«

In article
<1cd7f435-86ff-4426-925e->,
The alMIGHTY N <> wrote:

> On Jan 9, 10:12*pm, Jordan <lu...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > On Jan 9, 9:00 am, Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "...the millions of PS3s Sony has sold since late in 2006 likely
> > > clinched Warner Bros. Entertainment's exclusive support for the Blu-ray
> > > format...."
> >
> > > Business Week article:http://easyurl.net/Bluray
> >
> > I don't think it was that breakthrough... I think it was Warner
> > closely monitoring the sales of Blade Runner and the Harry Potter
> > movies on both formats.
> >
> > From what I understand the Blu-Ray movies out-sold the HD-DVD versions
> > 3:2. *I wouldn't consider that significant, but it was enough for the
> > bean-counters to go "ZOMG! 50% more sales on Blu-Ray!"
>
> Uh... isn't that worse than the overall 2:1 Blu-Ray:HD-DVD for all of
> 2007... or the greater than 2:1 Blu-Ray:HD-DVD for 300 specifically? I
> don't see how HD-DVD GAINING market share for a specific title would
> be the catalyst for such a decision.
>
> I think they basically saw that Blu-Ray still outsold HD-DVD over the
> holidays in both standalone hardware *and*, naturally, software, and
> just decided that without Fox jumping with them (if you believe that
> story), it just wasn't worth it anymore.

The sales of both formats is miniscule in the scheme of things. But the
money that Sony was losing in both the BD standalones and PS3 was
staggering. Sony's last gasp to have credibility and make money on a
new technology was strong enough for them to spend the money to get
Warner to come over.

I don't have a problem with those kinds of payments as that is how
business is sometimes done. Sony had very much more to lose should BD
die than did Toshiba. Toshiba is profitable in ALL divisions, something
Sony cannot say.

The 'war' between formats was never about the technology or the
consumer, it was about profits and control of a market. BD is not the
best for the consumer, but it isn't horrible either. The consumer could
only have been much a part of this war had all studios been neutral.
Since they weren't, we as consumers never really got to put much input
into it.

So is the war over? Not yet, there will be some battles fought by these
big corporations and it does seem that BD will win. Fortunately for me,
I bought 3 players.

My HDDVD player meets the specifications spelled out, just as all HDDVD
players do. It does TrueHD, PIP, and has a network connection for
upgrades and interactivity.

One of my BD players is imitating a doorstop. Not because it doesn't
work, but because it works poorly and SHOULD be the $199 player the BD
camp needs and will probably get with Funai. The S300 is a screw job by
Sony. The owner's manual shows it supporting TrueHD and DTS-HD (not
MA), but it supports neither, and when pressed about it, Sony pretty
much said it didn't. But they didn't change the book, and they've not
provided the firmware update that would allow it to do it.

The other BD player is really the only one to get. That is the PS3. It
is upgradeable online very simply. It is now Profile 1.1 and Sony has
officially said that Profile 2.0 update will happen this month. It does
TrueHD but not DTS-HDMA, but we are all hoping it will. Many are
convinced we are just an upgrade away from that. I am a bit more
pessimistic.

With BD standalones, what you buy is what you get the day you buy it.
If it is Profile whatever, it will be that profile forever. Especially
the Profile 1.0 machines, which are the majority of what is being made
today. They cannot be updated to Profile 1.1 or Profile 2.0, they just
don't have the hardware to do it. To me this is very damning of the BD
industry.

Profile 1.2 1.3 1.4 .1.5..and so on.

HDMI 1.3 (current) 1.4 this fall

http://uk.cinenow.com/videos/1151-ph...sion-show-2007

And so on and so on and so on..

In article <dNchj.35933$uV6.30176@pd7urf1no>, Billy <> wrote:
>
>"boodybandit" <> wrote in message
>news: ...
>>
>> "TheGame" <> wrote in message
>>> Me thinks it was more about the $500 million sony gave WB than the
>>> number of PS3s sold...
>>
>> Link?
>
>It was 620 million

The Dippin' Dots guy said it was a Dirty Sanchez and a Pluto Pez
dispenser. And 80% of PS3 owners don't know they can play Blu-ray discs.
Oh, and the moon landing was faked.
--
vince
/***** Visit the Home of the Rancid Tofu Experience *****/
/***** http://www.garageband.com/artist/rancidtofu *****/
/***** New Songs Added 12-21-2007 *****/

In article
<2b4cec7e-723b-40c5-9e70->,
The alMIGHTY N <> wrote:

> On Jan 10, 12:51 pm, Lloyd Parsons <lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <1cd7f435-86ff-4426-925e-193b9b56d...@j78g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
> > The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Jan 9, 10:12 pm, Jordan <lu...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > > On Jan 9, 9:00 am, Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > "...the millions of PS3s Sony has sold since late in 2006 likely
> > > > > clinched Warner Bros. Entertainment's exclusive support for the
> > > > > Blu-ray
> > > > > format...."
> >
> > > > > Business Week article:http://easyurl.net/Bluray
> >
> > > > I don't think it was that breakthrough... I think it was Warner
> > > > closely monitoring the sales of Blade Runner and the Harry Potter
> > > > movies on both formats.
> >
> > > > From what I understand the Blu-Ray movies out-sold the HD-DVD versions
> > > > 3:2. I wouldn't consider that significant, but it was enough for the
> > > > bean-counters to go "ZOMG! 50% more sales on Blu-Ray!"
> >
> > > Uh... isn't that worse than the overall 2:1 Blu-Ray:HD-DVD for all of
> > > 2007... or the greater than 2:1 Blu-Ray:HD-DVD for 300 specifically? I
> > > don't see how HD-DVD GAINING market share for a specific title would
> > > be the catalyst for such a decision.
> >
> > > I think they basically saw that Blu-Ray still outsold HD-DVD over the
> > > holidays in both standalone hardware *and*, naturally, software, and
> > > just decided that without Fox jumping with them (if you believe that
> > > story), it just wasn't worth it anymore.
> >
> > The sales of both formats is miniscule in the scheme of things.
>
> You're late to this party, haha. A bunch of us have been saying that
> for a while now.
>
Nah, I've been saying this for awhile, just in a different forum.

> > But the
> > money that Sony was losing in both the BD standalones and PS3 was
> > staggering. Sony's last gasp to have credibility and make money on a
> > new technology was strong enough for them to spend the money to get
> > Warner to come over.
>
> I assume, then, that you're not one of the people clamoring for proof
> that there was any money involved for fear that it may taint their
> beloved format. What's equally funny to me are the people acting as if
> this alleged "bribe" was actually that bad a thing considering any
> rumor about Sony et al bribing Warner is always accompanied by the
> notion that they simply beat out Toshiba et al at their own game since
> Toshiba also offered a substantial payout.
>
Nope, no problem with it at all. I mean, if the consumer was never part
of the formula for hidef dvd format success anyway, why not let the
biggies bribe each other to hell and gone?

> > I don't have a problem with those kinds of payments as that is how
> > business is sometimes done. Sony had very much more to lose should BD
> > die than did Toshiba. Toshiba is profitable in ALL divisions, something
> > Sony cannot say.
> >
> > The 'war' between formats was never about the technology or the
> > consumer, it was about profits and control of a market. BD is not the
> > best for the consumer, but it isn't horrible either. The consumer could
> > only have been much a part of this war had all studios been neutral.
> > Since they weren't, we as consumers never really got to put much input
> > into it.
>
> I absolutely agree. I've been saying forever that all the claims that
> the consumers chose Blu-Ray are bullshit. Some diehard Blu-Ray
> fanatics are too blind to see that, though, instead asininely
> insisting that it was the merits of the format that won this war.
>
the BD fanbois all want to talk tech, but for the movie lovers, it
didn't matter. Both formats could and did provide the same PQ/AQ. They
could have done better on the audio though, damn studios didn't use
TrueHD from the beginning on HDDVD, yet the players all supported it.

BD was better at that. Many, if not most, BD titles had at least one
advanced codec.

> > So is the war over? Not yet, there will be some battles fought by these
> > big corporations and it does seem that BD will win. Fortunately for me,
> > I bought 3 players.
> >
> > My HDDVD player meets the specifications spelled out, just as all HDDVD
> > players do. It does TrueHD, PIP, and has a network connection for
> > upgrades and interactivity.
> >
> > One of my BD players is imitating a doorstop. Not because it doesn't
> > work, but because it works poorly and SHOULD be the $199 player the BD
> > camp needs and will probably get with Funai. The S300 is a screw job by
> > Sony. The owner's manual shows it supporting TrueHD and DTS-HD (not
> > MA), but it supports neither, and when pressed about it, Sony pretty
> > much said it didn't. But they didn't change the book, and they've not
> > provided the firmware update that would allow it to do it.
> >
> > The other BD player is really the only one to get. That is the PS3. It
> > is upgradeable online very simply. It is now Profile 1.1 and Sony has
> > officially said that Profile 2.0 update will happen this month. It does
> > TrueHD but not DTS-HDMA, but we are all hoping it will. Many are
> > convinced we are just an upgrade away from that. I am a bit more
> > pessimistic.
>
> The Playstation 3 has been a great Blu-Ray player for me thus far. I'm
> not a home theater enthusiast so I don't give much of a crap about
> fancy shmancy DTS-HDMA support... as long as I get decent sound out of
> a basic surround set-up, I'm happy as a pig in mud.
>
My 'basic surround' is a freaking nightmare of wires. But I get all the
lossless 7.1 I can stand with it.

> > With BD standalones, what you buy is what you get the day you buy it.
> > If it is Profile whatever, it will be that profile forever. Especially
> > the Profile 1.0 machines, which are the majority of what is being made
> > today. They cannot be updated to Profile 1.1 or Profile 2.0, they just
> > don't have the hardware to do it. To me this is very damning of the BD
> > industry.
>
> Fortunately, they will still be able to play Blu-Ray movies without
> the ability to access the Profile 1.1+ features.

