By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Has Sony lost another format war?

Xeno on 09 April 2008

Sony has had bad luck with formats. Whether it was Beta, Mini Disc, Memory Stick, or Super Audio CD, Sony has not been very successful at having their proprietary formats dominate the industry. From a distance, it may appear that Sony will win this round of high definition video via Blue Ray. However, upon closer inspection, it may be that Sony's victory over HD-DVD was meaningless.

If you think about it, what is the real advantage of watching movies in high definition? Is the new Indiana Jones movie going to be more exciting just because high definition allows me to see the wrinkles on Harrision Ford's face? Imagine watching the old Star Wars trilogy in high definition. It would seem that high definition would take away from the excitement of the old Star Wars by making it more obvious that a lot of the characters are wearing costumes or are just puppets. In high definition, Han Solo's Millennium Falcon would look more like a toy model. That is because high definition is less forgiving when it comes to certain special effects.

Many good movies have been successful because they are directed in such a way in which they refrain from being explicit. For example, the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre did not depend on explicit, high definition, special effects to scare the crap out of people. Instead, it was cleverly directed in such a way that it allowed the audience to imagine the gravity of each violent scene. 

It seems that the only real advantage of high definition is when it comes to sports. Indeed, watching a game of tennis in 1080p with a television running at 120Hz will make the game more immersive. However, watching games such as tennis, baseball, and football have nothing to do with Blue Ray. Those sports can be watched by subscribing to a high definition package from a cable or satellite provider.

Recently, it was announced that NetFlix may make a lot of its movie catalogue available over the internet, using the XBox 360 as a video player. With thousands of movies available, owners of the Xbox 360 will have access to true video on demand. Apparently, subscribers will be able to stream as many movies as they can possibly see for a small subscription fee. If there is no overwhelming advantage to watching movie in high definition, then it may be preferable for a consumer to watch 30 movies in normal definition than to rent 3 movies in high definition. In addition, a consumer who subscribes to Netflix will not have to worry about mailing the movie back or returning it to a video store.

If Microsoft plays it cards correctly, it may be that Sony's Blue Ray will go the way of Super Audio. While Blue Ray and Super Audio are higher quality formats than DVD and CD respectively, it did not matter. The average consumer did not care and was happy with the quality of DVD and CD. Streaming movies via the Xbox 360 may be Microsoft's ace-in-the-hole. If that is the case, then Sony may indirectly lose another format war.



Around the Network
psrock on 09 April 2008

Just answer this one question for me, what would you have said if hd-dvd had won? i just want to know.



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
Dogs Rule on 09 April 2008

By your logic, it is the TV's that have too much definition: TV's should only show as much detail as needed to give people the illusion of detail, without compromizing the rudimentary special effects of when they were made. Maybe movies made before 1990 should only be in standard definiton.

The thing about the HD formats is that people paid BIG money buying top of the line HD sets. Why would they then skimp 10$ per disk, when the difference means optimizing the value of your TV?

Just accept the fact that some people will buy HD physical media and you don't have to.



makingmusic476 on 09 April 2008

Most movies benefit from High Definition, the Lord of the Rings being the ones I'm most anticipating. And OTA HD doesn't look near as good as a properly transferred Blu-Ray movie.

As for those willing to use XBL, just over half of 360 owners actively use XBL, which only amounts to 10 million people. How many of those are going to start renting movies from netflix over and above paying for XBL? And how many people are going to start buying 360s with the intent to then rent movies via XBL? Are they going to start selling standalone XBL machines with the sole purpose of renting movies? You act as if the 360 will become a mainstream commodity like DVD, when in reality the system will sell 40 million units WW at best.

Your problem is that you're viewing this strictly within a console war mindset. Blu-Ray is supported by far more companies than just Sony (Panasonic holds more patents in Blu-Ray tech than any other company), and many of these companies make and are actively pushing standalone Blu-Ray players. This will allow Blu-Ray to reach a far larger audience than the 360 ever will.

And for all those failed Sony formats you mentioned, did you forget about the CD?

And just so you know, HDM has been growing at faster rates than DVD was in its early years.



kenzomatic on 09 April 2008
Xeno said:

Sony has had bad luck with formats. Whether it was Beta, Mini Disc, Memory Stick, or Super Audio CD, Sony has not been very successful at having their proprietary formats dominate the industry. From a distance, it may appear that Sony will win this round of high definition video via Blue Ray. However, upon closer inspection, it may be that Sony's victory over HD-DVD was meaningless.

If you think about it, what is the real advantage of watching movies in high definition? Is the new Indiana Jones movie going to be more exciting just because high definition allows me to see the wrinkles on Harrision Ford's face? Imagine watching the old Star Wars trilogy in high definition. It would seem that high definition would take away from the excitement of the old Star Wars by making it more obvious that a lot of the characters are wearing costumes or are just puppets. In high definition, Han Solo's Millennium Falcon would look more like a toy model. That is because high definition is less forgiving when it comes to certain special effects.

