Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

HD-DVD and the Early Adopter Premium

Posted by CmdrTaco on Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:20 PM
from the sounds-like-a-waste-of-money-to-me dept.
Hodejo1 writes "The early adopter premium is the difference between the cost of buying the latest greatest techno-toy today and the cost of buying an equal or better unit a couple of years later for much less. That Blu-ray unit you buy today for $300 will cost $80 two years from now. The premium is the $220 you pay to get the starter Blu-ray unit now as opposed to waiting. The same applied for HD-DVD until the axe finally fell and this is where it gets interesting. MP3 Newswire has been tracking post-mortem HD-DVD sales on eBay and surprisingly found that there are many takers. And why are people flocking to buy this decade's Betamax? Simple, they did the math. The demise of HD-DVD format creates "an option where the consumer can get his high-def player NOW without paying the $220 early adopter premium. That savings pays for the player and more. New sealed boxes of the Toshiba HD-A3, which shipped last fall for $300, are now drawing on average about $75 on eBay, where plummeting HD-DVD movie prices are averaging between $6 and $10. "Take a consumer with a 42" plasma set who needs to replace a broken standard definition DVD player. He can a) replace it with another standard definition DVD for about $60. b) He can buy a Blu-Ray player for between $300-$1000. c) He can buy an HD-DVD unit for under $80 and then buy ten $10 or sixteen $6 HD-DVD videos for a total of $180". What really drives this is Blu-ray's skimpy catalog, which will take a couple of years to pump up. Rather than blow the $220 on the early adopter premium just to have access to a limited number of movies the post mortem HD-DVD buyers can enjoy cheap Hi-Def players, cheap Hi-Def videos, and pay less. These users can shift to Blu-ray when players are less expensive and the catalog is robust. Actually, the early adopter premium is more like $320. With the win, Blu-ray manufacturers have raised prices."
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by kesuki (321456) on Saturday March 08 2008, @12:25PM (#22687456) Journal
    aacs has been cracked, while BD+ hasn't so everything on 'hd-dvd' can be backed up to a computer, then sold on e-bay or whatever. you can even burn the backed up hd-dvd to a bd-r, if you're willing to pay $600 for a bd-writer...
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      Of course, you can't play the resulting burned BD-R on a standalone BluRay player - as I understand it, they only play AACS-protected pressed BD discs.
      • by Zocalo (252965) on Saturday March 08 2008, @01:34PM (#22687772) Homepage

        I'm pretty sure that can't be right. I could perhaps understand the control freaks at Sony trying to pull a stunt like that, but requiring AACS is going to have a big impact on another emerging market Sony has a huge stake in; HD camcorders. Currently, the only way of efficiently distributing sizeable hi-res content from such a camcorder to friends and family (assuming they have HDTV capability in the first place) is via a physical HD disc, which essentially now means Blu-Ray. Hitachi even has a HD camcorder [hitachi.com] available that records straight to an 8cm Blu-Ray disc, which is then supposed to be immediately playable in any Blu-Ray player. Unless both the Hitachi camcorder and end-user AV software is also doing AACS encoding before writing content to disc, then that's going to leave a lot of HD camcorder owners just a little peeved when they try and show of their latest home videos in glorious HD.

        Then again, it could actually be a good thing if they don't play on standalone players. It was bad enough having to sit through $random_family_member's holiday snaps, things took a turn for the worse with the first analogue camcorders, but the thought of seeing all that in HD? Won't somebody please think of the children!

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          As i understand it, encrypted DVDs will only play with HDMI but unencrypted ones will play in hi-def. Since most pr0n is not encrypted, those Blue-Ray players would take a beating.

          I am looking for an HD-DVD myself simply as an upscaling standard DVD player. They are cheaper than the regular upscaling DVD players on average.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Of course you can. The amount of FUD surrounding Blu-Ray is phenomenal. The BD players I know of play DVDs, encrypted or otherwise, BD movies, encrypted or otherwise and even some other file types in some cases.

        My Playstation 3 quite happily plays high definition content over my network using its DLNA (UPnP) functionality which for all it knows could be ripped HD-DVD discs.

