the PS3 was a curiosity (I know I bought mine largely out of curiosity about it). Now you are basically getting a free next gen DVD player with every PS3 - that is not something Microsoft will be able to match in price any time soon.

Props to Sony. Whatever their other evils, they clearly kept their eye on the ball in this case.

Full disclosure: I own both consoles.

Re:This won't help the xbox (5, Insightful)

longbot (789962) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539234)

This of course in addition to the inherent hardware unreliability of the Xbox 360. I only know one person who hasn't had one give the red lights of death at least once, and one of them actually had their console die on them three times.

Much as we all love to hate on Sony for being evil, the PS3 has proven itself more reliable than the Xbox 360, and as such is an additional point as big as the choice of HD video format they picked to support.

Re:This won't help the xbox (4, Interesting)

MBCook (132727) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539246)

I have a 360. I couldn't care less. That was an add on who only served to play movies. It had no other function. The fact they will no longer sell it doesn't alter my opinion of the console.

My understand is that the DVD playback on the 360 is horrid. I've never used it for that, but I've read about it. You can find more than a few examples with a quick Google search [google.com] . That has always made me weary of the HD-DVD playback the console would offer.

Re:This won't help the xbox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539758)

Since all the movies in the future are being released on BlueRay it means all your bought movies have a price increase of $160 divided by number_of_movies_bought, *just to play the movie*.

So say you have 16 movies, you paid $10 extra just for the player.
This extra price per disk does not decrease anymore since no movies will be released.

This is called 'pure profit', and guess what, it is not going into your pocket.
Wrong bet, no pay.

Re:This won't help the xbox (2, Insightful)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539258)

>Microsoft has damaged its whole gaming platform by getting into a sparring match with Sony over video formats.

First off, MS barely sold those add-ons. What exactly is wrong with add-ons? If anything, its Sony wh o took the bigger risk.

Hell, whats so wrong with hd-dvd. It was the superior format with no region encoding, PIP early on, cheaper production, etc. Gasp, cant we admit MS was on the right side for once. If there is such a thing as being on the right side when it comes to proprietary drm format wars.

Re:This won't help the xbox (1)

pizzach (1011925) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539922)

What exactly is wrong with add-ons?

The stigma of addons is that they split the console base into the haves and the have nots. If you develop game requiring the addon, you are limiting your audience and therefor limiting your profits.

But the HD-DVD addon wasn't used for games so I agree with you that it was not a bad thing.

Re:This won't help the xbox (1)

MrSteveSD (801820) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539300)

If it was somehow possible for Sony to prevent Blu Ray working with the X-box 360, I wonder whether they would do it, to kill of their rival?

Re:This won't help the xbox (5, Insightful)

DeepZenPill (585656) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539384)

Microsoft certainly did not damage its gaming platform by siding with HD-DVD. HD-DVD was always an add-on for the 360 and never a major selling point. This (along with questionable quality control) allowed Microsoft to release the 360 a year ahead of the PS3, gaining significant market share and pressuring developers to focus on creating games for the 360 rather than its competition. This strategy has paid off for Microsoft because those who wanted a gaming system got a gaming system as well as a large library of games. The attach rate for the 360 is currently the highest by far among the 3 consoles competing in this generation. As a gaming platform the 360 is doing pretty well for itself.

Sony, on the other hand, has been making progress in terms of consoles sold undoubtedly because of its blu-ray capabilities, but the slow start due to blue laser shortages and the high expense of blu-ray components has significantly hurt their sales. PS3 is still in 3rd place in terms of the attach rate and has suffered from developers supporting the 360 as the PS3's expense. In the end, these machines are primarily games consoles and their media playing capabilities are a secondary function. Microsoft focused on games as a selling point and has been the most successful in that respect while Sony focused on the media capability with Blu-Ray, but at significant expense. High manufacturing costs as well as studio support both took a toll on Sony's bottom line for a high-def disc market that is still in its infancy.

To the average Xbox 360 owner, the format war has been a non-issue because their console uses DVDs. Cross platform games still look equally good on both platforms, so the size constraints of DVDs is not yet apparent. This may change in the coming years, but for now DVD is still king in most living rooms.

