Samsung to Launch Dual-standard DVD Player

[James Fee]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2005-09-06T084914Z_01_HO631701_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-SAMSUNG-DVD.XML' target='_blank'>http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2005-09-06T084914Z_01_HO631701_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-SAMSUNG-DVD.XML</a><br /><br /></div><i>"Samsung Electronics Co. will bring out a DVD machine next year capable of playing both Blu-ray and HD DVD if backers of the rival standards fail to agree on a unified format, a newspaper said. Competition between the two camps has hampered the launch of the next generation of optical disks, which will have greater capacity and higher definition, as movie studios hesitate to commit to printing disks on either standard. Samsung's head of consumer electronics, Choi Gee-sung, told the Financial Times Deutschland: "We would welcome a unified standard but if this doesn't come, which looks likely, we'll bring a unified solution to market."</i><br /><br /> <img src="http://www.digitalmediathoughts.com/images/samsung_logo.gif" /> <br /><br />I'm not surprised that Samsung would be able to do this, but it all may be moot as I'm not sure consumers are going to be enamored with either solution for watching DVDs. I'm still betting that consumers will just skip this "generation" and wait for the next better solution.<br /><br />HD DVD/Blu-Ray = LaserDisc

[Felix Torres]

I'm not ready to agree with you 100%...
...but I'm 80% there... ;-)

The idea of a dual format player sounds good on paper but the specs are different enough that a universal player is likely to feature at least three and most likely four different pickups. Doable but pricey. And demand will be uncertain. For Samsung, of course, this is just an exercise in brand-building so there is no reason not to do it as long as they don't actually expect massive sales.
Cause that is unlikely to happen this decade.

Personal observation of upscaled content leads me to believe there is just enough visual information in a *good-quality* 480i DVD stream that a premium upscaler can bring out, that blue-laser video will encounter *serious* credibility problems at least until native 1080p displays are common.

Or, to be a bit more blunt:
The vast majority of displays currently in use are 720p or lower.
On such devices it is very unlikely that blue-laser video can show enough quality improvement over upscaled 480 to justify the expense of moving to a $1000 player and a $50 disk. So the first-gen products are in fact very likely to follow the old laserdisc track, selling to the dedicated enthusiast market almost exclusively.
Good call there.

A few thoughts come to mind:
1- We've already seen a belated effort of late by the DVD-licensing body to limit upscaled output to hdcp'ed sources or, better yet, stamp it out completely. We're likely to see more of this.

2- Any dreams the content providers might have of selling $50 disks are just that; dreams. Consumers won't go for it.

3- Blu-ray's focus on capacity will be more of a calling card *after* players and content come down in price to current DVD prices ($100 players/$20 disks) at which point it will have a more compelling story than HD-DVD for repackaged TV content. One disk will be cheaper to make that 2 or 5, and TV season package prices are trending lower. Most recent releases are going for street prices of under $40. As the competition heats up further, I'm thinking $30 per season will be the sweet spot.

With Toshiba delaying the HD-DVD launch, presumably to firm up the spec for the triple-layer disk, and BD-ROM still at least a year away, content providers will likely have to take a closer look at WMV, Divx and MPEG4 as HD distribution mechanisms.

And finally, if the XBOX360 really does well, WMV HD will have a pre-established base of players for HD video on red-laser.

Bottom-line; it's back to square one: everything is in play...

[Jason Dunn]

The vast majority of displays currently in use are 720p or lower. On such devices it is very unlikely that blue-laser video can show enough quality improvement over upscaled 480 to justify the expense of moving to a $1000 player and a $50 disk. So the first-gen products are in fact very likely to follow the old laserdisc track, selling to the dedicated enthusiast market almost exclusively.

Very true. The difference between VHS and DVD was immense, and most people could see that. Many bought just for the improvements in media size/durability, etc. But HD DVDs? The justification just isn't there for the vast majority of people. I agree with you that HD-DVD and Blu-Ray are going to become the next Laserdisc - almost no one is going to buy the 1st gen hardware.

Most recent releases are going for street prices of under $40. As the competition heats up further, I'm thinking $30 per season will be the sweet spot.

