Forbes: No Blue Skies For Blu-Ray

[mikemorel]

BURLINGAME, CALIF. - When movie maker Warner Bros. said it would throw its weight behind Sony's format for storing high definition movies, Blu-Ray, Sony executives likely popped a few corks. Executives from rival Toshiba grimly declared that they would carry on. "We have been declared dead before," Toshiba Vice President Jodi Sally told reporters. She didn't take questions.

But Sony (nyse: SNE - news - people ) can't afford to spend too long drinking the champagne. The real news isn't that HD-DVD's future looks grim. It's that if Blu-Ray's backers can finish off HD-DVD quickly, Blu-Ray might have one.

With Apple (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people ), Amazon.com (nasdaq: AMZN - news - people ), NetFlix and Microsoft (nasdaq: MSFT - news - people ) pushing downloadable movies and cable and phone companies peddling a plethora of on-demand, high-definition content, the day is coming when the stacks of plain vanilla DVDs that clutter many home entertainment centers will go the way of the CD collection.

JVC even introduced a flat-screen television at the International Consumer Electronics Show that allows users to simply pop in one of Apple's iPods to watch video content--threatening to turn the slim media players into an alternative to digital video discs. And Panasonic is building iPod docks into its home theater systems alongside an integrated Blu-Ray player.

Another worry, according to Robin Harris, an analyst with the Data Mobility Group, is that Blu-Ray adoption will be slow because few people will notice the difference between formats, since many players can neatly "up-convert" DVDs for high-definition sets. As a result, few will opt to replace their entire DVD libraries, as many did with the earlier generation of videotapes. "So is this going to be a pyrrhic victory for Sony? I think that there's a fair chance that it will be," Harris says.

Blu-Ray’s victory came at a high price. Sony delayed the release of its PlayStation 3 so it could include the pricey Blu-Ray technology in its console. Partly as a result, the PlayStation 3 has lagged behind the Nintendo (other-otc: NTDOY - news - people ) Wii and Microsoft Xbox 360 in sales--even as analysts credit the PlayStation 3 with giving Blu-Ray an edge over HD-DVD.

That edge was vital to blunting HD-DVD's price advantage. HD-DVD players can be had for as little as $99, and its HD-DVDs cost less to produce. By contrast, Blu-Ray players start at $350.

That said, analysts say the chances of a comeback for HD-DVD are slim. Harris points to the move by Blockbuster (nyse: BBI - news - people ) to expand its Blu-Ray offerings last year as one key point. And Warner's move signals the studios are tiring of pitting the competing consumer electronics manufacturers against one another. "Hollywood is now done with this particular argument," Harris says. "They are worried about movie sales and they don't want consumers hesitating about high-definition content."

Looks like business magazines aren't so quick to claim "victory" for blu-ray (or any optical format, for that matter). At least, not without the word "pyrrhic" in front of it.

Considering the high price paid for victory (payoffs, incentives, PS3 delays, PS3 pricing, etc. etc.), they might be right.

It is entirely possible that the blu-ray optical might not take off to anywhere near DVD levels. J6P might be happy with other alternatives.

[brado8236]

Sure, there's a cap on the lifespan of all optical formats. But we're a LONG way away from having iPod plug-and-play functionality become the gold standard for HDM in J6P's home theater setup. Show me the first iPod that will hold more than 5 1080p movies that can be downloaded in less than a week and I'll start believing it's coming soon. Otherwise, it's all FUD for at least another 5 years. BD can be very successful in that timeframe if everyone gets behind it.

[stevo4]

What they are suggesting is a real possibilty for BD.
While most ppl on this forum will prefer to own HiDef media.
That is not the case for J6P who is not that fussed on HD quality and will lean in the direction of what is being suggested in that report if it is readlily available and cheap enough.

Its fine for CE companys to expect to make good profit on early adopters, but the prices they will pay is not what will get J6P interested let alone consider buying into HiDef. Not in significant quantity too see it have a substantial impact on SD sales to see BD or HD DVD become mainstream.

Despite things looking good for BD now, it may very well fail to recoup what has been laid out.

Originally Posted by brado8236

BD can be very successful in that timeframe if everyone gets behind it.

True, but getting everyone behind it means a lot more than just the enthusiast market, and thats far from a given.

[WeaselSniff]

Sorry, ain't buying it. There are still people all over my home town that still don't have high speed service. Oh it exists, they just don't want it. Most rural areas don't even have digital cable yet, much less high speed internet lines. Downloadable content is already available to those with access and even those people STILL BUY PHYSICAL MEDIA...even the ones that DO use iTunes and whatnot.

And yeah, that statement about the iPod becoming a portable video server is laughable. It's not even close to being that yet, especially for hidef content.