        Speaking of FUD and Sony, the PS3 quite happily rips CDs to its hard drive and then lets you copy them off to memory sticks, etc. if y
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      Doesn't that require a lot of disk space? *looks at the 3 750GB Freeagent Pros that I bought yesterday for 53.99 each* :)
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        well yes, but you only have to store it on hd for 2 years. since then, burners for BD media will be cheap... i can't remember if hd-dvd does dual layer, so it's like 15-30 gb per movie. as for not playing it on standalone players, you can still play it back on a 'cheap' pc player with a bd-rom bd rom drives are still spendy too, they will be cheaper in 2 years though.
    • "can be backed up to a computer"

      That only interests a small segment of the audiophile population, which is itself a small segment of the consumer population in general. If that truly was a major deciding factor in the purchase, then the MPAA's piracy numbers are accurate. You can't have it both ways.

      Of course, I'd wager you also foresaw the failure of Apple's iTunes because of its DRM format and still wonder how the Virtual Console can possibly make money with ZSNES available for free.
  • by mccalli (323026) on Saturday March 08 2008, @12:26PM (#22687460) Homepage
    Another difference from Betamax is that an HD-DVD player can play today's most popular format without trouble - the DVD. It can also act as an upscaling DVD player, so in fact you'll get better quality than a standard DVD player.

    There was a Digg link where everyone laughed at play.com [play.com] rebranding an HD-DVD player as an Upscaling DVD Player with HD Capabilities. I disagree with the laugh track - I think that's a clever step to take, and it's also completely true.

    Cheers,
    Ian
      • by ArikTheRed (865776) on Saturday March 08 2008, @03:59PM (#22688564) Homepage
        It is... oh god it is. I got a BR player, and it takes forever to boot. Not only that, some discs actually take forever to load beyond the boot-up time. Ratatouille actually took over 5 minutes to load when we tried to watch it... just sat there with a loading screen with a damn rat on it. I swear - it was laughing at me.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        My A3 takes nearly 30 seconds to boot. Fairly annoying, but I've had decent DVD players that took nearly that long.

        And yes, it's useful. 30 seconds to boot vs. 2 hours to watch a movie on average; you do the math. Turn the player on, grab something to drink, then take a movie off the shelf. By then, the thing's on and you're ready to sit down and feel your ass grow.

        Regular DVDs look fantastic on it, yes. I would recommend that people not turn on the black and rgb enhancement, though; those features see
  • by YesIAmAScript (886271) on Saturday March 08 2008, @12:26PM (#22687464)
    Article says BluRay manufacturers have raised prices. This is not true. The link tracks average sale price, no manufacturer's recommended price.

    Yes, average sale price has gone up after Christmas sales ended.

    Also, if BluRay's catalog is skimpy, what does that make the HD-DVD catalog, which is smaller?

    It'd be great if the HD-DVD fans took a clue from Toshiba and stopped trying to push a dead format. They're not doing anyone any favors.
    • by Berkyjay (1225604) on Saturday March 08 2008, @12:45PM (#22687558)
      This article is dead on and people are smart for doing this. Don't hate because someone knows a good thing when they see it. I just bought 10 HD DVD's for $50. And at a later point I will rip them onto my computer then burn them to a Blu-Ray disc.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        This article is dead on and people are smart for doing this. Don't hate because someone knows a good thing when they see it. I just bought 10 HD DVD's for $50. And at a later point I will rip them onto my computer then burn them to a Blu-Ray disc.

        And play them on what? They won't play on any BD player currently in existence, or likely in existence in the future (by design).

        Then there's the media. How cheap are you expecting dual-layer Blu-Ray discs to be? Go look up the price of a dual-layer recordable D
        • > What makes sense at this point is to either stick with DVD, which is fine, or buy a Blu-Ray player.
          > It does not make sense to buy an HD-DVD player at any price.

          You're assuming that many people buying HD-DVD players TODAY are primarily motivated by desire to watch NEW movies in HD, as opposed to picking up a cool new disposable toy because it was cheap enough to say 'Fuck it' and buy just to enjoy the novelty of, and have a future player for HD camcorder videos burned to DVD+R media.

