[PCWorld]

Post your comments for HD DVD Price Cut Shakes Up Format Wars here

[Crooksie]

This is war is so dumb. I mean neither side is reinventing the wheel here. I'm going to tell you which side will win right now. However, gets the closest and fastest price match to a Standard DVD. I have a Upscale to 1080i and a PS3. And to me there is no difference. And I'm a tech wizard compared to those who bought a 98 dollar HDDVD player in Wal-Mart of all places. Since some studios are in one camp or another you both will lose because all camps are still in DVDs which you can no upscale fully. The only way to win is to compromise the technology get all camps involved and drive the price to the sky. That's what you should do.

[jediman98]

It's the price point which will push the success of either camp. PS3 was suppose to bring BD to every home on a chariot, but the sales aren't there. HD DVD was stalling on sales until the $100 players...sparking life in a war that has companies and consumers split. I support HD DVD and have already begun my new HD DVD collection. Yes it's a gamble but I prefer HD DVD over BD because of overall performance. If only Sony and Toshiba worked together to build ONE impressive solution...but Sony had to do their own thing.

Go HD DVD!! :)

[lapavoni]

I bought the $98 HD A2 from Walmart and am happy with it so far. I think the point the author made about getting a sub $100 upconverting DVD player with the HD DVD as a "bonus" is right on. I've been eying an Oppo for the last year. If I wanted only an upconverting player, and the best available, I would have purchased the Oppo. Now I have a moderately good upconverting player with HD DVD functionality built in. Although I prefer HD DVD over Blu Ray, I think Blu Ray has the edge right now for a few reasons. First, I went into Blockbuster to view their inventory of High-Def movies and to my chagrin, they only stocked Blu Ray movies. And second, until other vendors start mass producing the HD DVD players, there won't be mass appeal. When Onkyo comes out with theirs, that will help the "audiophile/videophile" segment of the market. We'll see what happens. Price is definitely the main factor .. for the players as well as the media.

[tomjennings83]

people only care about price anymore, it doesnt matter how good the equipment is, everyone is cheap in reality

[lapavoni]

I agree with you. Even with "shareware", "freeware" and free OS's, people didn't buy the hardware (PCs) en masse until they hit the sub $1000 mark. If Blu Ray players ever approach the price of HD DVD ones, they'll probably take the lead overall (units, movies and studio support). Of course, people forget that Betamax actually lasted in production from 1975 until 2002, so we might have two formats of HiDef Video for quite a while.

[Hondo]

I'm not buying either format until I can play and record the discs in HD. And the price must be below $300 ... PERIOD ! Buying a player only is a total waste.

[free2speak]

Crooksie Your little "tech wizard" comment implies you know so much more than the poor fools that took advantage of a killer deal at Walmart. I will put my tech experience up against yours any day.

I bought a Toshiba HD-A2 for $98.87 and I would do it again. I saw the HD-A2 for $299 a few weeks ago. I read a lot of comsumer reviews that said the HD-A2 was a great HD DVD player. In fact the HD-A2 was the best selling Hi-Def player at this major US retailer. I have been waiting for the cable companies, the movie companies, and the TV stations to deliver HD content to me. I have watched the Hi-Def format war closely. Inexpensive players will speed adoption. Only a small number of Sony fans think consumers should pay extra for Blu-Ray. PS3 was supposed to bring Sony a monopoly in Hi-Def DVD's too. Unfortunately, for Sony the PS3 has failed because of high prices and poor games. Now it comes down to how many stand alone players are out there? It seems obvious to me that the lower price of HD DVD makes it the logical choice to make the magic first million number. No I don't count the PS3 because it is intended for games and most people buy it for games. The PS3 is also much more expensive than an HD DVD player. The quality of HD DVD and Blu-Ray are identical. In fact HD DVD is better because it has a standard that all players must meet; instead of Blu-Ray's we will come out with new features that obsolete your early player. The only advantage Blu-Ray has is storage capacity. HD DVD can hold 4 hours of HD video per side so I am not worried about extra storage. Let's see $99-$399 for HD DVD, or $499 and up for Blu-Ray? Do the math.

[vwbeetlebailey]

the HD-A2 does not support 1080p. that's why it was $100. now that stock on the player is gone the price of the new gen. is around $250.

[free2speak]

I am an early adopter for HDTV. My 48" widescreen does 1080i which makes it a perfect match for the HD-A2. TV has always been interlaced which most viewers never complain about. Progressive scan is nice to have, but no were near the must have so many "experts" make it out to be. Again it is a $99 player do I really care? 1080P for my current television is a waste of money. It will be years from now before I upgrade my HDTV again. Oh yeah if you plan on watching HDTV you will always be watching 1080i because 1080i is the standard for HDTV. Most people would never notice the difference in video quality. 1080P is an afterthought capability for Hi-Def players. If 1080i is so terrible then why was it chosen for the new HDTV standard?

