Paramount and Dreamworks going HD DVD exclusive

[TruckWEB]

Which movies gets released in Europe before Canada/US? :huh:

and what movies are in Europe that are not in Canada/US? :p

https://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=579446

[spenser.d]

From what I can read, Blu-Ray is superior to HD-DVD in every way except DD+.

What we need is for someone to take screenshots of an HD-DVD and Blu-Ray movie in all its glory so we can compare.

And who cares about interactive menus, etc. If you buy DVDs for that crap you must be insane...

Uh, they're encoded near exactly the same, so they will look pretty identical. I'll take the cheaper one.

-Spenser

[TruckWEB]

Uh, they're encoded near exactly the same, so they will look pretty identical. I'll take the cheaper one.

-Spenser

In fact, using the same TV, with the same HDMI cable, using the same movie (VC-1), the quality of many Blu-Ray movie seem to be lower than HD-DVD. Grainy pictures. The sound is the same. I just don't know how that's possible considering one has more space....

[gigapixels Veteran]

Why does DRM matter if you aren't copying the movie? Tell me please. I don't buy this whole "OH I NEED A BACKUP" nonsense. If by backing up you mean downloading a disc, then yes, DRM can be a pain. Otherwise, its complete nonsense. Region codes have been in place since regular DVDs hit the shelves so why act like its a big deal now? Oh yeah, because there has to be something to complain about other than it being made by Sony.

Or simply it's the fact that NOT having region encoding is a very nice thing to have, regardless of whether it's been used by regular DVDs or not.

[kak]

Or simply it's the fact that NOT having region encoding is a very nice thing to have, regardless of whether it's been used by regular DVDs or not.

I'm not denying that it would be nice, but its hardly a huge problem. Region codes affect a minute percentile of the consumers. I guess if you're wanting to play R5 DVDs, it would bother you. Then again, if you're doing that with hi-def films, it completely defeats the purpose of getting them in hi-def since they aren't cleaned up as much as the R1 releases. The Asian market for films is hardly a reason for DVDs to open up.

[NateB1]

Why does DRM matter if you aren't copying the movie? Tell me please. I don't buy this whole "OH I NEED A BACKUP" nonsense. If by backing up you mean downloading a disc, then yes, DRM can be a pain. Otherwise, its complete nonsense. Region codes have been in place since regular DVDs hit the shelves so why act like its a big deal now? Oh yeah, because there has to be something to complain about other than it being made by Sony.

1. DRM adds unnecessary complexity to the consumer

2. Region codes NTSC/PAL are annoying. Let's say I want to get the UK "Top Gear" show on DVD - it won't play because the region code is different. I would need to recode the entire DVD to NTSC format.

[kak]

1. DRM adds unnecessary complexity to the consumer

2. Region codes NTSC/PAL are annoying. Let's say I want to get the UK "Top Gear" show on DVD - it won't play because the region code is different. I would need to recode the entire DVD to NTSC format.

1. How? What complexity does it add to someone popping the disc into their player? It doesn't. The only thing the DRM is "complicating" is replication of the disc which to the average consumer is completely pointless. Take care of your products.

2. Maybe you should blame the production studio for not supplying the disc in NTSC format. Its a two sided argument that no one will ever win. I agree that region codes are a pain, but they're hardly worth exhausting yourself over like its the make/break point of a piece of hardware.

[NateB1]

1. How? What complexity does it add to someone popping the disc into their player? It doesn't. The only thing the DRM is "complicating" is replication of the disc which to the average consumer is completely pointless. Take care of your products.

How? Let's say I have a HD disc that requires HDMI 1.3 and I only have HDMI 1.1. Or, let's say that my monitor doesn't support HDCP, and the disc requires it.

Without the 128-bit encryption, discs would load much faster, the players wouldn't have to be as expensive (right now they have to include a CPU to decrypt the HD content).

And that SPDIF output? If a flag is turned on in the disc, you will receive highly degraded audio.

