Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Talkstr8t
I have to take issue with a number of your assertions here.
|
Been known to happen...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Talkstr8t
You seem to be pointedly avoiding discussion of H.264 High Profile, which wasn't part of the original tests but is considered by most to be at least as good as and probably capable of better than VC-1, and which is in both specs.
|
I merely quote what I've seen.
I welcome any creditable source with newer info.
As things stand, all the codec decisions were made and reported 12-18 months ago so they were made based on the data available then.
Is anybody other than the satellite guys using h.264 as an HD commercial content distribution system? Apple has shown interest in it but they haven't done anything meaningful with it yet, right?
I don't think any of the US studios are planning to use it but I can easily imagine some ABM outfit in europe or Asia going with it.
I do doubt it'll have any significant market impact in the format war any time soon. (06-07)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Talkstr8t
Most titles currently-released will fit fine on a 25GB disc if encoded in VC-1 or H.264. Yes, it would be at the cost of either including lossless audio or including lots of HD bonus content, but in the short-term it would definitely solve the comparative PQ issue.
|
Of course they would. The hybrid HD-DVD in the review used only one HD-DVD-layer (15GB).
VC-1 can fit an HD movie in 11GB, so 25GB leaves plenty of room for audio and sundries. That is why the use of MPEG2 *combined* with the lack of BD-50 is hurtling the BD cause. If Sony had gotten past their MS-phobia and actually used VC-1 from the start they would at least have equal PQ.
Wouldn't produce a *better* product, though, would it?
I already pointed this out; BD is more expensive--delivering equal quality at a higher price isn't going to work to their advantage. They need to be *better* to justify the higher cost. And they're not going to have a better Codec; the best they can do is equal. So "better" has to come from something else.
And audio is a *big* part of the home theater/golden eyeball arena so don't assume the lack of lossless is not going to cost them high-end sales.
They're running out of places to be "better" without BD-50.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Talkstr8t
You're ignoring the fact that by all credible analyses Toshiba is losing nearly $200 per player, which a)makes the prospect of a $300 player difficult, and b)reduces the incentive for other manufacturers to jump into the market. Further, the fact that Toshiba had to throw a very high-powered CPU into the HD-A1 (a 2.4GHz Pentium 4) further suggests cost reduction will be difficult since typical systems-on-a-chip have far less CPU power.- Talk
|
I'm only talking about the near-term, you know.
Everything I discuss is only focused on the 06-07 time period.
And I *have* pointed out that Toshiba needs to move to a true CE architecture for HD-DVD at some point.
The analyses, are as credible (or not) as anything out there, but they have hidden assumptions in them; they assume MS and Intel are actually charging Toshiba full market price. Ditto for other parts suppliers.
But, when you're talking about ramping up a multi-billion dollar standard you hope to milk for 10 years, losing a couple million upfront is not a big deal just the ante to get into the game.
I don't think anybody expect these things to sell by the million, do they?
So far its really only tens of thousands, which is why I said it is way early.
(in other words, Toshiba's "massive" losses are way less than Apple's advertising costs.)
Oh, and the way to cut costs on these things isn't system on-a-chip, but rather though DSPs and fixed-function logic. And those, at the required volumes, will get you there in the 07-08 time frame. Outside the scope of the period I talked about.
(Boundaries matter when you're on the outside, looking in.)
Using P4 is strictly a time-to-market decision.
As for alternate suppliers of players, well, Toshiba has RCA onboard now and they have Cina, Inc ramping up.
Lets's see what CES 07 brings, shall we?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Talkstr8t
I don't disagree that feasible manufacturability of BD50 is probably a requirement for BD's success, but you overstate the other issues. There will be at least five major brand BD players on the market within the next few months (Samsung, Pioneer, Philips, Panasonic, Sony) plus the PS3. This equals far more retail availability, more advertising, and more features. The $500 or $600 PS3 certainly does reduce the price gap with HD-DVD, and the number of titles will likely catch up and surpass HD-DVD simply due to the far higher studio support. Yes, BD-50 needs to be available. Otherwise there is no inherent Blu-ray deficiency which six months of product and content development won't cure.
|
None of which will have any impact this year.
More BD players? Yes, but none under $1000.
But the main BD issues are *not* with the players; its the discs,
That's not getting fixed this year.
Not even sure they can backtrack and move to a modern codec before XMAS 07.
In the short-term, which is what I'm talking about, their only option is to get BD-50 out the door.
We just have different ideas of how fast the studios can move from one mastering system to another.
What I've seen and heard says it is a 12-18 month effort.
If Sony decided to swallow their pride and move to VC-1 today, they still couldn't get content using it out before late 07.
Do consider that I said that all of Sony's choices are defensible, *by themselves*.
What is messing them up is the *combination* of factors of an old codec, a manufacturing ramp-up problem, and underestimating the opposition.
Plus, the old Sony stand-bye of *overestimating* themselves.
Sony is very much a NIH house; they are very insular.
They *always* over-promise and under-deliver. Sometimes, they get away with it (PS2, where they FUD'ed Dreamcast with vapor promises that never came to fruition and basically bluffed Sega out of the market) but of late this is really starting to hurt them.
The key difference between HD-DVD and BD is that Toshiba/NEC started out with a goal of making a product that could be developed and manufactured without requiring major "scheduled breakthroughs". So they sacrificed theoretical storage capability for a cheaper to develop and manufacture system that they knew could hit the market by 06 with full capabilities.
Sony chose to push the envelope and trust their engineers to figure out the unknowns and make breakthroughs when needed. They chose to go with higher hardware costs in return for cheaper backend costs. That is how they got studio backing ("no new development tools needed!").
But they over-estimated their ability to deliver on time, as they usually do. (Even the PS3 is running 6 months late, don't forget; the thing was due this past spring.)
Sure, Sony can ship competitive movies on BD25 if they swallow their pride and backtrack on their promises to the studios. (Competitive but not better.) But then their equation collapses. Cause you get the worst of all worlds; higher backend costs for the new development systems, higher manufacturing costs for the discs themselves (which rely on a Sony-exclusive foil that is not cheap), and higher-cost players with lower capacity.
Extra hardware features aren't going to win this war. And neither is the PS3. This war is going to be won the old-fashioned way; win the early-adopters first, build up your reputation, hit $299 first.
BD is lagging in all these areas.
Again: it is way too early to pick a winner.
The HD-DVD crew can still screw-up--but you can't pin all your hopes on that. The race will most likely be settled in the next year or so, so switching codecs is *not* going to save BD. Getting BD-50 out the door will. Maybe.
(We have yet to hear from MS on the hardware front, you know; some of the rumors... :wink: )
It really all does hinge on BD-50 getting here sooner rather than later.
Or else...
PS - Remember I mentioned BD requires a Sony-supplied foil?
Apparently that is sticking in the Eurocrat's craw:
http://news.com.com/European+panel+i...l?tag=nefd.top
They seem most concerned about the studios and the disc manufacturers than the player makers, so any antitrust action in this non-existent market is more likely aimed at Sony or MS than Toshiba.