“Intel Corp. and Microsoft Corp., the leading suppliers of chips and software for most of the world’s personal computers, are throwing their support behind the next-generation DVD standard known as HD DVD,” Matthew Fordahl reports for The Associated Press. “After taking a neutral stance for months in the battle between the competing HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc formats, the companies said Tuesday they have joined the HD DVD Promotion Group that includes Toshiba Corp., Universal Studios and others.”
“The move means upcoming PCs running Microsoft’s upcoming Windows Vista operating system or Intel’s Viiv entertainment technology will come with support for HD DVD drives,” Fordahl reports. “‘We want to make sure that whatever is put out on the market is going to be as consumer friendly as possible from the price and usability point of view,’ said Blair Westlake, vice president of Microsoft’s Media/Entertainment and Technology Convergence Group.”
Fordahl explains, “Blu-ray technology can be licensed by any company anywhere in the world. Supporters of Blu-ray have claimed they have a more sophisticated technology with a greater storage capacity. HD DVD companies have pointed to the fact that their offering will be available sooner and at less cost — an argument disputed by the Blu-ray group.”
MacDailyNews Take: What a shocker! Well, maybe not so much. Imagine, Apple and Sony on the side of the better technology while Microsoft chooses to go with the cheap, second-rate “solution.” How typical is that?
The bottom line? Xbox 360 (HD DVD) vs. PlayStation 3 (Blu-ray).
[Notes: Blu-ray Disc supports the highest quality HD video available in the industry (up to 1920 x 1080 at 40 Mbit/sec). Blu-ray capacity: 50GB vs. 30GB for HD DVD disks.]
Companies supporting Blu-ray: http://www.blu-raydisc.com/Section-13469/Index.html
Companies supporting HD DVD: http://www.hddvdprg.com/about/member.html
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Twentieth Century Fox joins Apple, Dell, HP, others to support Blu-ray Disc format – July 29, 2005
Poll shows Apple-backed Blu-ray preferred by consumers over HD DVD for next-gen DVD standard – July 14, 2005
Microsoft allies with Toshiba on HD-DVD vs. Blu-ray Disc backers Apple and Sony – June 27, 2005
Apple joins Blu-ray Disc Association Board of Directors – March 10, 2005
Shocked, shocked I am that Micro$oft would pick a technically less capable, but easier to produce format that is not compatible with PS3 and Macs. How can this be?
Leodavinci:
“Got any links to non-biased criteria that HDDVD is the better technology? Not trying be contentious here, just want objective information, as everything I’ve read, online or off, indicates otherwise.”
Actually, I’m not trying to claim that BluRay is worse or better technologically – in fact, both disk formats are just ways of compressing and storing content at a high def level. As long as you can fit a full length movie on one, and maybe a few of the xtras (though they certainly don’t have to be high def), and as long as they play back on a monitor of some sort, then the differences between them are esoteric. To the extent that storage capacity is important, as I said above, data back ups are the only area where I see it as crucial. And there are more effective solutions than optical disks for that, although optical disks are fine for home use.
“Personally, as a “free-marketeer” myself, I’d rather see a format war. As I see it, this will force both camps to adapt, better and lower the consumer cost on their products much quicker than either would do if there were only one format. Eventually the market place will determine the winner (but not necessarily the best product) and consumers will have a better, less expensive product than otherwise. Unless something better comes along before then.”
I suppose we differ a bit here. For me, the free market should decide that it NEEDS higher capacity technology of some sort, clamor for it, and then the companies should work out a standard that won’t drive everybody crazy (or cost more than it has to) and compete against each other on the basis of cost efficiencies for media and players. Knowing a few people who code for a living, there’s usually not a whole lot to suggest one compression algorithm is ‘better’ or ‘more advanced’ than another. It’s just a matter of picking one, getting everyone to agree to use it, and then going from there. MP3s, DVDs, CDs … they were just the first that the majority coalesed around, either through the will of the users (MP3) or more often via an industry backed standards body (DVD/CD). Even refrigerators or automobiles have standards behind them, to make them easier to make and purchase. When it comes to code, the latter keeps costs down and convenience up for everybody.
Last, while there are some quarters that will always need ‘more better’, in the home entertainment area it’s usually ‘simple cheap’ that wins the day – all other things being equal. I know of no one, who doesn’t own a $2000-4000 HDTV, who thinks that DVD movies need to be replaced. And even those up-market guys are pretty happy with how good the DVDs look on their new setups. I’m not saying demand won’t come eventually – it will. I’m just saying that since HD-DVD is clearly the cost effective alternative, and since the capacity of it will more than satisfy 90+% of the consumer market, lets not be so quick to think that BluRay, just because Apple favors it and MS doesn’t, is the best way to go.
I might be wrong, but it seems to me that HD-DVD is a victim of superior marketing, more than it is of superior technology.