          The fact that Bl
    • by vertinox (846076) on Saturday March 08 2008, @12:46PM (#22687560)
      It'd be great if the HD-DVD fans took a clue from Toshiba and stopped trying to push a dead format. They're not doing anyone any favors.

      To be fair, I suspect Blu-Ray won't outlive plain old DVD. Unless Sony starts dumping $20 Blu-ray players with $9.99 movies, the rest of the world who can't afford Hi-Def TVs and Sound systems will probaly be satisfied with plain old DVDs for quite sometime.

      Once the initial analog hurtle was jumped from VHS to DVD, there was no real need to go beyond that except those who had Hi-Def. Much like SCDs and mini-discs never took off, I personally believe Blu-Ray will be "good enough" until downloads, holographic discs, or solid state media takes off in 5 years. I still bet DVD will still outlast them for quite some time.

      Just think of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD as the Laser Discs of the 21st century rather than VHS or Betamax. They're nice, but most people don't need them or will buy them except hardcore hi-def enthusiasts.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        I totally agree with you on every point... For me, DVD quality is more than good enough, and I couldn't imagine the point of upgrading to Blu-ray or HD-DVD. maybe my eye sight isn't that good anymore, but I just can't even see the difference. I would pay to upgrade when the media gets significantly smaller so that it can be used in portable devices - I would see the point of that.
  • Great Player (Score:5, Insightful)

    by n9uxu8 (729360) on Saturday March 08 2008, @12:28PM (#22687472) Homepage
    The Toshibas are excellent upconverting players...I need another dvd for the basement HDTV, so I plan on picking up another rather than shelling out for a standard upconverting player.

    Dave
    • Re:Great Player (Score:5, Informative)

      by MagicNegro (1242634) <magicnegro@t[ ]hmail.net ['ras' in gap]> on Saturday March 08 2008, @01:01PM (#22687622)

      I'm not feeling too bad about my purchase of a Toshiba HD DVD. I mean, it came almost free with the HDTV that we bought before Christmas, and aside from renting a few HD DVDS, we haven't really invested a whole lot of money.

      It came with 2 movies "Bourne Identity" (love it, great action and good features) and "300" (artist self gratification and generally crap movie), and a coupon for 5 more free. Haven't seen them yet. Doubt I will. It won't matter.

      We will be buying a Blu-Ray once the price point on a medium featured unit goes sub-$200. Typical consumer price.

  • New titles (Score:3, Interesting)

    by stabiesoft (733417) on Saturday March 08 2008, @12:34PM (#22687514) Homepage
    While I think the HD players are an excellent cheap up-scaling DVD player, I question there value as a HD player. The catalog is tiny, and more importantly, there will be no new titles. So if I want the latest new release on a HD format, its blu-ray or nothin. I know, lots of people think up-scaled DVD's look just as good as HD, I just don't happen to be one of them. So, for me, I'll be picking up the high priced blu-ray media. I do think the war ended too soon. I was getting a lot of mileage out of the BOGO sales, which have vaporized as you could predict. Oh, and for those that will mention HD downloads, I'm already rolling on the floor with laughter.
    • What about blank HD-DVD media and drives for recording it? Are they available?
    • Re:New titles (Score:5, Interesting)

      by squiggleslash (241428) on Saturday March 08 2008, @01:07PM (#22687654) Homepage Journal

      The catalog isn't that tiny, there's some real gems such as most of the major Kubrick films and the Blade Runner collection (which I ordered right after Christmas for $25. Wow. Most awesome DVD set I've ever had, until then it was the Criterion "Brazil" set but the Blade Runner DVD/HD DVD/Blu-ray thing blows that away), and, on the other end of the scale, the only high-definition release thus far of the Matrix series. It's worth checking both Amazon.com and Amazon.de as the European releases covered a slightly different collection of movies to those in the US, due to differing distribution rights; and HD DVD is region free so this really is worth doing.

      Yes, there are plenty of movies not available on HD DVD. But the catalog isn't "tiny", people were buying DVD players back when the available DVDs were nothing like as plentiful as HD DVD is today.