It took the iPod nearly 3 years to go mainstream and bring about the mp3 player revolution. I expect similar trends with hidef content.

[MGSteve]

Ah, the article is based upon a number of flawed assumptions.

1) VOD will take over from Physical media - it won't, until we can download a 50GB HD Disc Image in around 10 mins and store loads of them SECURELY, without risk of loosing everything should the storage medium fail.
2) Players like iPods will be able to store High Def Content - they don't have the space and are not likely to for a long, long time.
3) Yes you can up-convert a DVD and on a small HDTV it probably won't look too bad. But at the end of the day, when you blow up an image you cannot get more detail out of it than was already in the source image. Compare a upscaled DVD image on a 40"+ HDTV with a 1080p HD image and the difference is night and day.

As larger TVs become the norm, people will become more interested in proper HD content rather than upscaling a DVD onto their 26" TV.

The larger the TV, the greater the need for proper HD content.

I don't think the author of that article really fully understands what they are talking about.

[stevo4]

Originally Posted by MGSteve

Ah, the article is based upon a number of flawed assumptions.

1) VOD will take over from Physical media - it won't, until we can download a 50GB HD Disc Image in around 10 mins and store loads of them SECURELY, without risk of loosing everything should the storage medium fail.
2) Players like iPods will be able to store High Def Content - they don't have the space and are not likely to for a long, long time.
3) Yes you can up-convert a DVD and on a small HDTV it probably won't look too bad. But at the end of the day, when you blow up an image you cannot get more detail out of it than was already in the source image. Compare a upscaled DVD image on a 40"+ HDTV with a 1080p HD image and the difference is night and day.

As larger TVs become the norm, people will become more interested in proper HD content rather than upscaling a DVD onto their 26" TV.

The larger the TV, the greater the need for proper HD content.

I don't think the author of that article really fully understands what they are talking about.

No i think you missed the point.

That is, even if J6P does get interested in HD, that could take too long for Sony to recoup what they have pumped into BD before, if not what is being suggested in the article, something else comes along.

[vinnie97]

MGSteve, on your first point, you seem to forget that video compression schemes will continue to improve, so 50GB of content won't be required (HD DVD already proved that ffs).

[jrutz]

Originally Posted by MGSteve

Ah, the article is based upon a number of flawed assumptions.

1) VOD will take over from Physical media - it won't, until we can download a 50GB HD Disc Image in around 10 mins and store loads of them SECURELY, without risk of loosing everything should the storage medium fail.
2) Players like iPods will be able to store High Def Content - they don't have the space and are not likely to for a long, long time.
3) Yes you can up-convert a DVD and on a small HDTV it probably won't look too bad. But at the end of the day, when you blow up an image you cannot get more detail out of it than was already in the source image. Compare a upscaled DVD image on a 40"+ HDTV with a 1080p HD image and the difference is night and day.

As larger TVs become the norm, people will become more interested in proper HD content rather than upscaling a DVD onto their 26" TV.

The larger the TV, the greater the need for proper HD content.

I don't think the author of that article really fully understands what they are talking about.

Ah, your post is based upon a number of flawed assumptions.

1) Do you really think 50GB downloads are the future of digital distribution? Um, try 10GB, or 5GB. If you don't think codecs will improve in the next few years, you are so wrong. File sizes will probably remain consistent with HD files today, around 4-8GB, but improvements in the codecs will allow for better picture, higher resolution and HD sound. And remember, we don't need all that disc filler like trailers and multiple language support, which will save space. Also note HDi uses XML, and PiP might only add a few hundred MB to the file size, so extra content could be a possiblility.

2) See #1, and iPods might benefit from an upscaled picture as SD DVD does. Remember iPods went from 30/60GB to 80/160GB in a year. What's next?

3) 32" - 42" HDTVs are the sweetspot for consumers. Not everyone has a 50"+ TV to which they can scrutinize an upscaled image. Most "common folk", i.e. those not on these forums who make up the overwhelming majority of HDTV/CE consumers, have difficulty seeing a difference between HDM and SD DVD. You even state in your sig you only have a 42" HDTV, so are you saying you speak for that majority of which you are not a part?

And if push came to shove, I bet you'd say your PS3 does a damn fine job of upconverting SD DVD.

[countzero]

I have FiOS high speed fiber internet access (20 Meg down/ 10 Meg up) and prior to jumping into High Def, I used to download 4 gig DVD rips regularly via Bittorrent. Even as a high ratio member of private tracker sites, it would often take 8 - 12 hours to download a single movie. (Forget about using Pirate Bay if you want a movie this week). I still routinely download 1 hour TV shows, which generally take between one and two hours to download.