Tell that to the bastards at Paramount who are charging $120 CND for Star Trek boxed sets. I was nuts for buying all of ST:TNG, DS9, and Voyager at those prices, but I'm going to try and be strong and not buy Enterprise until the prices come down. But yes, you're right, most are around those price points.

[Felix Torres]

Tell that to the bastards at Paramount who are charging $120 CND for Star Trek boxed sets. I was nuts for buying all of ST:TNG, DS9, and Voyager at those prices, but I'm going to try and be strong and not buy Enterprise until the prices come down. But yes, you're right, most are around those price points.

I've watched all the new shows and taped them as they ran.
I'd love to have good, clean copies on disk.
But I'm not buying a single DVD set until they come down to reasonable levels.
Stargate, however, I'm up to date on thanks to a BB sale that amounted to essentially 25% off the regular $40-some price. :-)

There is still a big untapped market in series sales if the studios only realized it. Folks will buy even old shows if the price is decent.

[Phoenix]

I agree with you, Felix.

Unless everyone is going to upgrade to HD TVs, then indeed, there wouldn't be any reason for anyone to upgrade. And even with an HD TV, I still could see no reason to upgrade with all this mess going on. And $50 a disc? Get real. :roll:

As I've said before, these wars are so stupid because apart from someone coming out with a player that could handle everything (like Samsung plans to), there's hardly a shred of hope that anyone would buy two players and divide their collection among two competing formats, which could be worthless in the near future. This is just bad for all of us and these companies unwilling to create a unified format is motivated only by their disgusting levels of greed and ego.

I tell everyone that I talk to about this to pass on it until the industry figures something out. The players will be too expensive (and apparently the discs, too), and everything in its current state will be too confusing for the consumer.

I've also mentioned before that as it stands now, when you buy a DVD, you just find which movie you want, and buy it. End of story. Having two standards would make things confusing enough for people, but the real kicker is that movie studios are only committing to one standard or the other, not both - which is what will make it utterly exasperating for folks and I believe completely unsuccessful in the marketplace.

Yeah, I'm with the "I'll pass" camp.

[Jeremy Charette]

...content providers will likely have to take a closer look at WMV, Divx and MPEG4 as HD distribution mechanisms.

And finally, if the XBOX360 really does well, WMV HD will have a pre-established base of players for HD video on red-laser.

Bottom-line; it's back to square one: everything is in play...

The jury is still out on WMV HD. There are already existing WMV HD DVD players, but the WMV HD DVDs that are out there (all red laser discs) don't play on them! The content is protected, and the players don't have the ability to do any DRM verification to enable the content to be played. I am waiting to find out if the Xbox 360 will overcome this obstacle, or if Microsoft will even bother pushing WMV HD on red laser discs as a viable alternative to blue laser discs. I doubt it. They have an interest in HD-DVD, as they have already signed a partnership agreement with Toshiba.

I doubt content providers will back red laser alternatives. They will still want some promise of content protection, likely HDCP or some other upcoming alternative. This is going to leave a lot of people with component video inputs out in the cold, and burn alot of consumers.

If it were me, I'd want quick adoption. Here's a roadmap:

- 720p on a red laser disc in WMV HD format (upscaled to 1080i by the player if necessary) would be a solution that would be adopted quickly by consumers
- Eliminate content protection, other than copy protection on the discs (as existing DVDs have)
- Allow players to use unprotected Component Video outputs
- Price it around what current players/discs are at, say $200 for players and $20 for discs

Interesting that you mention the Xbox 360 as an installed base of WMV HD DVD players. When the PS2 first came out, it was sold out in Japan for months, not because people were playing games, but because they were buying it to use as a DVD player. It was half the price of other first-gen DVD players on the market there at the time. As a result, Sony lost a ton of money the first two years. They had planned on consumers buying lots of games, and making money on the per-game licensing revenue. A lot of PS3s were sold at a loss, but not many games were sold with them. A financial disaster.

[Felix Torres]

[Interesting that you mention the Xbox 360 as an installed base of WMV HD DVD players. When the PS2 first came out, it was sold out in Japan for months, not because people were playing games, but because they were buying it to use as a DVD player. It was half the price of other first-gen DVD players on the market there at the time. As a result, Sony lost a ton of money the first two years. They had planned on consumers buying lots of games, and making money on the per-game licensing revenue. A lot of PS3s were sold at a loss, but not many games were sold with them. A financial disaster.

