[analogue SPRINKLES]

Format War: Interactivity vs HD supplements - Engadget HD

[Eug]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

Why the hell would you "spec" a gaming console? Here are the specs that matter: to play games on the 360 I only need to pay $279. To play games on the PS3 I need to pay $399.

That's it.

Well, that and the fact that the available games on the 360 are actually better, judging by the reviews of both consoles.

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Format War: Interactivity vs HD supplements - Engadget HD

This is going to be an interesting experiment (that only companies like Warner can do). Too bad they didn't keep the price identical though. If the combo is truly tthe reason the HD DVD is $5 more, then they should just drop the combo and keep the price the same.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

Why the hell would you "spec" a gaming console? Here are the specs that matter: to play games on the 360 I only need to pay $279. To play games on the PS3 I need to pay $399.

That's it.

That's it? Maybe if you want the bare minimum gaming experience. But I'd say that having a hard drive is pretty essential to getting the most out of either system. And when you add that, you're within $20 of the PS3, and that's without an HD movie player or wireless internet. Doesn't sound like quite as good a deal now, does it?

[Eug]

Originally Posted by icruise 

That's it? Maybe if you want the bare minimum gaming experience. But I'd say that having a hard drive is pretty essential to getting the most out of either system. And when you add that, you're within $20 of the PS3, and that's without an HD movie player or wireless internet. Doesn't sound like quite as good a deal now, does it?

As was said, the Sony is now selling better, because of the price drops.

However, original logic by Sony was that the PS3 was a better value, and therefore the significantly higher price was justified. We all know what happened.

Remember, the el cheapo version of the Xbox 360 was only $299, but the tarted up one was $399 (including a hard drive). The cheap version of the PS3 was $499 at launch, or 25% more.

[icruise]

I certainly agree that if the PS3 had been $399 at launch, it would have done much better in the first year. Part of that was arrogance on the part of Sony, and part was apparently due to manufacturing costs of the Blu-ray drive (which I guess you could also attribute to arrogance in a way).

[Kenneth]

I got a free Xbox 360 Core during Spring 2006, it was my real game console to me. After playing it for months, it really got me into gaming (still not a hardcore gamer). However, it does have flaws in it, very noisy, limited experience (at that time), MS Points, Xbox Live (not really digging it). Graphics was top-notch tough. I know I get it for free, but MS shouldn't put out a Core edition in the first place.

Later, I got myself a Wii (on day 1) and 60GB PS3 (2 days before Christmas). Getting the PS3 was a surprised for me. I was literally walked into BestBuy, saw a couple PS3 and then grabbed one. The main reason I went to the store was pretty much window shopping. Yes, I did pay $599 plus sales tax. Weeks later, I sold my Xbox 360.

It's almost a year, I like the PS3. Xbox is pretty much solely a gaming console (to me). Sony has a lot of things coming for the PS3 platform (Home, GT5, Top Gear....), but it's still a waiting game.

The WB's Interactivity vs HD supplements is pretty interesting. HP is a kid's movie, right? They may want to know 'Hidden Secrets of Harry Potter'.

[mrtew]

So everyone agrees that the PS3 is the best way to go if you're getting a BluRay player eh? I guess PS3 really probably should be counted then when people are comparing sales of players then.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by icruise 

That's it? Maybe if you want the bare minimum gaming experience. But I'd say that having a hard drive is pretty essential to getting the most out of either system. And when you add that, you're within $20 of the PS3, and that's without an HD movie player or wireless internet. Doesn't sound like quite as good a deal now, does it?

I own a Core and have no issues. And I don't need the HD movie player (have a Toshiba A2) or wireless internet. So yes, it's still a good deal.

And if you really want the hard drive it's still a $50 difference between the 360 and the PS3 (as long as you don't want to play any ps2 games).

[ort888]

Microsoft has yet to respond to the latest Sony price drop. The $279/$349/$449 pricing was in put in place after Sony dropped to $499. Sony has since dropped to $399 and Microsoft has done nothing. Probably because they are still outselling them about 2.5 to 1.