Don't jump to that conclusion. There are articles talking about some
issues with this. Check out avsforums discussions, it is in one of the
threads there. Looks to be pretty legit too.

what I don't understand is that by removing all hd-dvd production, you also
remove the guaranteed sales of software to the thousands of hd-dvd adopters
who have hardware ready to go.......so in effect, the studios are missing
out on sales.

Someone who has invested in hd-dvd hardware isnt likely to just dump it and
go "i'll just run out and buy blu-ray instead'......

Why not produce them both? Obviously equipment already exists to do so, so
there is no higher production cost.....

Will never understand studio decisions.




"tracks" <> wrote in message
news:gqvhj.52132$uV6.51022@pd7urf1no...
> Profile 1.2 1.3 1.4 .1.5..and so on.
>
> HDMI 1.3 (current) 1.4 this fall
>
> http://uk.cinenow.com/videos/1151-ph...sion-show-2007
>
> And so on and so on and so on..
>
>

"Happy" <> wrote in message
news4dhj.35956$uV6.12684@pd7urf1no...
> I think all u idiots missed the smiley there before the preaching? Bait
> and hook.

I saw the smiley but took it as a "PS3 isn't selling anything, ha ha ha"
smiley, not a "I'm being facetious" smiley.

"Paul Murray" <> wrote in message
news:...

> But 40% less sales than releasing on both formats.

But x% more cost releasing on both formats.

"TheGame" <> wrote in message
news:1b8ed06e-a905-4cbe-a8ee-...
Me thinks it was more about the $500 million sony gave WB than the
number of PS3s sold...


Nope, no pay off


Warner Home Entertainment President Kevin Tsujihara says the studio took no
pay-offs to exclusively back Blu-ray.

"This decision was one hundred percent around what makes the most sense for
the consumer, the retailer and the industry. This was not a bidding war.
This was all about what was best, strategically, for us."

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/1327

"The alMIGHTY N" <> wrote in message
news:2b4cec7e-723b-40c5-9e70-...
> On Jan 10, 12:51 pm, Lloyd Parsons <lloydpars...@mac.com> wrote:
>> In article
>> <1cd7f435-86ff-4426-925e-193b9b56d...@j78g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
>> The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Jan 9, 10:12 pm, Jordan <lu...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> > > On Jan 9, 9:00 am, Nomen Nescio <nob...@dizum.com> wrote:


> I assume, then, that you're not one of the people clamoring for proof
> that there was any money involved for fear that it may taint their
> beloved format. What's equally funny to me are the people acting as if
> this alleged "bribe" was actually that bad a thing considering any
> rumor about Sony et al bribing Warner is always accompanied by the
> notion that they simply beat out Toshiba et al at their own game since
> Toshiba also offered a substantial payout.

Oh I don't know. Maybe people like me think it's all bullshit speculation
until proven wrong?
I have seen zero credible information that Sony paid off Warner to make
BluRay exclusive but I have seen this article from Warner stating the
opposite.

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/1327

Warner: No Payoff for Move to Blu-ray
Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 07:56 PM ET

Warner Home Entertainment President Kevin Tsujihara says the studio took no
pay-offs to exclusively back Blu-ray.

In a post-announcement conference call, Tsujihara flatly denied rumors that
studio had accepted anywhere from 250M to $500M in exchange for dropping its
HD DVD format support.

According to the exec, Warner's sole motivation in dropping its HD DVD
format support was to ensure growth of the "category" and the long-term
health of the industry.



"The packaged media business is a $42 billion dollar business worldwide at
the retail level, and we [Warner] have the largest market share of anybody,"
said Tsujihara. "From our perspective, the most important piece of this
whole puzzle is, "How do we get growth back into this category?" That far
outweighed anything else."

This [decision] was one hundred percent around what makes the most sense for
the consumer, the retailer and the industry. This was not a bidding war.
This was all about what was best, strategically, for us."

Stay tuned for more news from the Tsujihara conference call shortly...

"mark johnson" <mark-> wrote in message
news:fm6dg6$2b3k$...
>
> "TheGame" <> wrote in message
> news:1b8ed06e-a905-4cbe-a8ee-...
> Me thinks it was more about the $500 million sony gave WB than the
> number of PS3s sold...
>
>
> Nope, no pay off
>
>
> Warner Home Entertainment President Kevin Tsujihara says the studio took
> no pay-offs to exclusively back Blu-ray.
>
> "This decision was one hundred percent around what makes the most sense
> for the consumer, the retailer and the industry. This was not a bidding
> war. This was all about what was best, strategically, for us."
>
> http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/1327
>

Oh it must be true then!

Forget all those insiders spilling the beans on AVS/Home Theatre Forums and
High Def Digest and a number of other places.
Even stupid Bill Hunt confirms from his sources that there was a payoff.

it's just business.