Could Warner Bros. Abandon HD DVD in 2008?

[kennyt]

Dave Moritz and Lotus,

I for one like the look of the XA2, and it is one of the best players out there, when it comes to SD DVD it outperforms several of my $6K players. That said, I use one in my HT, and it looks good there, and beleive me I don't have anything close to a HTIB!

I haven't used the A35 yet so I can't comment on it....

As for computers..... that depends. I run three MAC's, and they all work extremely well and beleive it or not, I find my Power Mac G4 to be more efficient than the new Intel based MAC Pro, but suspect that is due to some of my software not yet being in universal format....

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by kennyt

Dave Moritz and Lotus,

I for one like the look of the XA2, and it is one of the best players out there, when it comes to SD DVD it outperforms several of my $6K players. That said, I use one in my HT, and it looks good there, and beleive me I don't have anything close to a HTIB!

I haven't used the A35 yet so I can't comment on it....

As for computers..... that depends. I run three MAC's, and they all work extremely well and beleive it or not, I find my Power Mac G4 to be more efficient than the new Intel based MAC Pro, but suspect that is due to some of my software not yet being in universal format....

My sister is a mac person. She's had multiple Macs over the years and like my PCs they seem to have issues at times with new things. Thus is the case with players and certain titles.

The XA2 looks fine to me as well, and I know it's a reference quality DVD player. The only reason I'd pick an Arcam or Meridian over it would be for redbook playback. For DVD playback they are simply stunning. To compete with those units says "high end," to me but maybe Toshiba can't possibly make a high end item in David's mind.

The Onkyo seems to handle CD playback better (still can't touch a Meridian or Arcam unit). I'd even go so far as to say the XA2 and Onkyo/Integra units are a steal compared to the Pioneer.

I've yet to get my hands on the Denon, but I'm sure it's a much better sounding player (especially if its doing the decoding).

[DaViD Boulet]

Ok David lets explain it real simple:

The Sony discs were better against defects and thus accepted. The Toshiba discs had more space and yes were designed for dual layers as well.

So your whole arguement is stupid and pointless. All you've done is blame someone for FUD when the whole point of his statement was about something else entirely. You've spun the conversation to a Pro-Sony point that you thought you had correct data on.

Unfortunately you're wrong.

The DVD Forum made the right choice both times for consumers.

The DVD Forum seems to always choose what is best for consumer's wallets.

With recent HD DVD authoring tools among other things, it's just getting less and less expensive to make HD DVDs in comparison to BD. The Forum made an educated decision.

You obviously don't have the data they had to make a decision.

What are you talking about?

I already said that the DVD forum made the right decision. I don't understand your attempt to critize my remarks by actually agreeing with them on this point but acting like your countering me. (?)

It was 630 who implied that the dvd forum should have adopted Toshiba's disc proposal instead... and I was taking exception with his suggestion that the 5GB disc would have been better than the 8GB dual-layer disc that they (thankfully) approved instead.

Toshiba's disc was not dual-layer. The proposal was for 5GB *per side* in a dual-side flipper-disc.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

What are you talking about?

I already said that the DVD forum made the right decision. I don't understand your attempt to critize my remarks by actually agreeing with them on this point but acting like your countering me. (?)

It was 630 who implied that the dvd forum should have adopted Toshiba's disc proposal instead... and I was taking exception with his suggestion that the 5GB disc would have been better than the 8GB dual-layer disc that they (thankfully) approved instead.

Toshiba's disc was not dual-layer. The proposal was for 5GB *per side* in a dual-side flipper-disc.

Go do research and come back to this. You're wrong. It had Dual Layer design as well as Dual Sided.

He also made no such implication, you did. You see you spun what he said to make an arguement to take things from their original point.

Which lets get back on subject.

Today Warners dropped plans on some BD titles...

but put some titles in the TL pipeline...

I wonder if that means they made a decision?

Meanwhile a BD heavy will be announcing neutrality at CES is a massive rumor that popped up today.

[PRO-630HD]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

It was FUD by omission and a misleading conclusion. 630's post implied that Sony's proposal *reduced* the data that could be stored from 5 gigs to 4.7 gigs by adding a second layer.

Actually, Sony's proposal nearly DOUBLED the amount of data that could be read from one side of a DVD disc from 5 to 8 gigs. Comparing single-layer limits to single-layer limits of the two formats is meaningless: it only makes sense to compare the maximum of continuous data-read each format provides. Double-sided has no bearing because flipping a disc requires program material/playback to competely stop... and the disc to be flipped manually or by a mechanized system, which makes it no different in practice than using two separate discs (and not that much different in cost either).

I don't see how you can defend his "spin" that Sony's proposal for 4.7/8 single/double-layer continuous-play 8GB dual-layer DVD was somehow a compromise from Toshiba's original plan for consinuous-play single-layer 5GB.

It's one thing to spin facts that are relatively neutral, or flexible enough to be massaged. It's another to seriously suggest to any intelligent person that Toshiba's single-layer 5GB disc was superior to Sony's 4.7/8 single/double-layer structure.

Since flipping interrupts continuous play (and requires user-intervention), it's actually less convenient than using two separate discs if more than 8GB is required for content. Hence why we rarely see dual-layer/dual-side 16GB discs in use.

In defense of 630, are you *actually suggesting* that the DVD format, and consumers who use it, would have been better served with a structure limited to 5GB of continious read-time versus the 8GB we enjoy?!?

Dude you are dreaming. The Super Density Disc had a proposed maximum capacity of 18gb from day one. Single layer 5gb and dual layer 9gb. Dual sided single layer 10gb and dual sided dual layer 18gb. Sony was not responsible for the dual layer!!!! That was in the proposed specs far before Sony came on board. Thier format the Multimedia Compact Disc was dual layer with a maximum capacity of 7.4gb. the reason the the drop in space was Warner and Toshibas adoption of the EFMPlus modulation which was a different coding technique and making them more resistant to scratches and fingerprints.

[kennyt]

Originally Posted by Lotus

The XA2 looks fine to me as well, and I know it's a reference quality DVD player. The only reason I'd pick an Arcam or Meridian over it would be for redbook playback. For DVD playback they are simply stunning. To compete with those units says "high end," to me but maybe Toshiba can't possibly make a high end item in David's mind.

I couldn't agree more!!!

In fact I use a Meridian G98 DH into my 861 and an Esoteric DV-50s for my redbook sources in the main rig. The XA2 is an amazing SD DVD player, though the audio isn't quite up to the Meridian, but the video is simply amazing! I switch between my various players depending on mood and what I expect from a film, oh and which are connected to what that day. If I really expect great audio, it's in the Meridian, if I want to see the best video I may use the XA2, I need to be patient to use this one though, my standard DVD players just work better.

I guess like I keep saying, it's convenience that matters most and so far, NONE of the new format players are more convenient than an SD DVD player!