I agree that the value of the PS3 looks good right now compared to the 360, but I have a feeling that the price will drop again in early 2008. It pretty much has to.

[Dakar the Fourth]

Yeah, I don't think there'll be a 360 price drop until after GTA IV has been out for a while (E3 time?)

[ort888]

GTA4 probably won't be out for another 6 months. They need to drop it quicker then that.

[Dakar the Fourth]

It's scheduled for a February - April release.

[jokell82]

They don't need to drop it at all right now. They're selling well and the software is helping to move the hardware. Same can't be said for the PS3 *right now*, but that could change when they get some good exclusives.

Prices will probably be stable until next summer at the earliest.

[Eug]

I wouldn't be surprised to see a 360 price drop by spring.

The PS3 is actually selling OK right now, but it seems to me it isn't good enough for MS to justify a price drop right now.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Microsoft has yet to respond to the latest Sony price drop. The $279/$349/$449 pricing was in put in place after Sony dropped to $499. Sony has since dropped to $399 and Microsoft has done nothing. Probably because they are still outselling them about 2.5 to 1.

Didn't they? The 360 HD-DVD drive got dropped to $129.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Didn't they? The 360 HD-DVD drive got dropped to $129.

Well...

1) They were talking about gaming, AFAIK. At least that was what I was talking about. MS needs to drop the price of the 360 to market to gamers, but I don't think they need to do it in 2007.

2) $129 is a drop for the HD DVD drive, but it's not an official drop. The MSRP is still $179.99.

Nonetheless, $129 with those 6 free movies is a damn good deal though.

[goMac]

I don't think this was posted yet...

The State Of HD DVD: The State of HD DVD

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by goMac 

I don't think this was posted yet...

The State Of HD DVD: The State of HD DVD

Thanks for the link. Nice read.

[Eug]

Last week's software sales:

58% Blu-ray, 42% HD DVD.

The stalemate continues.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Last week's software sales:

58% Blu-ray, 42% HD DVD.

The stalemate continues.

Would you call it a stalemate if it was 42% Blu-ray, 58% HD DVD?
Or would you call it the comeback-of-the-century that you predicted and dreamed of all year?

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Xbox 360: Xbox 360 DVD Player Still Sucks After Update, HD DVD Not Great Either

"Unfortunately its HD DVD playback is so poor that it scored a 0 out of 100. This is because it's testing deinterlacing of content, and the player only does 1080i. In comparison, the PS3 gets an 88 out of 100 for the equivalent Blu-ray side."

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

Would you call it a stalemate if it was 42% Blu-ray, 58% HD DVD?
Or would you call it the comeback-of-the-century that you predicted and dreamed of all year?

Nope, that would still be a stalemate. But the hostility really helps!

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Xbox 360: Xbox 360 DVD Player Still Sucks After Update, HD DVD Not Great Either

"Unfortunately its HD DVD playback is so poor that it scored a 0 out of 100. This is because it's testing deinterlacing of content, and the player only does 1080i. In comparison, the PS3 gets an 88 out of 100 for the equivalent Blu-ray side."

I don't pretend to know everything about this stuff, but this seems pretty relevant:
"The Xbox 360 plays back content better that's been properly flagged as movie content, such as actual movies you buy from the store. The HQV test disc isn't properly flagged, and doesn't trigger the player's deinterlacing."

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by goMac 

I don't think this was posted yet...

The State Of HD DVD: The State of HD DVD

Microsoft argues that all Xbox 360 HD DVD drive purchasers are using them to play HD DVD movies, while not all PS3 buyers are using the game system to play Blu-ray discs.

Why would someone have a PS3 and not use it for BluRay discs??? They have NO interest in ANY movies whatsoever??? I pretty much hate 99% of movies and I'm going to buy a PS3 because I want a BluRay player for the very few that I do want to see. I don't buy the speculation that there are a bunch of PS3 bluray drives out there going totally unused.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

Why would someone have a PS3 and not use it for BluRay discs??? They have NO interest in ANY movies whatsoever??? I pretty much hate 99% of movies and I'm going to buy a PS3 because I want a BluRay player for the very few that I do want to see. I don't buy the speculation that there are a bunch of PS3 bluray drives out there going totally unused.

