You are not a techno slave. You are a slave to fashion.
I’m a techno slave. I’m locked away in a dark room all day. I never see the sun except when I squint my way across the street for a sandwich. Then it’s back to my cube where if I don’t code all day they whip me and tell me my code is weak.
Tyler
November 9, 2007, 7:29pm
22
Steamwalker:
From highdefdigest.com :
Report: HD DVD Standalone Player Sales Nearing 500,000 Milestone
Format backers say the total number of standalone HD DVD players sold is poised to hit the 500,000 mark by late November.
That’s according to a report published late Thursday by Home Media Magazine, which places the current total household penetration for HD DVD standalones at about 420,000 units.
This news comes on the heels of reports earlier this week that roughly 90,000 HD DVD standalones were sold last weekend alone, following highly-publicized price drops for Toshiba’s HD-A2 HD DVD player.
While passing the 500,000 unit mark would certainly seem to cement the HD DVD camp’s overall lead in standalone player sales, it still pales in comparison to the installed base of Sony’s PlayStation 3 game console, which comes with a built-in Blu-ray player. (According to the website vgchartz.com , over 2.2 million PS3s have been sold in the US to date).
Of course, as HD DVD backers will be quick to point out, the majority of PS3 owners are said to not use the console as a Blu-ray player.
What effect all of this may (or may not) have on next-gen disc sales remains to seen. As we’ve previously reported, year-to-date figures from Home Media Research gave Blu-ray a 1.85:1 disc sales advantage for the first nine months of 2007.
Arguing from the standpoint of consoles sold is misleading, seeing as how they dropped the price of the console by several large percentage points, which occurance correlates with the jump in console sales.
Tyler:
If storage is a non-issue, why point to future production of HDDVD in a capacity only one gig larger than bluray? If they had to up it to 51 gigs to catch up, we can explore this further by including the fact that it is technologically possible for bluray to include yet another layer of information in the format disk, and once again ecliplse hddvd, while hddvd will have a harder time squeezing another layer in their disk.
51 gigs wasn’t arbitrarily set up to best blu-ray’s 50 gigs. HD DVD hold’s 17 gigs per layer so a triple layer disk would naturally be 51 gigs. If capacity was the draw, screw BD and HD DVD, go with HVD which holds 3.9 terrabytes. It’s funny how the bluray fans will twist the fact that HD DVD is cheaper as somehow being of lesser quality. They call the recent sales “fire sales” to imply that HD DVD is about to become a dead format. The new HD-A3 which are replacing the $99 HD-A2s are still selling for $199, half the price of the cheapest bluray player. These folks probably buy Monster Cables as well.
Tyler
November 9, 2007, 7:51pm
24
Steamwalker:
Tyler:
If storage is a non-issue, why point to future production of HDDVD in a capacity only one gig larger than bluray? If they had to up it to 51 gigs to catch up, we can explore this further by including the fact that it is technologically possible for bluray to include yet another layer of information in the format disk, and once again ecliplse hddvd, while hddvd will have a harder time squeezing another layer in their disk.
51 gigs wasn’t arbitrarily set up to best blu-ray’s 50 gigs. HD DVD hold’s 17 gigs per layer so a triple layer disk would naturally be 51 gigs. If capacity was the draw, screw BD and HD DVD, go with HVD which holds 3.9 terrabytes.It’s funny how the bluray fans will twist the fact that HD DVD is cheaper as somehow being of lesser quality. They call the recent sales “fire sales” to imply that HD DVD is about to become a dead format. The new HD-A3 which are replacing the $99 HD-A2s are still selling for $199, half the price of the cheapest bluray player. These folks probably by Monster Cables as well .
That would be like me saying "It’s funny how the arguments of HDDVD fans make copious use of logial fallacies and homonym errors
Actually, I don’t own either, so nice try there…thanks for playing…
Methinks you don’t acutally know much about the technology. Methinks you bought an HDDVD console on a whim and are now rooting for the home team, as it were, in an effort to justify your choice.
jkwest
November 9, 2007, 7:51pm
25
Nope…mostly from monoprice.com
Working on some umbers for you Steamy…
jkwest
November 9, 2007, 7:54pm
26
Steamwalker:
Tyler:
If storage is a non-issue, why point to future production of HDDVD in a capacity only one gig larger than bluray? If they had to up it to 51 gigs to catch up, we can explore this further by including the fact that it is technologically possible for bluray to include yet another layer of information in the format disk, and once again ecliplse hddvd, while hddvd will have a harder time squeezing another layer in their disk.