Re:This won't help the xbox (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539400)

Except for the little tidbit that MS never really pushed the add-on drive as anything all that exciting. I doubt anyone at MS is losing sleep.

Moron.

This won't help the xbox? (5, Insightful)

BigDork1001 (683341) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539442)

I own a 360, I don't feel it's obsolete. I bought it to play games, not watch movies. I don't own a HD-DVD add-on and never planned on buying one. If I did own a PS3 I doubt I'd own Blu movies. I buy game consoles to play games, not watch movies.

Why is it so hard for people to grasp this simple concept? My Wii doesn't play movies at all and yet it still sells well. If people really cared that much then I would say that yes Microsoft is in trouble. But no, you can't say that this is a nail in the coffin of the 360.

Re:This won't help the xbox (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539544)

Microsoft has lost over a 1 billion dollars on the Xbox360 and its a failure. This is despite the red ring of death from many people who just chose to repurchase a 360 when the original one dies.

People are choosing the wii mostly due to price besides a few cool new features like the wii mote. Parents like to save money and children is where the market is for most gamers.

MS can save a fortune by not including a HD-DVD player and could price more competively with the wii. So in essence this may help MS sales of the expensive xbox. I hope they dont make the mistake of including a blue-ray as its hurting Sony as well. Sony could have made more money selling it seperately. SOny tried this with success with the ps2.

It wont hinder it either. (1)

Xest (935314) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539754)

I don't really see how it can make a difference, although I'm not sure if you're under the impression the 360 has an HD-DVD drive built in? It doesn't.

Anyone who bought the HD-DVD addon already has a 360, by their HD-DVD drive becoming useless it's not going to somehow un-sell the console and reduce adoption and it's unlikely to stop people buying games for the 360. Chances are if people weren't fussed about the games they'd have bought the much cheaper Toshiba EP30/A30 HD-DVD player.

If anything I'd say it's a burden of Microsoft and the 360's back, they've basically had to support HD-DVD up until now due to their initial decision to do so yet it's not been a real bonus for the console for a long while now as a result of HD-DVDs decline. Now they're free of HD-DVD they can take the option of supporting Bluray and remove one of the PS3's major advantages over their system. 360 owners with the HD-DVD addon at least have the option of running both formats on their same system that way so they're not totally screwed over by the whole format war thing and it'll likely be cheaper to buy any Bluray addon drive that might be released than to ditch the system and buy a Bluray player or PS3 instead.

It's going to be a hard decision for Sony however, do they attempt to sabotage Microsoft's attempts at adding Bluray to the 360 if MS chooses to do so and in the process risk Microsoft sabotaging Bluray on the Windows platform as a result or do they take the hit on PS3 console sales by allowing the 360 to also play Bluray movies but gain Microsoft's support for Bluray in the grander scheme of things?

Re:This won't help the xbox (2, Interesting)

Izabael_DaJinn (1231856) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539856)

I have a 360. Why would I feel it is obsolete? It plays games as well as a PS3 (more so because as of this writing it still has way more cool games.)

(But I also have a Wii, and when we play it on our HDTV and I get sick of shaking my arms around like an r-tard, I DO feel like I bought obsolete hardware!)

PS3's are still over-priced for a game system as far as I am concerned.

Xbox 360 will most likely drop it's price another $50 bucks this year too. A $299 price point is very tantalizing for people. It sounds a lot better than $399 esp. if one is buying it as a game machine.

Also a recession year isn't the best year for a $399 game system either. I would say the 360 vs. PS3 war is just getting underway. Sony will have a good year, but will it be enough? Everyone I know who owns a PS3 also owns an Xbox360 anyway.

As far as cinema, we get most of our movies off of a.b.hdtv.x264 (spare me the "Fight Club" rules, please), so I don't have a rush to buy an over-priced standalone Blu-ray player either. When they drop to $200 I will most likely grab one.

xoxo
*iza

Re:This won't help the xbox (1)

CSMatt (1175471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539882)

Actually I'd say that Sony would be in even deeper shit if Blu-Ray lost, because Blu-Ray is also the format for PS3 games. Microsoft using HD-DVD in the same manner would have quickly spelled death to the Xbox, but at least in this case the only ones screwed are the few Xbox owners who purchased the add-on, and even then it's not as bad as if they had invested in a standalone HD-DVD player instead.