Do you also not buy that there are people hooking up PS3s to (shock!) non-HD televisions? Or some that are hooked up to HDTVs but using composite cables? Oh the horror!

Shame that you don't believe it, but it's true.

[Montezuma58]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

Why would someone have a PS3 and not use it for BluRay discs??? They have NO interest in ANY movies whatsoever??? I pretty much hate 99% of movies and I'm going to buy a PS3 because I want a BluRay player for the very few that I do want to see. I don't buy the speculation that there are a bunch of PS3 bluray drives out there going totally unused.

Why would it be hard to believe that people are primarily using a game console to play games?

There are PS3 owners that purchased it because it can play BluRay movies, there are some gamers that will get some BluRay movies just because it's a nice side effect for their console of choice, and there are gamers that buy it solely for playing games.

The problem is that some people want to count every PS3 as movie player when that is clearly not the case. They do this just to get the biggest number possible to use in a dick measuring contest.

That is not to say that the PS3 is not an important factor the high def movie market. It is just about impossible to use the number of units out there to make a meaningful comparison to the number of HD-DVD players.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

I don't pretend to know everything about this stuff, but this seems pretty relevant:
"The Xbox 360 plays back content better that's been properly flagged as movie content, such as actual movies you buy from the store. The HQV test disc isn't properly flagged, and doesn't trigger the player's deinterlacing."

I dunno about the HD-DVD part but I do know from using it myself that the Xbox DVD player is the worst on the market. The picture has a strange green tint and everything is fussy. They haven't improved it at all since it came out.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

Do you also not buy that there are people hooking up PS3s to (shock!) non-HD televisions? Or some that are hooked up to HDTVs but using composite cables? Oh the horror! Shame that you don't believe it, but it's true.

You're weird.

Originally Posted by Montezuma58 

Why would it be hard to believe that people are primarily using a game console to play games?
There are PS3 owners that purchased it because it can play BluRay movies, there are some gamers that will get some BluRay movies just because it's a nice side effect for their console of choice, and there are gamers that buy it solely for playing games.
The problem is that some people want to count every PS3 as movie player when that is clearly not the case. They do this just to get the biggest number possible to use in a dick measuring contest.
That is not to say that the PS3 is not an important factor the high def movie market. It is just about impossible to use the number of units out there to make a meaningful comparison to the number of HD-DVD players.

Maybe I've been reading Wikipedia too much but I kinda like to see sources. You say the same thing in about 5 different ways almost as if each sentence is evidence or support for the others but it seems more like you're worried about your dick in the measuring contest and are trying not to get all the other guys inches counted. Where are you getting this stuff about some PS3 owners not watching movies? Everybody watches movies.

[Chongo]

Sorry if this been posted already
12 movies with A3 purchase: 2in box, 5 at time of purchase, 5 by mail
Wal-Mart Holiday

[Montezuma58]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Sorry if this been posted already
12 movies with A3 purchase: 2in box, 5 at time of purchase, 5 by mail
Wal-Mart Holiday

I think the A2 at Wal-Mart would be a better deal. The extra $100 for the A3 just gets you two movies since the players are almost identical in capabilities. They probably won't have many A2's in stock though. The selection for the three movies is also a question mark right now.

Best Buy is selling the A3 for $250 right now with 3 movies at purchase in addition to the two in box and the mail in rebate. And Best Buy already has an excellent selection of movies in stock. And you won't have to deal with getting in line at 8:00 AM.

[Montezuma58]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

Maybe I've been reading Wikipedia too much but I kinda like to see sources. You say the same thing in about 5 different ways almost as if each sentence is evidence or support for the others but it seems more like you're worried about your dick in the measuring contest and are trying not to get all the other guys inches counted. Where are you getting this stuff about some PS3 owners not watching movies? Everybody watches movies.

Settle down Beavis.