This is for DivX files, and they don't even come close to being hidef, even the ones which claim they are. Very Very Very few shows are available in the MKV format which houses true 720p content, and none of those are streamable to my media players (PS3 or Buffalo Linktheater). They can ONLY be played on my PC, which is NOT where my wife and I watch movies/shows.

Don't forget, the MKV files are significantly larger, usually 2gig+ for a 42 minute episode, which puts it in the 4 hour+ download time frame.

Anyone who thinks downloadable hi-def content is on the horizon is deluding themselves. I've been an 'early adopter' of downloadable content for a couple of years now, and I jumped to true HD media immediately. The quality is significantly better and it's no where near as much of a pain in the ass.

As for High def on-demand? You must be joking. FiOS offers all kinds of on-demand content, NONE of which is actually in high def (720p, let alone 1080p).

Talk about a tech that isn't ready for mass market penetration...

[SRFan]

Originally Posted by countzero

I have FiOS high speed fiber internet access (20 Meg down/ 10 Meg up) and prior to jumping into High Def, I used to download 4 gig DVD rips regularly via Bittorrent. Even as a high ratio member of private tracker sites, it would often take 8 - 12 hours to download a single movie. (Forget about using Pirate Bay if you want a movie this week). I still routinely download 1 hour TV shows, which generally take between one and two hours to download.

This is for DivX files, and they don't even come close to being hidef, even the ones which claim they are. Very Very Very few shows are available in the MKV format which houses true 720p content, and none of those are streamable to my media players (PS3 or Buffalo Linktheater). They can ONLY be played on my PC, which is NOT where my wife and I watch movies/shows.

Don't forget, the MKV files are significantly larger, usually 2gig+ for a 42 minute episode, which puts it in the 4 hour+ download time frame.

Not to mention they're illegal, and thus won't be mainstream

[romper]

Blu has won the war, but with the price of players and interactive features (see Fox at CES) that no player in stores now can produce or may ever produce is going to make Blu-ray growth sluggish. That and alot of early adopters are in the Red camp and may stay there awhile.

[ferrando]

Originally Posted by mikemorel

Quote from your quote: As a result, few will opt to replace their entire DVD libraries, as many did with the earlier generation of videotapes. "So is this going to be a pyrrhic victory for Sony? I think that there's a fair chance that it will be," Harris says.

----

Looks like business magazines aren't so quick to claim "victory" for blu-ray (or any optical format, for that matter). At least, not without the word "pyrrhic" in front of it.

Considering the high price paid for victory (payoffs, incentives, PS3 delays, PS3 pricing, etc. etc.), they might be right.

It is entirely possible that the blu-ray optical might not take off to anywhere near DVD levels. J6P might be happy with other alternatives.

This is always the case. I'm 100% positive there are people that didn't rebuy their VHS tapes in DVD, in fact I'd wager that's the vast majority... VHS tapes weren't exactly cheap until LD was in its swan-song and DVD was in its infancy, I remember seeing price tags of 90-150 bucks in the 80s, which is almost double the money now due to inflation. I own 200 some-odd DVDs, I won't replace most. Why? Because the quality really can't improve much on most of these. Lots are older catalog movies. There are some that WILL be upgraded, my Indiana Jones', my Star Wars', my Lord of the Rings'.... but not every movie needs to be. The victory lies in the fact that all FUTURE movies will be on BD, and sold as such. I mean, I own the Breakfast Club, Sixteen Candles, Better Off Dead, and a million other movies from the 80s for nostalgia's sake..... and video quality in the 80s was poor at best... will it really improve anything to be in HD? HDnet Movies, Universal HD, and HBO HD lead me to say no.... and they feel better being the quality they are. It's like how a record sounds a billion times better than a CD, despite an occasional crackle in the sound (maybe that's a poor example, as records DO sound better than CDs).

[Menaceuk]

I think people seem to overlook the fact that people dont need to replace there current collection.

Haveing to do so from VHS was a requirment IMO but BLU-RAY/HD-DVD players play and upscale standered DVDs to good quality soo haveing to replace DVD collections is not needed in any shampe or form.

[Deadmeat]

Toshiba can still fight back.

Upconversion friendly encode + super upconversion(Toshiba SD2HD) on player side = overpriced Blu-Ray loses.

[ferrando]

Originally Posted by Deadmeat

Toshiba can still fight back.

Upconversion friendly encode + super upconversion(Toshiba SD2HD) on player side = overpriced Blu-Ray loses.

Just like the Vietnam War can still be won?

Just send in General Westmoreland + go on the offensive = over-confident Viet-Cong loses.

source hddvd.org