Can't wait to hear the PS3 fanboys when (1)

The Analog Kid (565327) | more than 6 years ago | (#22538904)

Microsoft comes out with an external Blu-Ray player. According to people's comments on various forums I read through, the end of the Blu-Ray vs HD-DVD war was not only suppose to kill HD-DVD but the 360 as well. (as if everyone who bought a 360 bought it for the HD-DVD capabilities)

Re:Can't wait to hear the PS3 fanboys when (3, Funny)

nagora (177841) | more than 6 years ago | (#22538918)

Microsoft comes out with an external Blu-Ray player.

They'll probably be too busy laughing to say anything.

TWW

Re:Can't wait to hear the PS3 fanboys when (1)

spirit of reason (989882) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539036)

as if everyone who bought a 360 bought it for the HD-DVD capabilities
I know I didn't. I bought the 360 for the exclusive RPGs and better price. The draw of Final Fantasy seemed to leave with Sakaguchi-san for me (dunno why, exactly; was he really that important to the series? But the feel of it has changed for the worse, I think.). On the other hand, Lost Odyssey has been awesome so far (though it has some bugs, so save often, lol), and I'm looking forward to Fable 2.

Re:Can't wait to hear the PS3 fanboys when (1)

morari (1080535) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539462)

All of those Playstation fanboys, who did purchase a console largely for video playback, might just think such...

In all fairness though, at least the few decent games on the PS3 aren't all eventually released for the PC as well like anything on the 360 is. Wii FTW!

Microsoft To Drop HD DVD.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22538916)

.... so will it bounce and if not who is going to pick up the pieces!?!? ;)

Announcement: MSOpenDVD (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22538972)

Redmond 24th Feb 2008 (for the beast works Sundays)

Microsoft today announced a new High Definition DVD format they have labeled MSOpenDVD. Microsoft chairthrower Steve Ballmer said, "this is a very exciting project by combining MSOpenDRM with our SilverLight technology and embedding the DVD data in XML we have created an open extensible platform that will confound anti-trust regulators for decades - Muhahahaha".

The MSOpenDVD format will be publicly released under the Microsoft patent promise next quarter.



Re:Announcement: MSOpenDVD (1)

tristian_was_here (865394) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539072)

Does this mean MSOpenDVD will become a standard and compatible with Linux?

Re:Announcement: MSOpenDVD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539266)

Does this mean MSOpenDVD will become a standard and compatible with Linux?

Absolutely -- under Microsoft's patent promise as part of their continuing efforts at interoperability. Speaking of Linux, it contains so much Microsoft "eye-pee" that they've decided to rename it "MSOpenLinux" and relicense to allow proprietary modules, especially DRM. Users and developers can get a patent license covering usage for $699 a seat. The license also transfers ownership of said seat to Microsoft (chairs are expensive and the CEO has a thing for them).



I'm still hoping for... (5, Funny)

AugustZephyr (989775) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539032)

... the cartridge [wikipedia.org] to make a comeback.

Re:I'm still hoping for... (4, Funny)

PhrostyMcByte (589271) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539216)

ffFFWwFFFWWWW FFWwwfWWWWf fWffFwWwwW

What? I'm sorry, I couldn't here you over cleaning my SNES cartridge.

Re:I'm still hoping for... (1)

glitch23 (557124) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539830)

What? I'm sorry, I couldn't here you over cleaning my SNES cartridge.

Actually, I only had trouble with the NES cartridges. The SNES ones were fine but maybe others had trouble with both. And Iu would think if either of those consoles would have trouble it would have been the SNES since its cartridge slot was on top of the system even though it did have a cover.