All I was saying is that it's disingenuous to count every PS3 as a BluRay Movie player when trying to comparing it to the number of HD-DVD player. Just as it is disingenuous for HD DVD fans to completely dismiss the PS3 because it isn't a dedicate player. Both sides are guilty of cherry picking stats while ignoring what is really going on.

I'm not going to bother digging up sources for you. I'll let you do your own home work. If almost all of the PS3s in the wild are being used for HD movie watching there are a lot of people wasting money on BluRay movies. Most of them are hooked up to SD sets.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by Montezuma58 

If almost all of the PS3s in the wild are being used for HD movie watching there are a lot of people wasting money on BluRay movies. Most of them are hooked up to SD sets.

Wow, what a waste of a PS3. I got a Xbox360 last year and went to get a HDTV the next day because it looked like crap on my SDTV. Somebody should do a study of how many people buy new TVs just for their consoles! I watched TV fine on my old tube but it sure wan't good enough for a modern videogame. And now I want to get a BluRay player for the HDTV. And a PS3 seems like the best one. So in a way it was the Xbox that sold me on the PS3! Or maybe I'm just a victim of a consumer society :-]

[Eug]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

Would you call it a stalemate if it was 42% Blu-ray, 58% HD DVD?
Or would you call it the comeback-of-the-century that you predicted and dreamed of all year?

Stalemate of course. Why wouldn't it be?

P.S. For the record, ever since 2006, my prediction has been that there would be a stalemate for years, so I don't know what you're talking about.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Xbox 360: Xbox 360 DVD Player Still Sucks After Update, HD DVD Not Great Either

"Unfortunately its HD DVD playback is so poor that it scored a 0 out of 100. This is because it's testing deinterlacing of content, and the player only does 1080i. In comparison, the PS3 gets an 88 out of 100 for the equivalent Blu-ray side."

They're out to lunch on that one. Well... partially. HD DVD on the thing is very good, but yeah, DVD upscaling on it sucks royally.

[Kenneth]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

Wow, what a waste of a PS3. I got a Xbox360 last year and went to get a HDTV the next day because it looked like crap on my SDTV. Somebody should do a study of how many people buy new TVs just for their consoles! I watched TV fine on my old tube but it sure wan't good enough for a modern videogame. And now I want to get a BluRay player for the HDTV. And a PS3 seems like the best one. So in a way it was the Xbox that sold me on the PS3! Or maybe I'm just a victim of a consumer society :-]

When I got my Xbox 360 and PS3, I hooked them up to a SDTV via composite cable for over 6 months.

[ort888]

I think a lot more people then you think have their PS3s and 360s hooked up to SDTVs. I think that number is going to continue to grow rapidly rather then shrink, as the consoles come down in price.

[Eug]

Nothing inherently wrong with hooking up a console to an SD TV. A lot of people do it, a lot of will continue to do so, and many, many new buyers will do so as well. While not ideal, the games at 480p are still often better than previous generation games, and this way you don't have to invest in two different consoles to experience the latest and greatest.

There's also the fact that some people buy the console first with the intent of eventually buying an HDTV. Plus there's the fact for stuff like the Xbox, the only model you can get is the 360 anyway. The original Xbox has been discontinued.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

They're out to lunch on that one. Well... partially. HD DVD on the thing is very good, but yeah, DVD upscaling on it sucks royally.

It isn't even the upscaling that is the problem. Even on a standard def TV the dvd players quality is worse than many of the $30 DVD players out there.

Can't imagine why they wouldn't update the software other than to push HD-DVD or digital downloads.

Oh and probably just another silly rumor but:
Warner to finally go Blu-ray-only at CES? - Engadget HD

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

You know who is winning? Just regular CD players. Most consumers only care that they can listen to their Music.

And what does music have anything to do with video formats? My comment was directed towards the fact that most consumers just care that it plays DVDs they rent from blockbuster.