Later!
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”cool smile” style=”border:0;” />
beta did win
all pro’s use beta
home users use the cheaper lower quality vhs
pros tend to use macs too
home users = windows
I read form PCworld that Toshiba already have 45G phototype HD-DVD, so both BD-DVD and HD-DVD capacity will increase in the coming year. The HD-DVD mostly usethe same manufacture method, so many people in HD-DVD believe it is more realiable and least troble in the mass production scale (Toshiba already test on the mass production line). BD-DVD have to use new method (Blue laser instace of normal Red laser) result in 0.1 layer instace of 0.6, and never try to manufactor in mass. What is if the BD-DVD is rotten like CD? I know I am piss when I found out my few of my CD collection sets are rotten even though I keep in protective case. I screamed very load that day ” What #@$^ bought for a years and rotten already”. I do not want many people to share same agony as my when a year later there BD-DVD are all rotten especially the smaller 0.1 layer. One of the guy point to me the NASA never use the newest technology on the line because of the safety, so they will go to the most prove and realiable technology ( Just don’t use until it is very old and rotten because it will sure start coming off and break down). I would wait until there is not problem report with the HD-DVD and then pick it up, and it will be the same with BD-DVD also. I will be more early adopter for HD-DVD then BD-DVD though because so far I do not have any problem with my DVD yet.
Sorry misspelling ( I screamed very loud and not screamed very load)
Odyssey67, I suspect we will just have to disagree.
On one point though, you don’t add up the entire industry as a cost when counting costs on the lines. You don’t add the costs for company B adding a production line when figuring how much company A is going to charge for a product. Company B could do a very stupid implementation which costs 10 times as much as company A’s implementation. Thus company A has a cost advantage. When passing on costs to the consumer 99% of the time company A will use their lower cost as a competitive advantage rather than charging what company B needs to charge just to break even. Therefore it does not matter what the industry as a whole will have to pay. It matters what each individual company has to pay.
“So, for well over 100% more money, you bring a product with, maybe 25% more capacity to a market where the customers…” I still contend the additional cost for Blu-ray Disks is not significant (especially when amortized over the life of the line). It most definitely is not 100% more money. And it’s 67% more capacity, not 25%.
Odyssey67, it is fun discussing this with you. You have a good way of putting forth your position. I just happen to disagree with it.
The Grim, IIRC the HD DVD camp demonstrated a 38.5 GB disk. It had 30 GB on one side (the standard HD DVD dual layer density) and 8.5 GB on the other side (the standard DVD dual layer density). I have not heard of anyone doing a 45 GB disk.
Additionally, both HD DVD and BD use blue lasers so there is no advantage in either camp there.
Finally, optical disks need to be treated with care. Even the old (relative term) audio CDs get scratched beyond usable form if they are not handled with a bit of care. Initally the BD camp had a *huge* disadvantage with this regard. The data layer is very close to the surface when compared to traditional DVDs and the HD DVD camp. Thus scratches, even minor ones, were much more detremental to the disk. (The surface of the disk is closer to the object plane of the sensor reading the reflected blue laser light in BD, and therefore the scratches have a greater effect on being able to read the data layer. They could have gotten around this issue by making the depth of field of the sensor extremely shallow, but that would have made the cost of the sensor prohibitively high.) Originally the BD group was claiming the disks needed to be kept in a carrier of some type even when placed into the reader (like the original DVD-ROM disks). The BD camp has changed their surface coating to a much, much harder material. They now claim surface scratches, with normal care, are no longer a problem. Just don’t clean your disks with steel wool.
leodavinci:
Intel wants ability to make authorized copies and/or streaming for its new entertainment system…
http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050927_190208.html
Shadowself:
Thanks, I enjoyed it too. However, it may not be over yet (hahaha)!
We both may need to bye “down” a drink – he/she has introduced an article that clarifies some things for both of us. And, I think, backs up what I’ve been saying (so obviously I’m happy about that too).
It’s from Tom’s Hardware, which is another site I trust a lot. It’s very thorough, but here are some pertinient quotes vis a vis what we’ve been discussing:
“Maintaining low disc replication costs affects the consumer price for media, said Ribas, which would play into any price/performance evaluation. A (current) disc production factory can make minor upgrades to its equipment (to produce HD-DVD disks), he stated, with the result being equipment that can produce both conventional DVD as well as HD DVD. … Ribas said it would cost as much as $1.7 million per production line to install Blu-ray disc production equipment, and as much as $2.0 million for each new mastering system installed. That’s a significant expense, he explained, for a business which only turns over a 10 percent margin.”
That 10% margin was the figure I didn’t have, but was what I suspected (even a little higher than I thought). Even over the lifetime of the technology, it would be unlikely that most companies would be patient enough to make back their money on anything less than that kind of slim margin – so prices almost certainly would go up, long term.