Re:I'm still hoping for... (1)

MrSteveSD (801820) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539432)

Packed with 50GB of Flash memory :)

Re:I'm still hoping for... (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539848)

I guess that was a joke, but I absolutely want solid state to take over optical media. Of my kids' DVDs, and the ones we get from the library, hardly any actually work. I would much rather have their movies on GBA-like cartriges. I think flash capacities will catch up with DVD in just a few years, but now Blu-Ray has raised the bar that much more.

Re:I'm still hoping for... (1)

failedlogic (627314) | more than 6 years ago | (#22540086)

I would agree. So little of the overall cost and price at the cast register of a movie or music recording on DVD or CD pays for the actual disc. Even if the media were slightly more expensive, it should not add to the cost at the cash. I think it would therefore be much better to buy a Read-only Flash or cartridge based system so long as the life-span and durability of the product are the same, with no DRM so that I can copy on my computer and music players.

But will Blu-ray win? (3, Interesting)

Tancred (3904) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539104)

Or will online distribution overtake it? I don't buy physical CDs anymore and would like to buy video content online as well.

Online distribution of HD content take too much bw (4, Insightful)

SpecialAgentXXX (623692) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539202)

From some of the forums I've read, Blueray rips can be up to 27GB. Even with high-speed broadband, that's still several hours or more to legally download a movie. All that bandwidth will cost the distributer a lot of money. So I'm assuming they will compress the hell out of it (like HD-lite) and you'll see artifacts. Then what's the point of HD if there's a bunch of macroblocking, etc.? Plus, legal downloads are DRM'd to your PC. What if I want to transfer it to my media PC in the living room? Or if I want to watch a late night movie in my room? No, I don't think online disto can compete with the quality and "freedom" of a physical disc.

Re:Online distribution of HD content take too much (0)

Tancred (3904) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539662)

So I'm hearing a few arguments. Let me rebut them one at a time.

- Time to download too great. Compare that with going to a video store, and even today in the relative bandwidth backwater of the U.S. it's not such a big difference. And speeds will of course increase over the next few years that Blu-ray is trying to build its distribution monopoly.

- Bandwidth costs. I contend that online distribution is already *much* cheaper than by disc. My back of the envelope calculation gives a bandwidth cost of $.10-.20 for that 27GB file.

- Compression. Obviously, content providers don't have to compress their content, but I can certainly it happening at first. It could be a differentiator for a while. But again, more bandwidth would likely change that.

- Freedom of discs. You need a Blu-ray player in the other room to play that disc. Or you can move your player around. But the same goes for your digital media player - have two or move it around.

- DRM. I hope the anti-DRM trend we're seeing in music repeats in video. I don't think it necessarily has to be a big problem in the shorter term either.

Re:Online distribution of HD content take too much (1)

Clover_Kicker (20761) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539908)

- Time to download too great. Compare that with going to a video store, and even today in the relative bandwidth backwater of the U.S. it's not such a big difference. And speeds will of course increase over the next few years that Blu-ray is trying to build its distribution monopoly.
Geez, how far do you live from your video store? And don't you have to brave the Big Blue Room to stock up on beer and Doritos anyway?

Re:Online distribution of HD content take too much (2, Informative)

mr_matticus (928346) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539932)

Time to download too great. Compare that with going to a video store, and even today in the relative bandwidth backwater of the U.S. it's not such a big difference.
How, exactly, does a 15 minute trip to the video store (or a 30 second trip to the mailbox) compare to the 12-14 hours it would take to download a full quality BD file?

Bandwidth costs. I contend that online distribution is already *much* cheaper than by disc.
I doubt it. Blu-ray discs won't end up costing more than DVDs once the market hits its stride. It's not just the bandwidth costs (which I think you're lowballing anyway), but the hardware necessary to have file storage and availability to millions of customers and be able to push out the astronomical volumes of data that would be requested. In the end, the disc will be cheaper.

Compression.
BD is already highly, highly compressed. There's not really any way to compress it further without giving up significant quality, at which point, it's no longer a replacement for BD.