True for Tommy Boy not Star Wars. 1) Star Wars is being graphiclly upgraded again for HD release. 2) Most movies they will clean up before release "digitally remastered" 3) there is still plenty of resolution left on film.

People will Upgrade for your major movies but they will not replace there dvd selection.

Many good movies have been successful because they are directed in such a way in which they refrain from being explicit. For example, the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre did not depend on explicit, high definition, special effects to scare the crap out of people. Instead, it was cleverly directed in such a way that it allowed the audience to imagine the gravity of each violent scene. 

This in no way what so ever has anything to do with HD.

It seems that the only real advantage of high definition is when it comes to sports. Indeed, watching a game of tennis in 1080p with a television running at 120Hz will make the game more immersive. However, watching games such as tennis, baseball, and football have nothing to do with Blue Ray. Those sports can be watched by subscribing to a high definition package from a cable or satellite provider.

So I have the HD set why not get the HD movies?

Recently, it was announced that NetFlix may make a lot of its movie catalogue available over the internet, using the XBox 360 as a video player. With thousands of movies available, owners of the Xbox 360 will have access to true video on demand. Apparently, subscribers will be able to stream as many movies as they can possibly see for a small subscription fee. If there is no overwhelming advantage to watching movie in high definition, then it may be preferable for a consumer to watch 30 movies in normal definition than to rent 3 movies in high definition. In addition, a consumer who subscribes to Netflix will not have to worry about mailing the movie back or returning it to a video store.

Your hinting at how blu-ray could lose which would be because of movie downloads.

If Microsoft plays it cards correctly, it may be that Sony's Blue Ray will go the way of Super Audio. While Blue Ray and Super Audio are higher quality formats than DVD and CD respectively, it did not matter. The average consumer did not care and was happy with the quality of DVD and CD. Streaming movies via the Xbox 360 may be Microsoft's ace-in-the-hole. If that is the case, then Sony may indirectly lose another format war.

 


Look I don't think blu-ray will match DVDs susccess, but it's not going to fail. And I think everyone can agree Downloading movies is the next step. But in the next 10 years there will be plenty of people who will want hard copies, and they are going to by blu-ray.



"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."

Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable! You are a poor scientist. Especially if you think the moon landing was faked.

ioi + 1
Around the Network
Xeno on 09 April 2008

I was actually cheering for both DVD Audio and Super Audio. Somehow, neither of them really managed to put a dent on the CD domination of the marketplace. In fact, people seem content with lower quality music such as MP3s. The MP3s are very convenient in that they allow a person to store 160+ songs on a single CD. The fact that people are willing to sacrifice quality for convenience leads me to believe that streaming video may win over high definition video. I don't own either an HD DVD or a Blue Ray, so I have no dog in the fight. However, just because Blue Ray won, I'm not sure if people will be compelled to make Blue Ray a mainstream format, such as DVD. By the way, I do own two Sony televisions, and they are great. However, looking at Sony's history with formats, I'm not sure they're going to pull this one off.



skip on 09 April 2008
Xeno said:

Sony has had bad luck with formats. Whether it was Beta, Mini Disc, Memory Stick, or Super Audio CD, Sony has not been very successful at having their proprietary formats dominate the industry. From a distance, it may appear that Sony will win this round of high definition video via Blue Ray. However, upon closer inspection, it may be that Sony's victory over HD-DVD was meaningless.

If you think about it, what is the real advantage of watching movies in high definition? Is the new Indiana Jones movie going to be more exciting just because high definition allows me to see the wrinkles on Harrision Ford's face? Imagine watching the old Star Wars trilogy in high definition. It would seem that high definition would take away from the excitement of the old Star Wars by making it more obvious that a lot of the characters are wearing costumes or are just puppets. In high definition, Han Solo's Millennium Falcon would look more like a toy model. That is because high definition is less forgiving when it comes to certain special effects.

Many good movies have been successful because they are directed in such a way in which they refrain from being explicit. For example, the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre did not depend on explicit, high definition, special effects to scare the crap out of people. Instead, it was cleverly directed in such a way that it allowed the audience to imagine the gravity of each violent scene.

It seems that the only real advantage of high definition is when it comes to sports. Indeed, watching a game of tennis in 1080p with a television running at 120Hz will make the game more immersive. However, watching games such as tennis, baseball, and football have nothing to do with Blue Ray. Those sports can be watched by subscribing to a high definition package from a cable or satellite provider.

Recently, it was announced that NetFlix may make a lot of its movie catalogue available over the internet, using the XBox 360 as a video player. With thousands of movies available, owners of the Xbox 360 will have access to true video on demand. Apparently, subscribers will be able to stream as many movies as they can possibly see for a small subscription fee. If there is no overwhelming advantage to watching movie in high definition, then it may be preferable for a consumer to watch 30 movies in normal definition than to rent 3 movies in high definition. In addition, a consumer who subscribes to Netflix will not have to worry about mailing the movie back or returning it to a video store.