Notice I have not mentioned backing up discs. That, ironically, is the easiest part of this DRM issue (Slysoft, anyone?).

[kak]

How? Let's say I have a HD disc that requires HDMI 1.3 and I only have HDMI 1.1. Or, let's say that my monitor doesn't support HDCP, and the disc requires it.

Without the 128-bit encryption, discs would load much faster, the players wouldn't have to be as expensive (right now they have to include a CPU to decrypt the HD content).

And that SPDIF output? If a flag is turned on in the disc, you will receive highly degraded audio.

Notice I have not mentioned backing up discs. That, ironically, is the easiest part of this DRM issue (Slysoft, anyone?).

Discs load within seconds as is. You're argument doesn't hold water there. Maybe the first players were a bit slow, but those problems have been fixed since.

Why would an HD disc require HDMI 1.3 when there are hardly any devices out there that use 1.3 or software that takes up the pipeline offered by 1.3? I fail to see why they wouldn't be compatible and just use a lesser-quality audio (current technology!).

If you're viewing content on a non-HDCP monitor, you either didn't research your monitor for use with HD content or bought a cheap monitor. Pretty much every monitor I looked at prior to buying a TV had HDCP standard.

Everything that the DRM is going to be triggered by is going to be media center computers, which by the way things are moving along, these 'specialized' computers will have no problems in decrypting the DRM. I guess you would run into problems if you bought a computer from Wal-Mart and then installed a BR drive, but isn't the old saying 'you get what you pay for?'

[goji]

And that SPDIF output? If a flag is turned on in the disc, you will receive highly degraded audio.

However, there is one way to get around this issue. If you have a HD-DVD player that allows for multi-channel outputs and a receiver or preamp/processor that has multichannel inputs the actual HD-DVD player will decode the HD audio bit streams and send the HD audio streams via PCM to the receiver for regular decoding. There is no real lose of quality whatsoever.

[kak]

I believe he was talking about DRM issues with BR players.

[goji]

Why would an HD disc require HDMI 1.3 when there are hardly any devices out there that use 1.3 or software that takes up the pipeline offered by 1.3? I fail to see why they wouldn't be compatible and just use a lesser-quality audio (current technology!).

Actually, the slew of 1.3 devices will be out this fall. CEDIA, one of the nations biggest electronics shows starts up in a few weeks where many vendors will be showcasing new products with 1.3+ tech.

HDMI 1.3 as a tech offers more than just audio and video capabilites. When connected with other 1.3 certified devices, install and ease of use for consumers is drastically improved over what we have on the market now. HDMI 1.3 allows for one device (i.e. a receiver) to act as the main hub for all the other connected devices, where only 1 remote control can be used. No programming is necessary as the codes are automatically streamed to the main remote. This new spec could very well put Harmony remotes out of business as the remote from your receive would take control of all of your 1.3 devices without blinking an eye.

I believe he was talking about DRM issues with BR players.

Even if he is, there should be no difference as the audio streams on either platform are decodedd first and foremost at the player level. PS3 owners of course don't get the leverage of multichannel analog out as, however if they do have a standalone player with the outputs, then they too will receive the HD streams. As far as the "lip sync" issue that 1.3 resolved I cannot say.

If anything IMHO, HDMI has created more problems than solutions.

[Boz]

I don't understand...

HD-DVD = 15 GB

Blu-Ray = 25 GB

Personally, when it comes to using discs to back up my data in the future, I hope that the larger disc will be readable in any location I take it.

No biggie though. With my low income, I'm not the target market for this stuff anyway yet. I don't own an HD TV and I don't have plans to buy one, so DVD quality is just perfect for what I'm watching.

I just have a drive that has 150-some gigs of stuff on it that I need to burn. I'm waiting for the winner in this format battle to be declared. When I broke down the content into manageable chunks, it was approximately 25 DVDs of data. I *really* like the idea of being able to put it all on 3 or 4 BD-R DL discs instead or 5 or 6 HD-DVD DL discs.