[Eug]

Macbidouille: Apple: No Blu-ray Playback Yet

When releasing information collected from our sources yesterday about future Mac Pro, we were mentioning BD burning, but also playback. According to additional information, it seems that the latest feature will NOT be included for the time being, due to the current conflict between Apple and AACS LA.
To implement BD playback in OS X, Apple needs the key from the AACS LA which will of course not release it if it can not ensure that one would not to easily be able to crack it. This is mostly due to past month experience with the first BD playback application on PC which allowed hackers to relatively quickly got access to the key.
The AACS LA would currently require from Apple to implement a protection system, not on the software layer of "HF Player", but directly in the kernel of Mac OS X! For obvious reason Apple is not willing to accept such request for the time being, considering that such protection will only be used from time to time when users will play a BD media on their Mac

[jokell82]

The fact that such low-level protection is required is f*cking retarded.

[Eug]

I'm a little skeptical of that report. It seems to work fine with XP, without modification of the kernel... unless things have changed drastically because of the breaches on Windows.

[Kenneth]

It doesn't make any sense to me, we'll see. SONY, DELL, and HP (?) do offer Blu-ray drive on their PCs.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I'm a little skeptical of that report. It seems to work fine with XP, without modification of the kernel... unless things have changed drastically because of the breaches on Windows.

I think the article mentions that their experience on Windows has led to this. Regardless, the OS X kernel is open source. The kernel request makes sense because the Bluray camp has really been pushing for the entire operating system to protect video paths, as an extension to HDCP.

This really validates what I've been saying all along. Bluray is a poor choice for computers, and it's not nearly as computer ready as HD-DVD. I hope the HD-DVD camp uses this as a chance to fully convert Apple.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by goMac 

I think the article mentions that their experience on Windows has led to this. Regardless, the OS X kernel is open source. The kernel request makes sense because the Bluray camp has really been pushing for the entire operating system to protect video paths, as an extension to HDCP.

This really validates what I've been saying all along. Bluray is a poor choice for computers, and it's not nearly as computer ready as HD-DVD. I hope the HD-DVD camp uses this as a chance to fully convert Apple.

The supposed request is from AACS, which is used on both HD DVD and Blu-ray.

[voodoo]

Let me get this straight:

The AACS LA is refusing to allow less than 5% of the computer market access to HD-DVD/BlueRay playback because 95% of the market has already has playback, has cracked it and is copying and distributing HD video already?!

Yeah. That's gonna help a lot!

V

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Let me get this straight: The AACS LA is refusing to allow less than 5% of the computer..
V

Actually Apple is higher now. AppleInsider | Apple's U.S. Mac market share rises to 8.1 percent in Q3

Originally Posted by Kenneth 

It doesn't make any sense to me, we'll see. SONY, DELL, and HP (?) do offer Blu-ray drive on their PCs.

Are you serious??? Apple is so messed up. How am I going to explain that to my crowing, preening, PC friends at work? Stupid Steve Jobs.

[PaperNotes]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Bluray is a poor choice for computers, and it's not nearly as computer ready as HD-DVD. I hope the HD-DVD camp uses this as a chance to fully convert Apple.

Since you are more in favor of movie download distribution instead of on high data density discs this makes you a bigger hypocrite than ever. You should be saying the format that offers the most storage space and fastest read/write times is the best choice for "computers".

Fastest read/write times: Blu-ray
Highest actual and theoretical storage space: Blu-ray 50GB actual/200GB theoretical vs HD-DVD 30GB/51GB.
Mac industry support as a storage medium: Blu-ray. Support in Toast 8 and from drive suppliers such as LaCie.
Availability as a storage medium: Blu-ray recordable drives and discs are easier to find than HD-DVD.
Availability in personal computers: Blu-ray. Nine system manufacturers offer Blu-ray equipped systems versus only two for HD-DVD.

[mrtew]

So is there BluRay support in OSX if you buy an external drive?

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by PaperNotes 

Highest actual and theoretical storage space: Blu-ray 50GB actual/200GB theoretical vs HD-DVD 30GB/51GB.

How do you figure HD DVD's max is 51Gb? They already have a 51Gb disc in the approved spec, does Blu-Ray have anything higher?