      • The Criterion Brazil is great (wish they would re-release it in anamorphic or HD, though). But, for my money, the absolute gold standard of all DVD sets is still the Alien Quadrilogy boxset. It's like God himself came down and designed a DVD set. Nothing else even comes close.
    • "Oh, and for those that will mention HD downloads, I'm already rolling on the floor with laughter." - parent

      iTunes has already made a lot of progress for music, movies will most assuredly follow. All it will take is something like a Tivo that can purchase movies online and allow you back them up for playback on your home PC (presumably after loggin in online) or the "tivo" you purchased it from. And if netflix ever starts actually putting good, and new movies, online for download, which is certainly in th
      • I'd rather download a 700MB xvid or divx than a DVD iso. Time is significant. The quality is acceptable. Maybe its time to bring back XVCD?
  • Given the fact that HD-DVD titles are dirt cheap now, what about the prospect of buying up a lot of titles you want now and converting them to Blu-ray later? This is sort of like people converting VHS titles to DVD a few years ago, but without the problems of degraded quality.
    • I remember hearing that BluRay would only play encrypted/copy protected content. I'm not sure if I'm misinformed, or just not quite correct on the details, but it was my understanding that there wouldn't be any way of having user created content playable on BluRay.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      OR, unless your HD-DVD player breaks (which is possible, but I have 3 "true" DVD players around the house, one of which is about 10 years old, and none have ever broken), why even bother converting? Just keep playing the HD-DVD's.
  • Multi-format players (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ifni (545998) on Saturday March 08 2008, @12:47PM (#22687568) Homepage
    Another consideration is that by the time BD players come down in price in a year or two, they are likely to be multiformat players, integrating HD-DVD playback. The technology is already available (http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/09/05/lgs-bh200-hd-dvd-blu-ray-combo-player-set-for--october/), and since there will be a significant market comprised of people that don't want to repurchase their HD-DVD collection, it only makes sense that either this multi-format system will become standard, or be a very low cost option. So all these people taking advantage of cheap HD-DVD players/movies now can also take advantage of low priced Blu-Ray a couple years down the line with almost no down side.

    Despite Samsung canceling its next gen combo player (http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/006597.html), I think that this is a near term decision - when the market picks up for current model combo players, there will be financial incentive to meet that demand with new products.
    • by the eric conspiracy (20178) on Saturday March 08 2008, @01:56PM (#22687910)
      Nobody is going to be building combo players. It just doesn't make sense to add to the cost of a player for a format where there will be no new software.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            Somebody must have hit you with the stupid stick. The post you were replying to was referring to COMBO players, not being able to get obsolete devices. Did you ever see a 5.25"/3.5" floppy disk combo drive? No? Well, there's your analogy.

            Speaking of being hit with the stupid stick, the 5.25" and 3.5" floppies used completely different form factors, which makes them a poor analogy for HD-DVD and Rlu-Ray, which share pretty much the exact same form factor. It would be a wee bit difficult to produce a "combo"
                • by PoliTech (998983) on Sunday March 09 2008, @08:27AM (#22692052) Homepage Journal
                  Now youre narrowing your expected definition of COMBO drive. Since the only difference in the floppy question is form factor (because the media and mechanisms are nearly identical except for media size itself) the comparison isn't really accurate.

                  Does anyone remember Super Disk drives [wikipedia.org]? Those were a combo drive that would accept traditional 3.5 inch floppies in addition to being able to read and write its native 120 MB (later 240 MB) disks. These drives used the same slot and mechanism for read write of two highly disparate formats.

                  Actually the comparison of this media works on a number of levels. The floppy was long outmoded and of insufficient capacity for several years, but the drive was still deemed necessary to at least read historical data. The introduction of the LS-120 and the later variant LS-240 SuperDisk was too little, too late. By 2000, the entire removable-disk category quickly faced obsolescence because of CD-R and CD-RW drives.