Freedom of discs. You need a Blu-ray player in the other room to play that disc. Or you can move your player around. But the same goes for your digital media player - have two or move it around.
So that's not much of a rebuttal. The benefit of discs is that they contain their own storage and don't require network access. You can watch them in places without high-speed networks, such as while traveling, on players that don't need hard drives. They are just as portable as files within their scope of use; you can bring them to a friend's house. There's also the psychological element of having the box and the disc; some people enjoy that physical connection. Discs will also have the special features, additional audio tracks, and other bonus content that downloads won't; again, some people don't care about those things, but many do.

The short answer is that by the time Blu-ray can be delivered digitally without any quality loss and without serious drawbacks in delivery time, something better than Blu-ray will be on the market. This BD replacement will outstrip our Internet connections, too. We'll be right back at physical media for the optimum quality. We're many, many years from networks that can completely outpace that.

Re:Online distribution of HD content take too much (1)

xtracto (837672) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539834)

From some of the forums I've read, Blueray rips can be up to 27GB. Even with high-speed broadband, that's still several hours or more to legally download a movie

Bah, kids these days. You should have been about fifteen years ago. I left my 56k (which was really about 33600) connection up more than two continuous days (re-dialing every 8 hours which was the limit before prodigy disconnected you) to download some mp3s.

And yeah, the senile posters who are going to talk about the dinosaur era in BBSs can refrain from doing so ;-)

Re:Online distribution of HD content take too much (4, Informative)

Kjella (173770) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539902)

No, rips (not encodes) can be up to 50GB because the disc is 50GB, I don't know anyone who'd make a 27GB encode. Maybe you're confused with HDDVD rips that usually is close to 30GB? Encodes usually go for DVD5/720p and DVD9/1080p sizes, 1080p is 6x the pixels of 480p so roughly the same quality per pixel as a 2CD rip but with each pixel only being 1/6th the size in the total picture.

Remember there's a lot more headroom in the Blu-Ray standard, a regular DVD9 only in HD resolution would be 6xDVD9 = 54GB in MPEG2 but H264/VC-1 compresses a lot better so in reality you have more bandwidth per pixel on top of having a much higher resolution. Given the number of people that must be blind or something and can't tell HD from 480p, only a very small minority would be able to tell these rips from the real Blu-Ray disc. I'd say they're better than any HDTV you can get over the air in the states (ATSC is MPEG2 at 15-20GB/movie).

Re:But will Blu-ray win? (1)

fyrie (604735) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539270)

My gut says that online distribution can't win in the movie *purchase* market until DRM is made more consumer friendly. People are starting to clue into the fact that they may be S.O.L. if they buy a movie download and their computer/device dies or the service goes out of business (like the Wallmart movie service). DRM has to become user friendly in the sense that a user can keep the license beyond the life of the service and that the media can be moved to another device. I don't think 1 purchase per device is going to fly for anything that isn't sold dirt cheap. Maybe the answer is a license dongle like iLok with online license storage in case the dongle dies.

All that being said, digital downloads could really take off in the rental market if services can deliver the same audio and visual experience as physical media (including extras, commentaries etc...). From what I have read, apple TV has pretty darn good quality, but the rental fee is still too high IMHO. It's gotta be as cheap as Netflix or cheaper.

Re:But will Blu-ray win? (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539376)

Or will online distribution overtake it?
Granted, I've seen ~5 GB HD movies spread on The Pirate Bay, and they seem to be of good enough quality, despite being much more heavily compressed than their 25 GB variants. But I don't think I'd want to go much lower if this is still about 1080p movies. And then, the question becomes how much of a hassle downloading a 5 GB movie might be? For me on a 100 Mbps connection, not so much in theory, but it's 1) still very common with much slower DSL lines, and 2) the problem with centralized bogged down servers probably not reaching your full capacity. Especially not if downloading internationally. And I wouldn't really bet on these companies daring to move to P2P technologies... That probably comes off as too scary for them, still. :-p

Re:But will Blu-ray win? (2, Insightful)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539678)

Depends on the content.

I could see online distribution taking over the rental market, but I don't necessarily see it overtaking the purchase market.

"Huh?" I hear you ask.

Consider the content of Amazon's current top selling DVD, American Gangster. It has the original movie, as seen in theaters. It has a new "extended version." It has commentary, and a couple of documentaries on the subject matter and the making of the film. Almost 7.5 hours of video!