[vwbeetlebailey]

most all hd-dvd's and blu-ray's support 1080p. that is the whole point of watching a movie on disk vs watching it on broadcast tv. IT LOOKS BETTER.

[Barrington]

If HD DVDs cost about U$100(£50)in the UK-millions would be sold.
Would not automatically buy one. Despite-cheap enough to throw away:
1)Space required for HD equipment;
A)Cable- or Satelite box.
BC) Blu-ray and(&)HD DVD player
D)AVR(Audio,Video Receiver)
Further problems when available:-
1)Fully featured HDMI 1.3 products
2)Blu-ray & HD DVD(Toshiba RD-A103) recordable players - Any person interested in the next recording technologies should place, 'Toshiba Vardia' into for example the Google's browser and carryout searches:

www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GZHZ,GZHZ:2007-30,GZHZ:en&q=%27Toshiba+Vardia%27

[http://www.hdtvuk.tv/2007/11/toshiba_launchi.html]

[http://www.hdtvuk.tv/2006/06/toshibarda1co.html]

[http://www.hdtvorigin.com/hdtv/toshiba-vardia-rd-a600-and-rd-a300-hd-dvd-recorders-introduction/]

3)HD Freeview Playback(Pause,rewind & forward play Live TV,One touch recording;set reminders & TV series e.g.soaps,TV Guide(EPG),record to hard disk drive(HDD) without having to find a space as with VHS/SVHS recorders & having to subscribe for HD)
4)Twin digital tuners-record 2 channels whilst watching a 3rd
5)Ability to upscale;TV,Cable,& Satelite,& not just DVDs to almost 1080p standard
6)HD sound,& wireless connectivity
7)1080i-Possible health problems-chosen because cheaper than 1080p
8)1080p superior than 1080i- E.g. quality of sound in slow and fast motion (skipping frames) -Maybe, 1080p Broadcast in 4/5 years
9)HD DVD superior than Blu-ray films
Message was edited by: Barrington - I have inserted a web page for people who are interested in HD DVD recordable players that we don't have access to in the west or at least in the UK. I have also changed the title, because some people are taking things out of context.

[free2speak]

1080P will never be broadcast in the USA. The standard is set at 1080i in fact broadcasters broadcast many shows in 720P. If you setup a 1080i HDTV and a 1080P HDTV with the same source and stand in front of the screen so you can try to count pixels you might notice a slight benefit to 1080P. Solid backgrounds like PC displays have more of an issue with interlace flicker. But if you are sitting several feet back you will notice no difference in quality. If you were watching my 48" widescreen with surround system hooked up to the Toshiba HD-A2 you would be saying WOW! You wouldn't be sitting there thinking you needed 1080P to enjoy it. You can always wait for better technology that might come tomorrow, but there might be great technology that you can use today. Now if you'll excuse me I have a movie to watch. I will be sitting on my couch enjoying HD DVD in 1080i.

[vwbeetlebailey]

i have a 57" samsung dlp 1080p tv with blu-rays played on a ps3 and hd-dvds played on a xbox 360 add-on in my living room. in my kids room i have a 50" samsung dlp 1080i/720p. and the 57" 1080p looks a lot better. i bet your 48" hd set up looks great. but how much money do you have in it? i've got about $3000 with tv, ps3, and sound. and the ps3 does great with upconverting my dvds.

[free2speak]

Mitsubishi 48" HDTV, Toshiba HD-A2, Xbox 360, Sony DVD carousel, Yamaha AV Receiver, Polk speakers all around, M&K subwoofer. The whole system cost over $5,000. Toshiba HD-A2 is also a great upconverting DVD player. If someone really wants an HD DVD player with 1080P they are already available, but they will cost at least $399.

[Barrington]

Impossible to stop the advancement of technology. Blu-ray, probably took the attitude that they were not going to include interactive features, but on the 31st October 2007, in the UK have had to do a 'U' turn.

It has also been claimed that a Japanese firm has already created at least sixteen times 1080p standard. Probably, about three companies including Sony has already created 4Kx2K TVs. Gamers has already substantially pushed forward the technology in the computer field and no doubt will do the same with HD (high definition) technology. Picture quality in the last few years have substantially improved and it will continue: 1080p, OLED (Sony), 3D (Samsung and Mitsubishi), LED (Sony), LCD (Sony), Plasma (Pioneer and Panasonic) SED (Toshiba and Canon - Lawsuit problems), Laser (possibly), 4kx2k. Yoiu have forgotten that the only reason why we are getting HD is because, 'The Establishment' are not making enough money. Companies that cannot afford to not be able to compete with HD products, because otherwise they will go bankrupt. Even Sony has sacked numerous people and sold off assets. Broadcasters despite that they don't like spending money are being forced to create programmes in HD to be able to sell their programmes. If broadcasters will make more money by having 1080p channels do you think that they will create 1920x1080p channels or state that 1080i and 720p is the standard. Numerous standards have been ignored by, 'The Establishment' and 1080i will be just another one.