                  The more I think about this the more I see a parallel in the current situation; with Bluray being the "Super Disk" (HD-DVD could possibly be considered the "Zip" drive) and with the entire category of removable optical media facing overall obsolescence due to the higher capacity of solid-state (USB flash drives or SSD hard disks). Eventually owners of BluRay optical media may end up, like owners of SuperDisks, in possession of a device with a quietly discontinued format, and it's media becoming hard to find.

                  More likely, we may just end up with more of the same the alphabet soup that we already enjoy with optical media and it may well include the HD-DVD in the string of formats listed before it's all over.

  • Who pays $60 for a DVD player when you can get one for $30 [walmart.com]?
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Exactly!

          It may well be that the Toshiba HD players have the best upscalers in them, but all that implies is that the upscalers in the HD displays are crap (which would not be surprising, given that the display manufacturers want you to buy HD everything, so why make an effort at having your old DVDs look good on the display?).

          So, if a DVD HD player makes a good DVD upscaler, and you can buy it dirt cheap, why the heck not!

          The blueray player price rise someone mentioned here could really shoot Sony in the fo
  • ...a linux box, xine and bittorrent.
    I mean, HD-DVDs ? Physical disks ? Dust ? Uuuh.

    Besides, frankly speaking, this early adopter rush probably has nothing to do with a taste for high quality and everything to do with a pissing contest with your neighbors.
  • embellishment (Score:5, Insightful)

    by burnin1965 (535071) on Saturday March 08 2008, @12:53PM (#22687582) Homepage

    What really drives this is Blu-ray's skimpy catalog, which will take a couple of years to pump up.

    The articles itself was interesting and looks spot on, however this embellished comment on the article is inaccurate. Amazon lists over 500 HD-DVD titles [amazon.com] and over 700 Blu-Ray titles [amazon.com]. It seems someone is grasping at anything to save face on a lost cause.

    With a large volume of HD content available for the dead format and the player/movie prices heavily cut to move inventory it should be no surprise they are selling. Thats the point of the massive price cuts, to clear out the inventory of the dead format.

    Is this bad news for Blu-Ray? Hardly, once the inventory for this dead format is depleted it will be a Blu-Ray market until a viable alternative is developed. I doubt we'll get any meaningful agreement between hardware manufacturers, software developers, content producers, and telecom providers that will enable a meaningful replacement for Blu-Ray any time soon.
    • Re:embellishment (Score:5, Informative)

      by CastrTroy (595695) on Saturday March 08 2008, @01:11PM (#22687670) Homepage
      I don't think digital distribution will be a replacement for physical disks anytime soon. If you want to know why, take for example, the WiiShop channel on Christmas day, You couldn't even get on, let alone get to the point where you could download a game. And that's just for downloading tiny ROMS. Using physical disks allows studios to release a very large number of disks to the public, and have almost everybody who wants a copy, gets a copy. Digital distribution of 50 GB HD movies won't be feasible for quite a while. If everybody with a cable connection started to download 50 GB a month, the ISPs would quickly raise rates to account for the massive increase in bandwidth.
      • Of course, the smart thing would be that ISPs distribute the content themselves, so it does not really cost them in terms of external bandwith. That's exactly what the major ISPs here plan to do with IPTV.
    • This isn't anything to do with saving face on a lost cause, it's saving money on movies that you can buy right now. Don't forget, that HD player will still play regular DVDs, so for someone who doesn't have those "GOTTA GET SOME OF THAT" early adopter genes, a choice of 500 cheap titles for a $75 player is a better deal than 700 full price titles for a $320 player.
  • by rbrander (73222) on Saturday March 08 2008, @01:00PM (#22687614) Homepage
    Such a ridiculous premium is put on technology costs by the "first on my block" factor, and so much value is ignored by the "fear of obsolescence" that great economies can be had by doing the opposite - jumping on technologies as they start to age.

    Everybody who buys computers knows there's a "sweet spot" in price/performance that's about in the middle of the pack. If 1TB drives are just available, and you can still get 80GB drives but no smaller (not new), the the lowest $/GB is going to be around the 500GB size.

    Well, the sweet spot for consumer entertainment boxes has tended to be near the trailing edge for over a decade now, not the middle. Unlike computer parts, there's very little Moore's Law involved.