Next quote: “The surprise entry in Microsoft’s and Intel’s list of (reasons to go with HD-DVD) … is disc storage capacity. On paper, Blu-ray appears to have the advantage… Capacity, said Ribas, “used to be the biggest advantage of Blu-ray, and we believed it. We thought, they’ll get 50 GByte BD-ROM discs working, but it’s not happening, and it’s nowhere in sight. There are not even pilots. It’s only in the lab that they are building these discs.” With regard to demonstrated capacity, he told us, HD DVD-ROM actually leads BD-ROM by a score of 30 GByte to 25 GByte. “
My statement about 25% more capacity was a quick guess based on half of this information. See here to see that Toshiba is planning a triple layer 45Gb HD-DVD disk:
http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2005_05/pr1002.htm
and I assumed that the BluRay guys were at least able to double their single layer 25Gb capacity. Factoring in maybe a little wishful thinking by Toshiba, I guessed a 25% advantage for BluRay. However, now we see that BluRay is actually running into some unknown problems. Not even pilot examples of the double sided BluRay disks are available, at this late date? That’s not a good thing.
So we owe some thanks to “down” for doing his homework this morning – appreciate it, man!
An interesting article via down.
However (isn’t there always one?), here is an article with a very different take from back in May 2005 (http://news.designtechnica.com/article7528.html). It states in part, “Sony has developed equipment to streamline the disc mastering process by reducing the eleven steps currently used in DVD mastering to five for BD-ROM. This mastering process, Phase Transition Mastering (PTM), requires as little as one-fifth of the space required for DVD mastering and the equipment can be configured to allow mastering of both BD-ROM and DVD-ROM on a single system. The first two commercial machines are for Technicolor and Cinram for Q2, 2005 installation.” Sounds like a very different story from the typical comments about how Blu-ray is going to be so much more expensive than HD DVD to produce.
With regard to the limit of 25 GB capacity, there are several articles which seem to dispute this. The first one I came across when doing a quick search is (http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050525_144443.html) which states in part, “Commercial mass production of Blu-ray media will begin after the completion of pilot production in July of this year. Initial production will include 25 GByte and 50 GByte media with tests of 200 GByte discs already being completed in labs, the Blu-ray Disc Association said. Availability of such capacities will be offered ‘depending on needs,’ the organization said.”
In a cursory search (I do try to have a life) I didn’t find any proof that any BDA member has a line up and running that produces dual layer (50 GB) disks, but I didn’t look very hard and in an equal time search I didn’t find any HD DVD member which claims to have a line up and running with dual layer (30 GB) either.
Shadowself:
Toshiba themselves are claiming they have dual layer, and every article I’ve seen on the subject verifies it!
Your articles are what we all thought was true … months ago. From the Tom’s article on the MS/Intel announcement, they too claim that was when they thought – that BluRay was the winning horse – even though they took an officially ‘neutral’ position. The problem is that those months have passed and their is nothing to show for the BluRay announcements except more announcements. Meanwhile, HD-DVD has actual dual layer, even dual format, disks.
Come on, man! MS and Intel weren’t partisans in this until yesterday. Rick Marquardt – the author of the Ars editorial – is not a partisan either; he’s an expert. The former made their decision based on some unique features HD-DVD consortium was supporting (like disks that can be copied to hard drives) that the BluRay guys wouldn’t commit to, and the fact that BluRay hadn’t delivered on their claims of super high capacity yet (and you have to get moving on these things at some point). The latter is backing HD-DVD because of the numbers – it’s objectively the more cost effective solution for everybody involved.
The BluRay technology camp will continue to cheer for their stuff because, if it’s adopted, they stand to get a cut of every disk and player made. The facts mean nothing to them. Yet, I’m kind of an ‘Xs & Os’ guy. For the companies that actually will be manufacturing disks, and for those of us buying them, there is now a wealth of information showing that HD-DVD is probably the better alternative. Unless you have a lot of stock tied up in the BluRay companies, I don’t undertstand why you’re holding on so tight. After all, it’s a disk not a religion.
I’ve got a life too (I think), so I’ll check back if you reply but this will have to be my last post. See you on the next one ~
Odyssey67 and Shadowself both of you are very funny. Let see the finish product first and we will see which is better or win the format war. Toshiba will come out with HD-DVD labtop in 2006, and Sony will come out with Playstation 3 (BU-DVD). I will get each and compare my experience between these two formats. Note! I will probably get PS3 six month after it came out because of many very bad past experience with early PS, PS2, and HD-walkman dics. Sony does not have good quality control for their early product and more prone to trouble then Panasonic, Toshiba and Apple. I do not have any trouble with any Apple product yet. I do keep all my early collection CDs and DVDs in the very protective case and away form hot and cold weather, so I point my finger at the quality of CD manufacture of the first generation CD.