quote:

---

> Well, here's more proof the end for HD-DVD is fast approaching.
>
> In addition to amazon.com, other sales channels are reporting much
> stronger blu-ray sales, even though HD-DVD got out first in 2006.
>
> http://www.videobusiness.com/index....cleid=CA6408142
>
> for online retailer DVDEmpire:
>
> 1. Sales of Blu-ray discs are now stronger than sales of HD-DVD titles.
> For the week including Tuesday, Jan. 16, DVDEmpire.com noted that 57.7%
> of its high-def sales were BD and 42.3% were HD DVD.
>
> 2. there are already more titles in Blu-ray than HD-DVD....Through Jan.
> 16, DVDEmpire.com counted 190 HD DVD releases and 203 BD releases.
>
> And it'll just get worse as more people buy playstation and more
> blu-ray titles come out. Just this week, i already got the recent Ice
> Age 2 in blu-ray (and it's 20th century fox, so NO HD-DVD copy!)

quote:

---

> Well, here's more proof the end for HD-DVD is fast approaching.
>
> In addition to amazon.com, other sales channels are reporting much
> stronger blu-ray sales, even though HD-DVD got out first in 2006.
>
> http://www.videobusiness.com/index....cleid=CA6408142
>
> for online retailer DVDEmpire:
>
> 1. Sales of Blu-ray discs are now stronger than sales of HD-DVD titles.
> For the week including Tuesday, Jan. 16, DVDEmpire.com noted that 57.7%
> of its high-def sales were BD and 42.3% were HD DVD.
>
> 2. there are already more titles in Blu-ray than HD-DVD....Through Jan.
> 16, DVDEmpire.com counted 190 HD DVD releases and 203 BD releases.
>
> And it'll just get worse as more people buy playstation and more
> blu-ray titles come out. Just this week, i already got the recent Ice
> Age 2 in blu-ray (and it's 20th century fox, so NO HD-DVD copy!)
>

quote:

---

> Well, here's more proof the end for HD-DVD is fast approaching.
>
> In addition to amazon.com, other sales channels are reporting much
> stronger blu-ray sales, even though HD-DVD got out first in 2006.
>
> http://www.videobusiness.com/index....cleid=CA6408142
>
> for online retailer DVDEmpire:
>
> 1. Sales of Blu-ray discs are now stronger than sales of HD-DVD titles.
> For the week including Tuesday, Jan. 16, DVDEmpire.com noted that 57.7%
> of its high-def sales were BD and 42.3% were HD DVD.
>
> 2. there are already more titles in Blu-ray than HD-DVD....Through Jan.
> 16, DVDEmpire.com counted 190 HD DVD releases and 203 BD releases.
>
> And it'll just get worse as more people buy playstation and more
> blu-ray titles come out. Just this week, i already got the recent Ice
> Age 2 in blu-ray (and it's 20th century fox, so NO HD-DVD copy!)

quote:

---

> There's no question, Blu-Ray is the superior format of the two, so I
> hope Blu-Ray wins...

quote:

---

> 1. Sales of Blu-ray discs are now stronger than sales of HD-DVD
> titles. For the week including Tuesday, Jan. 16, DVDEmpire.com noted
> that 57.7% of its high-def sales were BD and 42.3% were HD DVD.

quote:

---

> 2. there are already more titles in Blu-ray than HD-DVD....Through
> Jan. 16, DVDEmpire.com counted 190 HD DVD releases and 203 BD
> releases.

quote:

---

> And it'll just get worse as more people buy playstation and more
> blu-ray titles come out. Just this week, i already got the recent Ice
> Age 2 in blu-ray (and it's 20th century fox, so NO HD-DVD copy!)

quote:

---

>1. Sales of Blu-ray discs are now stronger than sales of HD-DVD titles.
>For the week including Tuesday, Jan. 16, DVDEmpire.com noted that 57.7%
>of its high-def sales were BD and 42.3% were HD DVD.

quote:

---

>Just this week, i already got the recent Ice
>Age 2 in blu-ray (and it's 20th century fox, so NO HD-DVD copy!)