Microsoft is not only courting this scenario, they are embracing it. Witness their active promotion of the 360's media capabilities, both remote and local. Given their desire to quickly ramp up their installed base for the new platform, they seem willing to embrace a lower attach rate than the record high achieved by the first Xbox.

Unlike Sony, however, MS has ways of directly making money of non-gamers buying 360's as media devices *if* they choose to implement them; namely online music and video. Plus, MS is not adverse to investing in their own ecosystem and Xboxes used as media extenders will need PCs on the back end, preferably MCEs, so their agenda is furthered one way or another.

Also, the 360 will be running low on games early in its life-cycle, like all consoles do, so anything that boosts sales at launch is worth the bleeding.
Finally, this is shaping up as a singularly tight fiscal year for Sony so anything that depresses their Playstation sales will stress their PS3 budget and might force them to fully back off their half-promise to ship BD-ROM drives on the 360. Which in turn relieves MS from having to counter and saves them long-term money.

Which provides yet another nail in the first-gen blue-laser coffins. 8)

Now, the thing is, I don't think blue laser is totally dead; just that the products and pricing need serious rethinking. The market is changing too fast and what seemed like compelling features last year or six months ago are now yawners.

Basically, HD-DVD needs to rethink its capacity configuration, BD-Rom would be well advised to reconsider its draconian security, and both need to reconsider their pricing.

[Phoenix]

...Given their desire to quickly ramp up their installed base for the new platform, they seem willing to embrace a lower attach rate than the record high achieved by the first Xbox.

I not so sure about that. Microsoft has made it very clear that they believe the first company to sell 10,000,000 units this round, wins. They'll have to embrace whatever happens and deal with it, but not for the sake of slacking. I don't think they mind lower attach rates, I think they're looking to sell more than ever before.


Unlike Sony, however, MS has ways of directly making money of non-gamers buying 360's as media devices *if* they choose to implement them; namely online music and video. Plus, MS is not adverse to investing in their own ecosystem and Xboxes used as media extenders will need PCs on the back end, preferably MCEs, so their agenda is furthered one way or another.

In this way, MS does have an advantage.


Also, the 360 will be running low on games early in its life-cycle, like all consoles do, so anything that boosts sales at launch is worth the bleeding.

Finally, this is shaping up as a singularly tight fiscal year for Sony so anything that depresses their Playstation sales will stress their PS3 budget and might force them to fully back off their half-promise to ship BD-ROM drives on the 360. Which in turn relieves MS from having to counter and saves them long-term money.

Which provides yet another nail in the first-gen blue-laser coffins. 8)

Although I don't believe that BD is going to be as successful as it could be if it were the only format and with better preliminary pricing, I don't know that we can swing that hammer just yet, because what you mention remains to be seen. At this point, and based on when they plan to ship the PS3, I would count on Sony shipping the PS3 with BD drives.

I've always wondered how Microsoft was going to handle this aspect of their machine since out of the two main formats, BD seems to have the advantage technologically and in terms of support from the studios. IMO, it's not a good time to invest in either BD or HD drives. What's left? FVD?


Now, the thing is, I don't think blue laser is totally dead; just that the products and pricing need serious rethinking. The market is changing too fast and what seemed like compelling features last year or six months ago are now yawners.

I would agree that things need rethinking. Good grief, this is an understatement.

Now as far as "yawners" are concerned, if you're expanding on the earlier point you made about people not seeing all the benefits with lower end TVs, with that, I'd have to agree - HiDef DVDs would not be effective. So what would people have to get excited about?

Aside: Do more people have HD TVs than what we realize?


Basically, HD-DVD needs to rethink its capacity configuration, BD-Rom would be well advised to reconsider its draconian security, and both need to reconsider their pricing.

How about they just scrap the crap and start all over? :lol: Maybe work together this time around?

Hey, I can dream, can't I? :silly:

[James Fee]

As I said above, I think people will skip all this. None of the headaches are worth any of the benefits for either format. HD DVD is a 50% solution and Blu-Ray is a 150% solution (offering up way too much). DVDs and VHS worked because it was simple, and neither of these "solutions" are.