If Microsoft plays it cards correctly, it may be that Sony's Blue Ray will go the way of Super Audio. While Blue Ray and Super Audio are higher quality formats than DVD and CD respectively, it did not matter. The average consumer did not care and was happy with the quality of DVD and CD. Streaming movies via the Xbox 360 may be Microsoft's ace-in-the-hole. If that is the case, then Sony may indirectly lose another format war.

so your saying that the cd wasn't successful
Compact Disc
Media type Optical disc
Encoding Various
Capacity Typically up to 700 MB
Read mechanism 780 nm wavelength semiconductor laser
Developed by Philips & Sony
Usage Audio and data storage

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Disc

 

edit: know that I think about it you didn't include their other succeses. one such example being video8



Username2324 on 10 April 2008
Xeno said:

Sony has had bad luck with formats. Whether it was Beta, Mini Disc, Memory Stick, or Super Audio CD, Sony has not been very successful at having their proprietary formats dominate the industry. From a distance, it may appear that Sony will win this round of high definition video via Blue Ray. However, upon closer inspection, it may be that Sony's victory over HD-DVD was meaningless.

If you think about it, what is the real advantage of watching movies in high definition? Is the new Indiana Jones movie going to be more exciting just because high definition allows me to see the wrinkles on Harrision Ford's face? Imagine watching the old Star Wars trilogy in high definition. It would seem that high definition would take away from the excitement of the old Star Wars by making it more obvious that a lot of the characters are wearing costumes or are just puppets. In high definition, Han Solo's Millennium Falcon would look more like a toy model. That is because high definition is less forgiving when it comes to certain special effects.

Many good movies have been successful because they are directed in such a way in which they refrain from being explicit. For example, the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre did not depend on explicit, high definition, special effects to scare the crap out of people. Instead, it was cleverly directed in such a way that it allowed the audience to imagine the gravity of each violent scene.

It seems that the only real advantage of high definition is when it comes to sports. Indeed, watching a game of tennis in 1080p with a television running at 120Hz will make the game more immersive. However, watching games such as tennis, baseball, and football have nothing to do with Blue Ray. Those sports can be watched by subscribing to a high definition package from a cable or satellite provider.

Recently, it was announced that NetFlix may make a lot of its movie catalogue available over the internet, using the XBox 360 as a video player. With thousands of movies available, owners of the Xbox 360 will have access to true video on demand. Apparently, subscribers will be able to stream as many movies as they can possibly see for a small subscription fee. If there is no overwhelming advantage to watching movie in high definition, then it may be preferable for a consumer to watch 30 movies in normal definition than to rent 3 movies in high definition. In addition, a consumer who subscribes to Netflix will not have to worry about mailing the movie back or returning it to a video store.

If Microsoft plays it cards correctly, it may be that Sony's Blue Ray will go the way of Super Audio. While Blue Ray and Super Audio are higher quality formats than DVD and CD respectively, it did not matter. The average consumer did not care and was happy with the quality of DVD and CD. Streaming movies via the Xbox 360 may be Microsoft's ace-in-the-hole. If that is the case, then Sony may indirectly lose another format war.

Your such a freaking 360 fanboy, you do realize that Netflix is also playing to use the PS3 right? You also know that Netflix already streams movies to PCs right? You also realize that people want to use their HDTVs correct?

Blu-ray exists because of HDTVs, people want to be able to see more life like things, to say its too high quality is extremely silly.

Based on your post I conclude you simply hate Sony and Blu-ray because they won over Microsoft, and you being a 360 fanboy love Microsoft, and that makes you mad, so you are trying to cast doubt over those who have accepted Blu-ray.

Obviously you have never watched a movie in 1080p with TrueHD surround sound or you would know it makes the movie much more exciting and enjoyable.

Just move on, Microsoft sucks, HD DVD sucks, get over it and stop trying to ruin it for others.

 



Instant_Karma on 10 April 2008

In the long run, any tech war can be seen as meaningless because eventually the technology becomes obsolete. Could we agree that the invention of the VHS and the introduction of media into our homes has a little more significance than the step up in quality that is the DVD? What blu-ray is is the next step in quality, and eventually it too will be replaced. Will it ever hold the marketshare that DVD had? It's possible, in time. The format is still young, though technology these days advances at alarming speeds so the blu-ray could be a conduit from the DVD to the next best thing. As long as there are DRM issues as well as the lack of ownership of digitally downloaded media, and the current restrictions to digital transfer speeds on the mass-market, blu-ray will be the de facto medium. I can see in the future digital distribution could be standard...maybe 5-10 years down the road when the service, storage and transfer speeds become more accessible. Until then, the BD format will grow and prosper.



All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be.

Xeno on 10 April 2008

Well, I don't own an Xbox 360 or a PS3. I'm not a big fan of Windows, either. I'm not speaking as a fanboy but as a potential investor. Honestly, would you bank on Blue Ray as being a profit-generating source for Sony? Do you think Blue Ray will be able to compete against DVD, or will it go the way of Super Audio, Mini Disc, and Beta? Will streaming video make high definition null and void? Even if Sony is able to stream movies via Netflix, Sony was banking on Blue Ray as a major selling point for its PS3. If Sony promotes streaming movies, it will shoot itself in the foot.