quote:

---

> asjbiotek@gmail.com <asjbiotek@gmail.com> spake thusly:
>
>
> OMFG!!!!! 58% vs. 42%, Blu-ray is TEH CHAMPIONZ!!!!
>
> You've just illustrated why this war is too close to call, and why average
> consumers want nothing to do with it.
>
>
> HOLY SHIT!!! There are 7% more Blu-ray releases! This war is OVER!
>
> Again, you're illustrating just how deadlocked the two formats are.
>
>
> ROFL. Enjoy your talking mammoths.
>
> -Z-

quote:

---

> You do know the word "trends" right? it's that thing that smart people
> use to project future results.

quote:

---

> You do know the word "trends" right? it's that thing that smart people
> use to project future results.

quote:

---

> asjbiotek@gmail.com wrote:
>
> From dictionary.com:
>
> "trend /tr=C9=9Bnd/
> =E2=80=93noun
>
> 1. the general course or prevailing tendency; drift: e.g., trends in the
> teaching of foreign languages; the trend of events."
>
>
> A trend is a pattern. One sales figure that appears to go along with
> your previously-established conclusion does NOT constitute a pattern.
>
> --
> --
> Well, whaddaya know? War WAS the answer, after all. Go figure.
>
> A lone Micronaut lost in a world of Star Wars action figures,
> (The Excessively Parenthetical) Geena-- Worrier Princess
>
> "Reciprocity... is the key to every relationship."
> --LAPD Capt. Dudley Smith (James Cromwell), in L.A. Confidential
>
> "Andy Warhol once said that everyone would be famous for fifteen
> minutes. The unfortunate corollary is that everyone will also appear in
> a Freddie Prinze, Jr. movie for fifteen minutes."
> --me
>
> "This is like driving a Rolls Royce, naked, in mink underpants."
> --Tony Bourdain
>
> "You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline - it
> helps if you have some kind of a football team, or some nuclear weapons,
> but at the very least you need a beer."
> -- Frank Zappa
>
> "I'm not sayin' it's the best thing in the world FOR ya; I'm just sayin'
> it's the best thing in the world."
> -- Alton Brown
>
> "The most preposterous notion that H. sapiens has ever dreamed up is
> that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of all the Universes,
> wants the saccharine adoration of His creatures, can be swayed by their
> prayers, and becomes petulant if He does not receive this flattery. Yet
> this absurd fantasy, without a shred of evidence to bolster it, pays all
> the expenses of the oldest, largest, and least productive industry in
> all history."
> -- Robert Heinlein

quote:

---

> No question? Well let me ask you, how is BR "superior?

quote:

---

> Well, here's more proof the end for HD-DVD is fast approaching.
>
> In addition to amazon.com, other sales channels are reporting much
> stronger blu-ray sales, even though HD-DVD got out first in 2006.
>
> http://www.videobusiness.com/index....cleid=CA6408142
>
> for online retailer DVDEmpire:
>
> 1. Sales of Blu-ray discs are now stronger than sales of HD-DVD titles.
> For the week including Tuesday, Jan. 16, DVDEmpire.com noted that 57.7%
> of its high-def sales were BD and 42.3% were HD DVD.
>
> 2. there are already more titles in Blu-ray than HD-DVD....Through Jan.
> 16, DVDEmpire.com counted 190 HD DVD releases and 203 BD releases.
>
> And it'll just get worse as more people buy playstation and more
> blu-ray titles come out. Just this week, i already got the recent Ice
> Age 2 in blu-ray (and it's 20th century fox, so NO HD-DVD copy!)
>

quote:

---

> What does this have to do with xbox360?

quote:

---

> You do know you proved my point right? especially given the two
> factors i listed :
>
> 1. FIVE major studios are NOT releasing titles in hddvd.

quote:

---

> Therefore, as
> time passes (and as shown in the period from 2006 to today) the number
> of blu-ray titles will become SIGNIFICANTLY larger than hd-dvd.

quote:

---

> 2. As time passes, the number of blu-ray players will become
> overwhelmingly larger than hd-dvd, since: (a) More manufacturers are
> producing blu-ray (Samsung, Philips, Panasonic, etc)

quote:

---

> itself far outnumber any hddvd players.

quote:

---

> THEREFORE, given the larger
> player base (and as shown in numbers of discs sold from 2006 to today,
> where sales of hddvd was much larger than blu-ray in 2006, but where
> blu-ray now surpasses it by almost 60:40), the sales for blu-ray will
> become significantly larger than hd-dvd sales as time passes.

quote:

---

> asjbiotek@gmail.com <asjbiotek@gmail.com> spake thusly:
>
>
> Actually, it's three. Sony/MGM (same company), Disney and Fox. But the porn
> studios are leaning towards HD DVD, and anyone who followed the VHS vs.
> Betamax war knows that porn getting behind VHS was one of the reasons that
> format ultimately won. The porn industry as a whole makes more money on home
> video sales than any single Hollywood studio does.
>
>
> Unless Blu-ray doesn't gain any meaningful traction and/or HD DVD pulls
> ahead, in which case all the studios have to do is say, "OK, we're going to
> release on HD DVD now too." You know that none of the studios signed
> exclusivity agreements, right? And that HD DVD is quicker and easier to
> manufature?
>
> Right now studio support is the only true advantage Blu-ray has. So far it
> hasn't done anything to help the sale of Blu-ray players.
>
>
> LOL, that's some interesting logic. You think there's so much demand for
> Blu-ray players that it takes a bunch of manufacturers working together to
> meet it? Afraid not. In fact it just makes it even less desirable for those
> manufacturers to invest a lot in Blu-ray player design and manufacture,
> because there's more competition for the same teensy tiny segment of the
> market that actually wants this technology right now.
>
> (b) PS3 sales by
>
> So? There are over 10 million PSPs out there -- why did UMD movies die a
> painful death? I'm sure a lot of PS3 owners will buy a Blu-ray movie or two
> out of curiosity -- I did -- but those million or so PS3s aren't going to
> turn the tide in Blu-ray's favor. Hell, a certain percentage of those PS3s
> can't even be used for Blu-ray movies because they were bought by people
> with standard def TV sets. And even though the PS3 is the cheapest Blu-ray
> player available, they are gathering dust on store shelves. Even a Blu-ray
> player PLUS a next-gen gaming system together in one device isn't enough to
> motivate the average consumer to buy one.
>
>
> You need to go back to college and take Statistics 101.
>
> Face it, this format was is going to drag on for a couple more years. And as
> long as the two technologies are so evenly matched, most consumers won't
> feel compelled to buy either.

quote:

---

> Excellent points, Z. I know I'M holding out for a player that plays
> both formats.

quote:

---

> Actually, it's three. Sony/MGM (same company), Disney and Fox.

quote:

---

> Unless Blu-ray doesn't gain any meaningful traction and/or HD DVD pulls
> ahead, in which case all the studios have to do is say,

quote:

---

> LOL, that's some interesting logic. You think there's so much demand for
> Blu-ray players that it takes a bunch of manufacturers working together to
> meet it?

quote:

---

> So? There are over 10 million PSPs out there -- why did UMD movies die a
> painful death? I'm sure a lot of PS3 owners will buy a Blu-ray movie or two
> out of curiosity -- I did -- but those million or so PS3s aren't going to
> turn the tide in Blu-ray's favor.

quote:

---

> Hell, a certain percentage of those PS3s
> can't even be used for Blu-ray movies because they were bought by people
> with standard def TV sets.

quote:

---

> You need to go back to college and take Statistics 101.

quote:

---

>
> xbox? what's that? i just posted to NGs that were from a previous
> thread....
>

quote:

---

> Uh, Lionsgate, and Sony has control of both Columbia and MGM, both of
> which have their own historical content. So, 5.

quote:

---

> As to porn, hype. First, only Sony has said anything remotely
> anti-porn, and Sony is NOT the only blu-ray backer.