[Felix Torres]

I not so sure about that. Microsoft has made it very clear that they believe the first company to sell 10,000,000 units this round, wins. They'll have to embrace whatever happens and deal with it, but not for the sake of slacking. I don't think they mind lower attach rates, I think they're looking to sell more than ever before.

Although I don't believe that BD is going to be as successful as it could be if it were the only format and with better preliminary pricing, I don't know that we can swing that hammer just yet, because what you mention remains to be seen. At this point, and based on when they plan to ship the PS3, I would count on Sony shipping the PS3 with BD drives.

I've always wondered how Microsoft was going to handle this aspect of their machine since out of the two main formats, BD seems to have the advantage technologically and in terms of support from the studios. IMO, it's not a good time to invest in either BD or HD drives. What's left? FVD?

Now as far as "yawners" are concerned, if you're expanding on the earlier point you made about people not seeing all the benefits with lower end TVs, with that, I'd have to agree - HiDef DVDs would not be effective. So what would people have to get excited about?

Aside: Do more people have HD TVs than what we realize?

How about they just scrap the crap and start all over? :lol: Maybe work together this time around?

Hey, I can dream, can't I? :silly:

1- Uh, that's what I said; MS is embracing the lower attach rate because they expect the media features will sell boxes early. High attach rate = better profits; low attach rate = bigger losses. MS is not a charity so if they accept low-attach rates its to get the bigger installed base sooner and make Sony react.

2- You may count on Sony shipping PS3 with BD, but back at E3 Sony told financial analysts *not* to. In a great example of talking out of both sides of the mouth, they told the general media the PS3 supported BD at noon, but in the evening told analysts (who were ready to downgrade the stock) that they would only do it if the drives were available and cheap. Me, I think if they actually ship PS3 in 06, it's without BD. If it's 07, it's *with* BD.

3- Yawner is about people looking at blue laser video and seeing no great improvement over a good DVD on a good HD display. Obviously a good hd video on a good display will beat a bad DVD-transfer, but early HDs are going to be of recent releases, which will be on good DVD transfers. Yes, true HD video *is* better than upscaled DVD, but not that much better. Not $1000 better, and not $300 better. So blue laser players will have to be under $200 (current street pricing for SOA upscaling players) before they can take over.

4- Basically MS is betting that with on-the-fly texture decompression in hardware, 360 games won't be crowding the 9gb limit of DVDs. Like all bets, there is a gamble there... As it stands, if games do fit, and blue laser players don't start to ship until late 06 or even 07, then the lack of HD disks is a non-issue 'til 09 and by then everybody will be talking about xbox3 coming in 2010. Biggest exposure is '08. Theoretically, they could move the next-gen console up a year and *really* squeeze Sony.

5- Actually, there are *less* HDs out there than people think *they* have. All those ED panels and HD-ready tube TVs (directview and RP) that can't really display 1080 will show no benefit. And there are a lot of "hd" Plasmas that are actually 1024 by 1024...

6- Alas, too many folks have too much invested in the two specs to back out, which is why attempts to negotiate a convergence failed.

Mind you, if the studios price the hybrid disks at DVD prices and the CE vendors can get to the $200 price by '07 they might make a splash, but right now ramp-up of this tech is looking to be 4+ years away from mainstream at best. At worst, it will burn the studios so badly we'll be stuck with DVD 'til 2020...

[Phoenix]

1- Uh, that's what I said; MS is embracing the lower attach rate because they expect the media features will sell boxes early. High attach rate = better profits; low attach rate = bigger losses. MS is not a charity so if they accept low-attach rates its to get the bigger installed base sooner and make Sony react.

When you referred to "lower attach rate", you must have been referring to lack of game sales, then. I thought you were somehow referring to the Xbox itself, which didn't make sense to me.

With the media/extender capabilities of the Xbox 360, Microsoft is not only in more of a position to do this - and who knows, maybe it'll help boost sales of MCE boxes - but good-ol'-Billy certainly wants peoples' living rooms - has for a long time now (which is his main focus, not games) - and LARs or no LARs, I'm sure will do whatever it takes this round to make that happen. Just don't mention all this to J Allard. :wink:

2- You may count on Sony shipping PS3 with BD, but back at E3 Sony told financial analysts *not* to. In a great example of talking out of both sides of the mouth, they told the general media the PS3 supported BD at noon, but in the evening told analysts (who were ready to downgrade the stock) that they would only do it if the drives were available and cheap. Me, I think if they actually ship PS3 in 06, it's without BD. If it's 07, it's *with* BD.