    I got a DVD player when they hit $300, and watched about 20 movies on it by the time they'd dropped below $100. So those 20 movies cost me $5 each to rent, and $10 each to own the player that early; I bought too soon.

    Better results came from buying a LaserDisc AFTER the DVD had been announced and LD's dropped like a stone. I got it for a couple of hundred, watched several dozen movies on it before they were being sold from the stores, bought 20 discs for $5 each, and am still watching them one-by-one (and it's barely less good than DVD). In addition, it's now a conversation piece, a historical curio.

    People still buy technology with the wrong, wrong mindset that it is a capital asset, that it will last a long time like a house, or at least a good car. It's not. It won't last that long anymore; not just the gadget, the ENTIRE FORMAT. My tapes lasted 20 years, DVD came and went in about 10, Blu-Ray is widely expected to be obsoleted by (often downloaded) AVI files in less than 10.

    So treat it as an operating-money decision instead. Figure out the number of movies you watch in a year - if you're out of the dating years, have a family, generally Have A Life, it's probably less than 30, may be under 20. Then figure a five-year lifespan for a format these days, and that's the number of discs you'll play: maybe 100-150. Paying $600 for a player is $4-$6 per disc. Add then rental, and are you sure you don't just want to go to the theatre?
  • by Xest (935314) on Saturday March 08 2008, @01:01PM (#22687618)
    Frankly I don't give a damn whether I can see some actors face in all it's blemished detail, what I do care about is the likes of Planet Earth, Galapagos and so forth in HD.

    Fact is, picking up a firesale HD-DVD player + Planet Earth, Galapagos and so on in HD-DVD as well as a few films that do actually suit HD well such as 300 and Transformers I've been able to get the content I actually want to see in HD early. I'd never buy an HD player for the likes of the Bourne series, simply because I already think Matt Damon is an idiot and I don't particularly care about watching a high definition idiot in my room, I'm quite content with people like him remaining standard definition, and in not watching that sort of thing in HD I don't feel like I've lost out on anything whatsoever.

    I guess to put it another way, some films you watch for the fantastic visuals, others you watch for the story. The story based films really don't make much difference whether they'd HD or standard def. but you'd never watch something like Planet Earth for the story, whilst it's interesting the main pull to it is the fantastic visuals that make you realise how amazing our planet actually is so I had a choice. Do I wait god knows how long for a Bluray player to come down to £50 - maybe 2years or more? or do I just buy an HD-DVD player addon for my 360 for £50 and enjoy the content I actually care about seeing in HD right now. To me it's really a no brainer, as has been mentioned previously on Slashdot, it's not as if the 360's HD-DVD drive can't be used on a computer to rip the content to disc and burn to a Bluray disc sometime down the road anyway when the prices for burning Bluray discs becomes reasonable.

    Some people look at me funny when I say I bought an HD-DVD player and a few films, but I struggle to find myself as being the joke when I've paid £90 for the same player + content they're paying over £300 for. I'm still possibly going to buy Bluray down the line, I just aint going to pay anything over £100 for it. It's all too easy for some people to overlook common sense and logical action due to over the top brand loyalty. I understand there may be some people who do want to see their favourite actors in all their high definition glory rather than enjoy the storyline but I'm not one of those and plenty of others aren't - for those of us who only watch story based discs for the story then even 700mb XviD (i.e. not quite as good as DVD quality even) is plenty good enough.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      I struggle to find myself as being the joke when I've paid £90 for the same player + content they're paying over £300 for.

      You'll be singing a different tune when they spent that money just once and can continue to enjoy new releases while you spent that money once AND have to spend the additional money again when you find that you can't buy anything new that will play on your player. And you'll have to either dispose of the thing or figure out how to make it all fit in your TV stan

  • by elrous0 (869638) * on Saturday March 08 2008, @01:06PM (#22687652)
    I adopted DVD in 1997 (just months after it came out) with a $450 player (at that time, one of the cheapest on the market). I have no regrets. I got a well-built machine that has lasted almost 11 years now (my parents still use it). That premium got me several years headstart over those still wasting $ on VHS tapes and a machine that was very decent and built to last (unlike many of the cheapo DVD players today).

