Warner's HD DVD launch

[Steve]

April 18th will see Warner Home Video launch its first three titles on HD DVD. Yup, a whole three titles, and they'll cost $29. Apparently that's about $5 cheaper than Blu-ray titles are expected to cost, but still, will you be buying them?

It's not quite the splash movie enthusiasts would have expected. Warner Home Video, which claims that it distributes the largest film library of any studio, will introduce a total of three movies not on the launch date of HD DVD, but several weeks later. The trio consists of Clint Eastwood's Million Dollar Baby, The Last Samurai and Joel Schumacher's The Phantom of the Opera.

http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/03/17/wh..._introduction/

[Mike Fishcake]

What a way to get people to invest in a new technology by forcing them to spend hundreds on a new player, and buying discs that cost twice as much as existing ones for a slightly sharper version of a movie.

(No, I won't be buying, at least until the BR/HDDVD beeyatch fight has been decided)

[dabblet]

Currently reaching for my wallet as I type - not. What a good way to encourage early adaptors . Whilst I'm as eager as the next person - these prices and range of films do not tempt me in the least.

[vrykyl]

atm theres no point buying an hdtv until regular uk tv goes hd....dvds are so cheap (as are players) and look great enough on regular tvs that i just cant see the upgrade appeal -
the only thing about bluray/hddvd that appeals to me is the larger pc storage capacity...

[Lee H]

What a way to get people to invest in a new technology by forcing them to spend hundreds on a new player, and buying discs that cost twice as much as existing ones for a slightly sharper version of a movie.

(No, I won't be buying, at least until the BR/HDDVD beeyatch fight has been decided)

heh.. welcome to VHS vs Betamax - the next generation

I'm waiting with baited breath to see which version takes off before I invest in any new equipment to replace my old DVD divx/xvid player.

[autopilot]

I hope HD-DVD takes off myself. Appart from not being Sony, the disks are far more robust. Blu-Ray disk's scratch like a bugger and it will be some time before we have a decent way to rip to our PC's and make [legal] backups.

Personally i have no great interest in this format war, as by the time i am even slightly tempted to buy into all the over hyped nonsence the war will be well and truley over. For god sake, are normal DVD's really that bad?

[b0redom]

To be honest, unless you've got a MASSIVE screen you probably won't see the difference anyway. I get DVDs from Blockbuster by mail, and rip the TV episodes to Divx so I can watch em in order.

On an episode of 24 for example, you can compress down to around 400MB with no discernable loss of quality on a high def 32" LCD screen.

IMHO It's just another way of selling 'extras' and a more expensive format.

Tom

[teachmech]

I Agree until uk tv goes HD then i'm sticking with normal DVDs hopefully by then the format wars will be over.

[probedb]

You don't need a massive screen to notice a difference, I can see the difference on a 26" LCD sitting 2m away. But it does depend on viewing distance/screen size.

Initial line up for Blu-Ray is actually ok providing it launches as planned. As for protective coating/scratching etc you only have what you've been told as to how robust either format will be.

By regular UK TV then you'll be waiting at least a decade, they won't be switching off analogue till 2012 at the latest for some areas...only then they might look at free to view hi-def. But Sky HD launches this year and cable has already launched some hi-def stuff.

I'll be waiting at least a year to see what happens Personally I hope one of them does take off. After watching hi-def stuff I notice the lower res of DVD more...some of that's down to LCD and scaling though.

[Ody]

I think it will be 18 months to 2 years until and winner becomes apparent. With Bluray not due here for 6 months and both new formats costing an arm and a leg I think its all going to come down to hardware costs. Whoever takes the hit first and gets a sub £100 player on the market will probably win it. It normally comes down to market forces not which technology is the best.

[TheAnimus]

not just the player cost. Titles too, i mean that selection is hardly going to make me part with $30.

[flcherb]

It is quite expensive but when DVDs came out they were about the same price. The hardware is expensive to. Think i shall wait till the media war is over because if i buy into one of the systems and it goes belly up i be buggered.

Herb

[probedb]

Yeah my first DVD player was £600 about 6/7 years ago! It was Sony's first range and the high-end model. It doesn't support DTS out and doesn't like all DVD-Rs which shows how old it is. Ridiculous thing is it's still going...

I'll wait and see what settles this time. I think Blu-Ray will get a head-start when the PS3 comes out (whenever that is ) as they'll know everyone with a PS3 can play Blu-Ray.

[Knoxville]

Sky's started pushing HD recently, they've got a few movie channels broadcasting it, personally I find dvd's good enough tbh, how many more formats are we gonna have to go through before the human eye can't tell the difference?

[probedb]

Sky's started pushing HD recently, they've got a few movie channels broadcasting it, personally I find dvd's good enough tbh, how many more formats are we gonna have to go through before the human eye can't tell the difference?

The Japanese have been developing UHTV (or whatever acronym it is) which is something like 4x the res of 1080p/i!! It all depends on screen size and screen resolution.

[Skinleech]

Whether you decide to go HD or not will also depend on the movies available. Ignoring the fact they're only releasing 3 films to begin with, they're really not that great a selection of films either - there are far better titles that WB own that they could release for the HD-DVD launch.

Muppets.