Well in light of all that, since it could be interpreted as posturing by Sony in one direction and/or the other in an effort to tell one side or the other or both what they may want to hear, then there would be no other logical conclusion at this point other than to ask, "Who can say what will happen a year from now?" And the answer to that question would be: "No one... except maybe for Sony."

3- Yawner is about people looking at blue laser video and seeing no great improvement over a good DVD on a good HD display. Obviously a good hd video on a good display will beat a bad DVD-transfer, but early HDs are going to be of recent releases, which will be on good DVD transfers. Yes, true HD video *is* better than upscaled DVD, but not that much better. Not $1000 better, and not $300 better. So blue laser players will have to be under $200 (current street pricing for SOA upscaling players) before they can take over.

And whatever the improvement is, the bottom line is, people are going to need great HD capable displays to take advantage of what BD/HD will have to offer, anyway. I'm sure there are many people out there who aren't even thinking about that. Sort of makes a person wonder how much adoption this technology would even have, since most people can't afford HD-capable displays in the first place.

4- Basically MS is betting that with on-the-fly texture decompression in hardware, 360 games won't be crowding the 9gb limit of DVDs. Like all bets, there is a gamble there... As it stands, if games do fit, and blue laser players don't start to ship until late 06 or even 07, then the lack of HD disks is a non-issue 'til 09 and by then everybody will be talking about xbox3 coming in 2010. Biggest exposure is '08. Theoretically, they could move the next-gen console up a year and *really* squeeze Sony.

That's an interesting perspective.

5- Actually, there are *less* HDs out there than people think *they* have. All those ED panels and HD-ready tube TVs (directview and RP) that can't really display 1080 will show no benefit. And there are a lot of "hd" Plasmas that are actually 1024 by 1024...

That's what I'd tend to think. So again, what could the adoption rate of BD/HD truly be? Seems quite premature at this point just for this reason alone.

6- Alas, too many folks have too much invested in the two specs to back out, which is why attempts to negotiate a convergence failed.

Oh, I know - I was only kidding around. Ultimately, it always comes down to greed and ego. The industry should have come together from the very beginning.

Mind you, if the studios price the hybrid disks at DVD prices and the CE vendors can get to the $200 price by '07 they might make a splash, but right now ramp-up of this tech is looking to be 4+ years away from mainstream at best. At worst, it will burn the studios so badly we'll be stuck with DVD 'til 2020...

One thing's certain: it'll be an interesting landscape.

[Philip Colmer]

Personal observation of upscaled content leads me to believe there is just enough visual information in a *good-quality* 480i DVD stream that a premium upscaler can bring out, that blue-laser video will encounter *serious* credibility problems at least until native 1080p displays are common.

Or, to be a bit more blunt:
The vast majority of displays currently in use are 720p or lower.
On such devices it is very unlikely that blue-laser video can show enough quality improvement over upscaled 480 to justify the expense of moving to a $1000 player and a $50 disk.
Surely, though, if you are investing in a blue-laser product, it is because you already have a hi-def screen? I really don't see why anyone would contemplate getting the blue-laser player first and a hi-def screen second.

With that in mind, if you've got a hi-def screen, no upscaler, however good, can recreate information that has been lost because the resolution is lower. Take these screengrabs as examples:

http://images.digitalmedianet.com/2005/Week_37/bdu9endu/story/originalm2t_1920.jpg

http://images.digitalmedianet.com/2005/Week_37/bdu9endu/story/480p_1922x1080.jpg

The first is from a hi-def video stream, the second has been downsampled to DV and then upsampled back to 1080 resolution. If you look at the back of the boat, the first shows the name very clearly - it is completely lost in the second picture.

I'm not saying that there aren't some valid points being made in this discussion, and there are other sites where similar views are being aired, but I do think that as displays get bigger - and hi-def capable - you are definitely going to start seeing the worst of existing content. We definitely need HD content for our HD screens.

--Philip