    I also bought into HD-DVD (bought the $180 xbox 360 add-on drive when it first came out). That $180 got me the ability to watch movies in high-def, access to HD-DVD discs that were generally much cheaper than their blu-ray counterparts, and access to many great exclusives (like the Battlestar Galactica HD-DVD boxset) not available on blu-ray. And it's not like any of that stuff I've already bought is going to turn into a pumpkin now that HD-DVD is dead. It also gives me access to some great clearance deals on discs now. No regrets

    I also bought a blu-ray player (PS3 after the first price drop for $500). Gives me access to blu-ray discs and exclusives, a good gaming system with potential, full hardware backwards compatibility for my PS2/PS1 games (it's the original 60GB American model). And it's easily upgradable. No regrets.

    I'm sick of hearing about the "dangers" of early adoption. IMHO, it's almost always worth it (as long as you don't go crazy with the top-of-the line stuff). Early adoption can buy you years of fun ahead of everyone else and rarely becomes truly worthless even if your chosen format "loses."

  • Prior art (Score:3, Interesting)

    by johnw (3725) on Saturday March 08 2008, @01:08PM (#22687658)
    In its way, rather similar to what happened with the 3" floppy disc drive. For a while the two battled it out, then it became clear that 3.5" had won out, but then Alan Sugar made use of the fact that the price of 3" drives had dropped to practically nothing and put them in the Amstrad PCW256. Unfortunately, production of the media had pretty much stopped so for a while the drives were quite a lot cheaper than a box of 10 discs (which was more surprising then than it would be now).

    The Amstrad box was so popular that production of 3" discs had to be restarted and 3" drives got a whole new lease of life. Still died in the end though.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Just as an FYI and future reference, "disc" is reserved for optical media while "disk" is for magnetic (hard or soft media).

        Bollocks. The two spellings have been used interchangeably for years. Whilst it might be true to say that the trademark "Compact disc" requires the "C" spelling, extrapolating from this to your general rule is purely wishful thinking.

        It is true that "disk" is more common in the USA, whilst "disc" is (or was) more common in English English, but all these things are becoming very blurred.

  • by WK2 (1072560) on Saturday March 08 2008, @01:28PM (#22687740) Homepage
    > And why are people flocking to buy this decade's Betamax? Simple, they did the math.

    What? The summary does a good job of describing why HD-DVD is a good buy, although they have to make up facts to do it, such as pricing a DVD player at $60. However, I think it is more likely that most of the people buying HD-DVD players don't know that it is dead. Never attribute to average people doing math that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.
  • by urcreepyneighbor (1171755) on Saturday March 08 2008, @01:37PM (#22687798)

    And why are people flocking to buy this decade's Betamax?
    Don't know about the rest of the world, but I'd like a Betamax deck (to digitize some old Beta tapes I have).

    Save your HD-DVD player! Some loser, twenty years from now, may want it!
  • by pushing-robot (1037830) on Saturday March 08 2008, @02:42PM (#22688174)
  • by DCheesi (150068) on Saturday March 08 2008, @03:23PM (#22688364) Homepage
    What all the "Wal-mart DVD players are cheaper" posters are missing is that the upconversion on those players is mostly crap. If you've got an HDTV that has good internal scaling then all you need is progressive-scan; but some displays *need* a good quality upscaler, and the Wal-Mart brands are largely worthless for that (heck, even the models sold in CC/BB are only mediocre, usually).

    Personally, I bought an HD-A2 when the price dropped below that of the OPPO players, which are widely considered the cream of the crop in upscaling DVD players. Many reviews on AV discussion boards indicated that the Tosh HD-DVD players were(/are) at least equal to the OPPOs, plus you got HD-DVD as a bonus. Meanwhile the only thing I sacrificed was support for formats like DVD-A/SACD on the OPPO, which I didn't plan to use anyway.

    Of course that was before the format "died", so there was at least the *possibility* that the HD-DVD portion would be useful going forward. But if I were looking at it now, I'd much rather have a $60 "HD-A3 than a $30 Wal-mart brand just for the upconverting function...