quote:

---

> Secondly, porn will go where the money is, and where the population
> base is

quote:

---

> You have seen the graphs that show blu-ray sales catching up and now
> pulling ahead of HD-DVD, right (even though HD-DVD had a head start)?
> All in the space of several months time?

quote:

---

> It's not in the best interest of the studios to have two formats -
> they'll go with the format that seems to be winning, and that's
> Blu-ray, especially since 5 studios back it exclusively already.

quote:

---

> The backing of very large conglomerates like Samsung, Philips,
> Panasonic, Sony, Apple, and others means Blu-ray has the money and
> strength behind it to simply outlast HD-DVD, which is backed mainly by
> a very much smaller Toshiba (which is losing money on each player it
> sells, btw)

quote:

---

> Ah, you fail to notice that it is indeed those PS3 owners who are
> starting to buy Blu-ray

quote:

---

> You
> also miss the point that Blu-ray is NOT a proprietary Sony push, but
> one backed most of the industry, another crucial factor.

quote:

---

> Ah, I have a standard TV and use my PS3 Blu-ray on it....your point?

quote:

---

> However, because of our new Blu-ray, we are now going to buy an HDTV.
> Evceryone wins (except for the idiots who buy hd-dvd dead boxes that
> can't play disney movies, or spiderman, or james bond, or...)

quote:

---

> really? you need to take a look at the sales charts again

quote:

---

> 1. Larger number of studios exclusively using Blu-ray (Disney, Sony
> (MGM/Columbia), Fox, Lionsgate)

quote:

---

> 2. Much larger number of potential players for Blu-ray, which almost
> surely means a larger consumer base.

quote:

---

>OMFG!!!!! 58% vs. 42%, Blu-ray is TEH CHAMPIONZ!!!!

quote:

---

>You do know

quote:

---

>
> My understanding is; BR has superior potential, at least; 50mb/s data
>transfer (HDDVD is 30 and DVD is 10)

quote:

---

>What does this have to do with xbox360? Seriously go back to playing all
>those triple-A Playstation 3 titles instead of trolling these boards.
>

quote:

---

>Excellent

quote:

---

>
><asjbiotek@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1169527876.608892.74750@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>Well, there you go... We have an interesting practice on usenet, we
>TRIM the HEADERS to reduce posts to non relevant groups. But you know
>that, don't you, as of course we _all recognize your true purpose
>here.
>

quote:

---

> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 00:47:54 -0500, Geena Phillips
> <gbeenie@comcast.netrosexual> Gave us:

quote:

---

>
>There's no question, Blu-Ray is the superior format of the two, so I
>hope Blu-Ray wins... Plus I'd like to see the adult film industry take
>a loss, so this would be good news.
>
>If a scenario plays out where Blu-ray is declared the clear winner and
>it really takes off by mid 2007, this would be an extremely good thing

quote:

---

> In article <1169507559.104861.248960@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com>,
> Jeremy.Deats@gmail.com says...
>
>
> LMAO!!! So far Blu-Ray sucks compared to HD-DVD.

quote:

---

> Jeremy.Deats@gmail.com says...

quote:

---

> Geena Phillips <gbeenie@comcast.netrosexual> spake thusly:
>
>
> LG is releasing a hybrid player this year, but it's ridiculously expensive
> ($1200) and doesn't support interactive menus on the HD side, which makes it
> kind of pointless. But it's only a matter of time before someone makes a
> dual player that handles both formats flawlessly. It still won't solve the
> studios' dilemma of which format to release their movies on tho.
>
> Right now I have a PS3 and an Xbox 360 HD DVD add-on, so my bases are
> covered no matter which way it goes.
>
> -Z-

quote:

---

> Do you realize how big of an industry the 'adult film industry' is?
> You can bet when porn really starts pumping out the HD DVDs the end
> won't be far for Blu-ray.

quote:

---

> As a data format Bluray disc can hold 25-GB single layer and 50-GB
> dual layer compared to HD-DVD's 15-GB single layer and 30-GB dual
> layer.