51 gigs wasn’t arbitrarily set up to best blu-ray’s 50 gigs. HD DVD hold’s 17 gigs per layer so a triple layer disk would naturally be 51 gigs. If capacity was the draw, screw BD and HD DVD, go with HVD which holds 3.9 terrabytes. It’s funny how the bluray fans will twist the fact that HD DVD is cheaper as somehow being of lesser quality. They call the recent sales “fire sales” to imply that HD DVD is about to become a dead format. The new HD-A3 which are replacing the $99 HD-A2s are still selling for $199, half the price of the cheapest bluray player. These folks probably buy Monster Cables as well.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05/19/tdk_four-layer_bd/
nuther little tidbit for you…
Tyler
November 9, 2007, 7:56pm
27
Steamwalker:
Tyler:
If storage is a non-issue, why point to future production of HDDVD in a capacity only one gig larger than bluray? If they had to up it to 51 gigs to catch up, we can explore this further by including the fact that it is technologically possible for bluray to include yet another layer of information in the format disk, and once again ecliplse hddvd, while hddvd will have a harder time squeezing another layer in their disk.
51 gigs wasn’t arbitrarily set up to best blu-ray’s 50 gigs. HD DVD hold’s 17 gigs per layer so a triple layer disk would naturally be 51 gigs. If capacity was the draw, screw BD and HD DVD, go with HVD
HVD is still in it’s R&D stages, while the two competing formats are in mass market, speaking of non-issues…
For everyone’s personal edification:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc
djm
November 9, 2007, 8:28pm
28
I think I’ll just keep my pennies in my pocket for now, thx, though it is well said that, “a penny saved is a pocket burned.”
Tyler:
Steamwalker:
Tyler:
If storage is a non-issue, why point to future production of HDDVD in a capacity only one gig larger than bluray? If they had to up it to 51 gigs to catch up, we can explore this further by including the fact that it is technologically possible for bluray to include yet another layer of information in the format disk, and once again ecliplse hddvd, while hddvd will have a harder time squeezing another layer in their disk.
51 gigs wasn’t arbitrarily set up to best blu-ray’s 50 gigs. HD DVD hold’s 17 gigs per layer so a triple layer disk would naturally be 51 gigs. If capacity was the draw, screw BD and HD DVD, go with HVD which holds 3.9 terrabytes.It’s funny how the bluray fans will twist the fact that HD DVD is cheaper as somehow being of lesser quality. They call the recent sales “fire sales” to imply that HD DVD is about to become a dead format. The new HD-A3 which are replacing the $99 HD-A2s are still selling for $199, half the price of the cheapest bluray player. These folks probably by Monster Cables as well .
That would be like me saying "It’s funny how the arguments of HDDVD fans make copious use of logial fallacies and homonym errors
Actually, I don’t own either, so nice try there…thanks for playing…
Methinks you don’t acutally know much about the technology. Methinks you bought an HDDVD console on a whim and are now rooting for the home team, as it were, in an effort to justify your choice.
You got me pegged alright, apparently I don’t know what I am talking about. /shrug
Tyler
November 9, 2007, 9:52pm
30
Acceptance is the first step towards recovery for anyone interested
It’s hardly a 5:1 margin:
According to figures from The DVD Release Report, total Blu-ray titles available at retail passed HD DVD for the first time since the Paramount/DreamWorks decision, 332 to 328, the week ended Oct. 31.
Source: http://www.homemediamagazine.com/
From earlier in the week:http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/11/09/stringer_on_bluray/
Sony CEO saying the format war is neck a neck after Paramout jumped ship to HDDVD
Personally I don’t really care but my current preference is for HDDVD because it’s cheaper and a better standard.
But anyway, I’m not replacing my DVDs anytime soon and I don’t even have an HD TV so what would be the point.
I am a total luddite. Even the simple keys on my flute confuse me. I bought an Ipod 5G 4 days before the new-fangled models came out. Doh.
What the heck is bluray?
I don’t own a functioning TV, by the way, so I suspect the answers will be ‘academic only’ for me.