Just so you understand the WHOLE deal:

Dual Layer HD DVD 30gb - <10.000 copies $2.09 per disc

Single Layer Blu-Ray 25gb <10.000 copies $2.95 per disc

Dual Layer Blu-Ray 50gb -> non existant with replication companies (only Sony does it) and it is subsidized heavily. People smarter then me with access to numbers like PacificDisc guys mentioned that Dual Layer 50gb BDs are in the range $4+ per disc.

Majority of Blu-Ray movies are released on 25gb BDs,

Majority of HD DVD movies are released on 30gb HD DVDs

TL51gb (triple layer 51gb discs) are in the process of getting approved by HD DVD Group and DVD Forum, if this happens and they get approved so these discs are compatible with current players it will mean the end of storage "numbers" that favor Blu-Ray.

Remember, for HD DVD as it is utilizing much better technology and codecs, the keyword is efficiency without quality loss. This means that 30gb are enough for movies, plain and simple.

Even as Alan Bell, Paramounts CTO said, "size of the disc is just not a real deal breaker", but sloppy Java, horrific DRM that we are yet to see if it will work on all players, features that render previous players obsolete are much worse then have more gigabytes, not to mention that it's not like Blu-Ray will continue growing and HD DVD will just stay where it is. :)

[Boz]

In the interesting turn of events. More and more insiders are saying that Warner will go HD DVD exclusive. And when I say insiders, I mean Blu-Ray insiders :)

Thanks Beatboy. Everyone needs to get off your back. You give us insider info. If they change their minds, it's not your fault. Let Give Him A Break!

PS- Can you talk about the possible HD-DVD news? A small hint?

Sure. I heard a little while a go that WB is seriously considering going HD-DVD Exclusive. If they decide to go this route, they will announce by Friday this week.

~Josh

UPDATE:

Also more and more hints are coming out:

2 more studios will switch, 1 to exclusive (big), 1 to neutral (smaller)

The assumption is that it will be Warner going exclusive and Lionsgate going neutral.

And let me assure you that if Warner goes exclusive, it's pretty much over. HD DVD would have huge majority of movies exclusive. With higher prices of Blu-Ray players, it's going to be just matter of time before Disney and Fox join in.

Edited August 23, 2007 by Boz

[TruckWEB]

In the interesting turn of events. More and more insiders are saying that Warner will go HD DVD exclusive. And when I say insiders, I mean Blu-Ray insiders :)

UPDATE:

Also more and more hints are coming out:

The assumption is that it will be Warner going exclusive and Lionsgate going neutral.

And let me assure you that if Warner goes exclusive, it's pretty much over. HD DVD would have huge majority of movies exclusive. With higher prices of Blu-Ray players, it's going to be just matter of time before Disney and Fox join in.

I hope this news will be out and official soon.... You know, before the big shopping season of Xmas....

[gigapixels Veteran]

Oh man, I hope the Warner and Lionsgate stuff is true. I just want this format war to end so I can know what to safely go with. It is a bonus that HD-DVD seems to be getting the advantage because I personally like the format better, but either way I just want it to come down to one format.

[kak]

And let me assure you that if Warner goes exclusive, it's pretty much over. HD DVD would have huge majority of movies exclusive. With higher prices of Blu-Ray players, it's going to be just matter of time before Disney and Fox join in.

Seeing as how you don't control the market and that said 'sources' aren't listed, I'll wait and see. One studio going over doesn't mean that this will be over. Disney is still by far the biggest studio of all sought after. WB won't be going over unless they're given a massive amount of money as well.

[gigapixels Veteran]

Nobody has proven that Paramount was given any money.

[kak]

Nobody has proven that Paramount was given any money.

It clearly defies logic for them to stop production of movies for its best selling format unless they were paid a significant amount of money.

[goji]

Or atleast given generous kickbacks to either the studios or the studio kingpins.

[Boz]

It clearly defies logic for them to stop production of movies for its best selling format unless they were paid a significant amount of money.