quote:

---

> wadner wrote:
>
> I won't hold my breath. Porn goes where the population goes, and that's
> with Blu-ray.
>
> And btw, the Blu-ray consortium (you do know blu-ray is more than just
> Sony right?) already has made placating remarks to the industry.
>

quote:

---

>Nice sig, Geena!

quote:

---

> Have you noticed how biased the major retailers are towards Blu-ray.

quote:

---

> BB and CC have incredible setups with their best Bravias and $1000
> Blu-ray players on display while their HD-DVD players are connected to
> Westinghouse in an effort those TV's rather than the players
> themselves. One thing I have noticed is that those Vizio LCD's in
> Sam's are not as weak as I thought those would be. I am actually
> contemplating purchasing one and testing it out in my sons' room.

quote:

---

>
> SpanishTeacher wrote:
>
>
> I sure have!

quote:

---

>
>
>
> Good news for lowlife self-important twits, maybe. Those of us who
> function at an adult capacity LIKE porno.

quote:

---

> p.s. Seriously, I wouldn't want to know somebody who's against porn.

quote:

---

> "TheGame" <n0n0n0n0n0@excite.com> wrote in message
> news:1169513478.706792.26010@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
[vbcol=seagreen]
> My understanding is; BR has superior potential, at least; 50mb/s data
> transfer (HDDVD is 30 and DVD is 10)

quote:

---

> Higher storage capacity (which I, personally, don't much care about. Either
> version can easily accomodate a 150 minute movie; much longer and there's
> bound to be an intermission, so who cares if I have to change disks?)

quote:

---

> Problem is; Blu-Ray currently seems to use an inferior encoding to HDDVD
> (that can change, though)

quote:

---

> The data transfer is the thing that has me a leaning a little more towards
> Blu-Ray.
> Most of the highest-quality DVDs (the ones with the sharpest picture, etc.)
> tend to be the ones with a data-transfer close to maximum (8 or 9 mb/s) and
> from what I've read, the main advantage of High Definition is not so much
> the higher resolution (just look at the background in most DVDs; skies are
> textures and things, they barely use the resolution they do have; because
> they're limited by data/second,) but the higher amount of data used to store
> the image.

quote:

---

> You do know the word "trends" right? it's that thing that smart people
> use to project future results.

quote:

---

> Add in 2 facts:

quote:

---

> 1. FIVE major studios (including 20th Century Fox, Sony, and DISNEY)
> are ONLY RELEASING in Blu-ray

quote:

---

> 2. Because of the PS3, there will be MANY MANY more potential BD
> players than Hddvd players

quote:

---

> Add those 2 to the above and you figure it out. GAME OVER.

quote:

---

> You do know you proved my point right? especially given the two factors
> i listed :

quote:

---

> 1. FIVE major studios are NOT releasing titles in hddvd. Therefore, as
> time passes (and as shown in the period from 2006 to today) the number
> of blu-ray titles will become SIGNIFICANTLY larger than hd-dvd.

quote:

---

> 2. As time passes, the number of blu-ray players will become
> overwhelmingly larger than hd-dvd, since: (a) More manufacturers are
> producing blu-ray (Samsung, Philips, Panasonic, etc); (b) PS3 sales by
> itself far outnumber any hddvd players. THEREFORE, given the larger
> player base (and as shown in numbers of discs sold from 2006 to today,
> where sales of hddvd was much larger than blu-ray in 2006, but where
> blu-ray now surpasses it by almost 60:40), the sales for blu-ray will
> become significantly larger than hd-dvd sales as time passes.

quote:

---

> LG is releasing a hybrid player this year, but it's ridiculously expensive
> ($1200) and doesn't support interactive menus on the HD side, which makes it
> kind of pointless. But it's only a matter of time before someone makes a
> dual player that handles both formats flawlessly. It still won't solve the
> studios' dilemma of which format to release their movies on tho.

quote:

---

> bark bark bark!

quote:

---

>Isn't Warner Bros. using the other encoding (I don't remember their
>names...) resulting in their blu-ray transfers looking as good as their
>hd-dvd ones? And this just brings up my other question - if you put the
>exact same bits on both discs, wouldn't the resulting picture and sound be
>identical? After all, both players would be using the same codec, and
>putting those same bits onto the same interface (HDMI) to be played on the
>same equipment. So really, doesn't this whole brouhaha just boil down to
>a few stubborn executives bickering over who gets more money?

quote:

---

>Data transfer is only part of the overall "picture" though. (sorry,
>couldn't resist the pun ;) If you used the better encoding method, it also
>provides better compression, doesn't it? And isn't the decompression of the
>data done by the player itself? Then the difference between the data
>transfer rates won't matter as much since you're reading "more" data, just
>compressed.

quote:

---

>
>From an end user's point of view, this whole 'war' is just a repeat of the
>equally stupid DVD-R/+R issue.

quote:

---

>Don't these idiots understand that one of the reasons
>DVD was so successful so fast was that there was only ONE format?

quote:

---

>In alt.games.video.sony-playstation2 MassiveProng <MassiveProng@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
>
>Still playing the angry dog are we?

quote:

---

> On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 01:40:50 -0000, Doug Jacobs
> <djacobs@shell.rawbw.com> Gave us:

quote:

---

[vbcol=seagreen]
> Yeah. It's called low res & poor audio. Old school.

quote:

---

> Or that was then, this is now.

quote:

---

> There's a new kid in town.

quote:

---

> On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:52:40 -0500, "Zackman"
> <zackman@SPAMISEVILearthling.net> Gave us:

quote:

---

[vbcol=seagreen]
> Now I know where I saw you before. You are another kooktard from
> over in the kookgroup. The kooklingo proves it.

quote:

---

> Since the discussion is about both emerging formats, BOTH groups ARE
> relevant, you XXXXing retarded twit!

quote:

---

>
> However, I don't see how making consumers participate in the format war
> between blu-ray and hd-dvd is beneficial. Multiple formats just cause
> confusion and splits the market. DVD - whether you think its specs were
> good or not - presented consumers with a single format. You bought a "DVD
> Player" and it played "DVDs". Simple. No worries about which format to
> choose, buying multiple players or a more expensive combo-player.

quote:

---

> What does this have to do with xbox360? Seriously go back to playing all
> those triple-A Playstation 3 titles instead of trolling these boards.
>

quote:

---

>However, I don't see how making consumers participate in the format war
>between blu-ray and hd-dvd is beneficial.

quote:

---

>In alt.video.dvd MassiveProng <MassiveProng@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>Sarcasm-meter out of batteries? He's clearly making a joke.

quote:

---

> In alt.video.dvd MassiveProng <MassivePr...@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
>
> a HD format.
>
> However, I don't see how making consumers participate in the format war
> between blu-ray and hd-dvd is beneficial. Multiple formats just cause
> confusion and splits the market. DVD - whether you think its specs were
> good or not - presented consumers with a single format. You bought a "DVD
> Player" and it played "DVDs". Simple. No worries about which format to
> choose, buying multiple players or a more expensive combo-player.
>
> Consumers - and I'm talking your average consumer, not the high end early
> adopter types - like things simple.
>
> What's worse is that the only major difference between these is that they're
> backed by different companies. From the simple consumer's point of view,
> both formats play HD movies with surround sound. Differences in terms of
> what codec, compression, or even how many channels of audio (7 vs. 9?)
> just aren't going to make a very noticable difference to most. Instead,
> they'll just buy a combo solution - meaning they aren't making a choice at
> all, and now the silly corporations are stuck supporting their own
> proprietary formats out of pride.
>
> Going back to the difference between DVD-R/+R, wouldn't it have just been
> easier if there had just been 1 burnable DVD format, as their was with
> CD? Remember how fast CD burners dropped in price and suddenly all new CD
> devices supported CDR? There wasn't confusion about what sort of CDR. It
> wasn't like the DVD-R/+R mess where some DVD drives would recognize ONE
> burnable format, but NOT the other.
>
> --
> Win cash and giftcards just for clicking your mouse!http://www.netwinner.com/?signupCode=amuro98

quote:

---

>
>
> On Jan 22, 9:18 pm, "John J" <t...@isafake.email> wrote:
all[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> That would sound less idiotic if people like Jonah Falcon didn't litter
> the Xbox group with anti-PS3 garbage exponentially greater than any pro
> sony crossposts.

quote:

---

>
> Plus DVD players are cheap.

quote:

---

> come. Nobody with brains cares about the HD format whores... er... wars.

quote:

---

> Actually, there is a difference between the two at the programming
> level....it is possible to create much richer intrective applications
> on Blu-ray than Hd-dvd because Blu-ray uses Java (the same programming
> language that is used by eBay, google, etc, and by games in your
> cellphones)..
>
> As the platform matures, you will get much greater interactivity
> possible in blu-ray.

quote:

---

> safely say you are full of shit. It's a different language than what
> HD-DVD uses, but it is in no absolute way "better".

quote:

---

> On Jan 27, 3:40 pm, "Aaron J. Bossig"
> <linkv...@SpammersWillBeExecuted.ptd.net> wrote:
>
> As someone who actually has 9 YEARS experience in java (including J2EE
> and J2ME) and uses BD-Java (Blu-ray disc Java), I'll call your bluff
> and say you're full of sh*t
>
> The difference in capabilities of a full programming language like
> Java versus the scripting used in hd-dvd is the difference between a
> static web page using javascript to do some minimal
> "interactivity" (like hd-dvd) to a desktop application like Adobe
> Photoshop, Microsoft Office, or any PC/Flash game (a full
> application)....

quote:

---

> Yes there was. It wasn't much of a fight because no one in their right
> mind wanted DIVX to win that war, but it there was a question of whether
> or not the studios would successfully cram DIVX down the throat of
> consumers. mInstead they successfully crammed DVDs down our throats, as
> many a laserdisc enthusiast will tell you...

quote:

---

> In alt.video.dvd Ted <nospamforted@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
> Divx came out too late to be a serious threat to DVD. DVD had already
> started to accelerate in the market when Divx showed up abruptly one
> Christmas.
>

quote:

---

> Problem is, although the DVD players and DVDs were more expensive than
> Divx players/discs, the extra cost was easily justified.
>
> As for LD vs. DVD, doesn't DVD still win out because of higher resolution
> video and better audio? Or is this just a matter of capacity != format,
> meaning you could concievably use LD to hold a DVD-quality movie - it's
> just that the studios decided to move on to DVD?
>

quote:

---

> As the platform matures, you will get much greater interactivity
> possible in blu-ray.

quote:

---

>
>Still seems like a tie to me -

quote:

---

> "Doug Jacobs" <djacobs@shell.rawbw.com> wrote in message
> news:12rsoactnkift81@corp.supernews.com...
> =========================
> Not really true. Indeed DVD was a "good" seller from the start, but
> Divx was a threat for quite some time.

quote:

---

> DVD only really took off after the death of divx.

quote:

---

> Richard C. wrote:
>
> True, but it was only a threat because of the substantial amount of studio
> support Divx enjoyed (which, as I recall, is what the original poster of
> this thread claims "guarantees" Blu-Ray's victory). There was never any
> consumer demand for it.
>
>
> Honestly, I don't really see that as a causal relationship.
>

quote:

---

>
> In alt.video.dvd Ted <nospamforted@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
> Divx came out too late to be a serious threat to DVD. DVD had already
> started to accelerate in the market when Divx showed up abruptly one
> Christmas.

quote:

---

>
> Problem is, although the DVD players and DVDs were more expensive than
> Divx players/discs, the extra cost was easily justified.
>
> As for LD vs. DVD, doesn't DVD still win out because of higher resolution
> video and better audio? Or is this just a matter of capacity != format,
> meaning you could concievably use LD to hold a DVD-quality movie - it's
> just that the studios decided to move on to DVD?