From what I have read, interlace can possibly cause health problems. For example flashing lights make some people ill. Since, 720p resolution is used then I donot see why 1080p cannot be used. This is because why convert to 720P and not 1080p. It probably isnot possible to store interlace material long term has you can with progressive material, which is another advantage of 1080p. Instead of having to decide whether to have 720p or 1080i or to switch for example when a fast moving object appears in the screen by just having 1080p solves the problem. If you can see pixels than I agree with you that if you sit far enough back then you won't see them, but if you had for example a top of the range Sony 1080p TVshowing an excellent HD DV film then you should notice an enormous difference in picture quality, because you are watching an excellent 1080p source with excellent 1080p certified cables through an excellent 1080p TV and the HD DVD player or Blu-ray player has to be the best for picture quality.

I am certain that movie companies uses monitors and not TVs, because of the higher resolutions. I agree that interlacing causes flickering. I was told that one of the reasons why Sir Bill Gates and The European Union wanted 1080p instead of 1080i in Europe. I have heard and it is probably correct that within 4 to 5 years that in Europe we should have 1080p. When you are satisfied that you can see pixels albeit close-up means that your standards are far too low. I wouldn't accept any where that standard with my CRT TV. What you appear to be saying just buy the present technology without carrying out a proper 'Feasibility Study' (review), but what I have to do is to findout everything that I can about all products not only in the world at present but in the future. This means that when I buy something I am looking 5 to 10 years in the future that means that there is a much less chance of me making a mistake. For example HDMI 1.3, buying LCD instead of Plasma that possibly may have 'burn-in' problemsin the future (if manufacturers and warranty companies won't include repairs or replacement of displays in England, United Kingdom - don't trust plasma then I won't trust it, despite the hype), 1080p, wireless, HD sound - take into account also SED, LED, OLED, 3D, and laser technologies etcetera.

[free2speak]

So going by your opinion the brand new HDTV standard which is not even in use universally will be replaced by some super new technology? Yeah that makes a lot of sense. Spend years establishing a new HDTV standard then obsolete it before it is adopted by 50% of consumers. The HDTV broadcast standard in the USA is 1080i. In fact the broadcasters wanted permission to "multi-cast" two HD channels in 480p or 720p instead of supporting full 1080i. Two channels for the price of one. They didn't get to water down the HD quality with multi-casting, but does this sound like broadcasters that will deliver even higher resolutions? Many broadcasters use 720p. Even if you have a 1080p capable HD box in the future you will be watching 1080i upconverted to 1080p. I can't see pixels on my 1080i HDTV either, but the point is you would need to sit really close to see any 1080p advantage. Is that your medical opinion doctor that interlace is the cause of health problems? Interlace has been used since the invention of TV. Flashing lights at the proper frequency can trigger seizures in people with Epilepsy. TV doesn't cause Epilepsy, but it can trigger a seizure if someone has Epilepsy. I am pretty sure 1080p could cause the same effect by displaying flashing lights at the correct frequency, but hey I am not a doctor. The only illness caused by 1080i is that I am sick of this subject. All technology is obsolete the moment you buy it something else is designed to replace it. It all comes down to how much you pay for it, and how useful it is. I am finished with this topic. I will be too busy enjoying HD movies on my home theater system.

[nopcbs]

I also bought one of the HD-A2's at Wal-Mart and am basically happy with it with a caveat. I have bought four HD-DVD "movies" so far: Big Lebowski, We Were Soldiers Once, King Kong, and the Planet Earth BBC set. The first two really look no better than regular DVD versions did played on my $60 Sony upscaling DVD player (granted, it's a very good player). The last two look stunning in HD-DVD. Literally breath-taking, especially Planet Earth. I mean you are "there". (This on a Pioneer 50" 768p plasma...as good as non-1080p plasmas get.) The thing that is always better on HD-DVD is the sound. The HD-DVD version of Dolby digital, which, interestingly, plays through the audio receiver's DTS option, is very noticably better than Dolby Ditital 5.1 of the DVD versions of the movies. I think the studios need to be a little bit (OK a lot) better about the image quality of their old films when re-ssued on HD-DVD (or Blu-Ray, I assume the same thing is happening in that camp).

[nopcbs]

Wrong. It's $200 for the HD-A3 (1080i, also) with up to ten HD-DVD movies thrown in. (The HD-A2 was $100 with five HD-DVD movies thrown in.)

Arguably, the A3 costs the same because the incentive is double.



My guess is the A3 will be down to near $125 by Christmas.

[nopcbs]

My guess is your 50" set is pretty old vs. the 57" set. Samsung has only recently become a purveyer of "good" as opposed to "OK" sets.



Also, bigger, even if the same measureable quality, will always look better.



Finally, exactly how close are you standing/sitting to these things? If you get ridiculously close none of them will look good compared to a photographic image, but so what, no one watches super-close, anyway.