That's a lot of stuff.

Conversely, if I go to, say, an online distributor such as iTunes Store or Amazon Unbox, I get the original movie, as seen in theaters. About 2 hours and 37 minutes worth of video. But if I really love the movie and think it's great and awesome and fantastic and all, I'm going to want the rest of that content. But to download 7.5 hours worth of video is going to take a long time. I'm pretty sure I could drive to the mall, buy it, and come home before it finished downloading all that content.

That's why I'm not convinced that online distribution is going to kill Blu-Ray. Garbage expands to fill the space allotted and there's alot more room for garbage to expand on a Blu-Ray disk than online distribution is going to be able to conveniently handle.

Royalties (2, Insightful)

MrKaos (858439) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539136)

Won't Microsoft have to pay Sony royalties on blu-ray players if they were installed into 360's?

Re:Royalties (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539564)

As opposed to Sony having to pay MS royalties for using the VC-1 codec on blu-ray discs?

Re:Royalties (1)

News for nerds (448130) | more than 6 years ago | (#22540246)

Sony doesn't have to do that since no Sony Pictures movies are encoded in VC-1.

Re:Royalties (2, Informative)

pddo (969282) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539726)

Not too sure if they'll have to pay Sony (I think yes) but they'll have to pay Sun as all blueray menu's are now j2me driven... But i guess they are used to paying SUN.

Re:Royalties (1)

Rudolf (43885) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539980)

Won't Microsoft have to pay Sony royalties on blu-ray players if they were installed into 360's?

Maybe. Did they have to pay Toshiba for HD-DVD?

Whack, Whack, Whack... (1, Interesting)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539154)

Whack, whack, whack, the sound of the last nail in the coffin of HD-DVD. I'm glad it's dying earlier, rather than later.

Umm? This supposed to be news? (1)

ShadowFalls (991965) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539280)

Ofcourse these players will stop being made, Microsoft doesn't make them, Toshiba does. Though the price mentioned is only the current price, not the original...

duh! (1)

frovingslosh (582462) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539316)

Given that Microsoft didn't really make these but just bought other HD drive production, and that these will no longer be produced, there was no other option but to stop selling them.

So much for Xbox 360 being the "best" (0, Flamebait)

Doug52392 (1094585) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539322)

Now it can't even play new movies in HD!

I'm glad I went with the PS3, Xbox 360 is looking more and more like a cheap overpriced ripoff!

Microsoft lost this one (1)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539610)

Microsoft should be publicly humiliated for taking sides in the first place. It's not for them to take sides in terms of media.

Would they (for example) not support MemoryStick but choose to support SecureDigital? of course not. People want to just use their computer and have the freedom to choose, not have the decision made for them because the alternative media is made by a rival in another market.

This is what's wrong with Microsoft (and Apple to a degree too), they're way too involved in the media business to be objective in making decisions about new technology.

Microsoft couldn't care less that Blu-ray "won" (1)

SnprBoB86 (576143) | more than 6 years ago | (#22539842)

Microsoft was originally backing HD-DVD because it had their VC1 codec on it. Microsoft made a few pennies for licensing fees on the codec for each HD-DVD sold. Sony's codec was inferior, so image quality tests were showing HD-DVD to beat Blu-ray early. Sony quickly adopted VC1, so Microsoft makes a few pennies sold on every Blu-ray also. Hence, they no longer cared who wins. The Xbox player was just a side effect of their early support for HD-DVD.

one - two punch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22539910)

Now let's hope Microsoft succeedes with the purchase of Yahoo.

300,000? That's nothing (1)

Ice Station Zebra (18124) | more than 6 years ago | (#22540020)

Look at the millions who were ripped of buying Vista.

Then the Xbox would cost MORE than a PS3 (1)

gelfling (6534) | more than 6 years ago | (#22540284)

Adding a BR player at this point has GOT to cost well north of $250 minimum perhaps more than $300. Are you willing to add $300 to the cost of an Xbox? I'm not. I'll just get a Wal*Mart Sony BDP-S300 $370 BR standalone player.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>