What you say MAKES sense, and Paramount was definitely given some incentive, but most likely in covering marketing costs and similar things that are common when you join a group like this. 150 million HAS NOT been proven and is still rumor and speculation.

Again, I will give you a simple math calculation that will make it simpler for you to understand why Paramount did what they did and why Warner might do the same thing.

- FACT: Production costs of Blu-Ray discs (namely DL50gb) are OFF the charts.

If we look at costs of replication here the current situation:

- Dual Layer 30 Gb HD DVD disc on larger volumes: $2.09

- Single Layer 25 Gb Blu-Ray disc on same volume: $2.95

Difference in price for smaller disc 0.86 cents that makes 40% higher costs to product a smaller disc than Blu-Ray.

- Dual Layer 30gb HD DVD disc on larger volumes: $2.09

- Dual Layer 50gb Blu-ray disc on same volumes: $4.00+ with the fact that almost noone else except Sony is able to duplicate on DL50Gb and this is primary because Sony is subsiziding DL50Gb costs

Now here we see pretty bad difference. For the same quality of the movie, same codec the movie with all the features will fit on 30gb and leave most of the 50Gb space empty. Studios have to go 50gb because most likely SL25 BD will not do the trick. Forcing them to pay more money for replication. In fact this shows almost 100% increase in price.

Now let's take a look at the best selling title on the market produced by Warner. Judging by this, 2:1 is most likely making Warner going even on the amount of profit they generate from HD DVD vs BD version despite the fact they sold twice the amount of copies.

Let's not forget much larger licensing fees imposed by BDA, plus horrific development support for BD-J and problems with final specifications and the problems this will cause with older players.

When you look at all these things would you continue supporting it as a business? Of course, it's not like they didn't make money, but is it worth it? If the HD DVD numbers have made Warner the same amount of money than BD with 5 times less players, don't you think that they would be more satisfied with HD DVD.

This same argument applies to any movie studio including Paramount.

Just think about it.

[kak]

The main problem I see with this is that production costs will inevitably fall. We all can't argue the fact that BR production is more expensive. However, I don't think these companies current priority is to make landslide profit (but profit nonetheless) on this new technology. None of these 'exclusive' companies want to shift their resources in the last second to change production styles. Disney and Fox are not going to change on a whim. BDA will have to be hanging by a thread before they go.

I'd expect the BDA to make an offer to WB and other neutral studios to either stay neutral or sway over for a period of time [similar to rumored Paramount contract]. If not, they're playing to lose.

[Boz]

The main problem I see with this is that production costs will inevitably fall. We all can't argue the fact that BR production is more expensive.

But when man? When will they fall? Why would a business need to wait a year or two years for production costs to fall when they already have equal in quality and better in features technology which is much cheaper RIGHT now. You know HD DVD will inevitably fall in the price range of $50 a player and $9.99 for movies, so that of course again goes against your assumptions.

As I said, Blu-Ray is mostly smoke and mirrors, while HD DVD is fully completed, cheap next gen medium. That about sums it up. "What ifs" and "eventual" do not hold water in business.

On the the other hand;

Trust me, WB will go exclusive HD DVD almost certainly either this Friday or early next week. The reports from insiders are all over. This is the Paramount effect. WB had more then enough time to evaluate both platforms and costs.

When asked about the neutral stance Warner said... at least for now ("We haven't announced anything otherwise") . Sounds like a big fat "WAIT AND LISTEN to our announcement" to me :)

[kak]

There is talks, but its nothing like the talks about Paramount going apparently. I guess we'll find out Friday.

[Ironman273]

Actually, the slew of 1.3 devices will be out this fall. CEDIA, one of the nations biggest electronics shows starts up in a few weeks where many vendors will be showcasing new products with 1.3+ tech.

I'm curious, is HDMI 1.3 a physically different device? Will "old" HDMI cable still work? Will devices with HDMI be able to do a software update to get 1.3?