Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Data Storage Media

Toshiba May Delay HD-DVD Launch to 2006 102

Posted by CowboyNeal from the world-not-yet-ready dept.
Mictian writes "According to Reuters Toshiba may be delaying the launch of it's HD-DVD players that was originally slated for the end of this year. One of the reasons cited was that talks with Hollywood and major studios about the timing are still ongoing. It now seems that the players may not be shipped to retailers before 2006, at least not in the US. The Japanese might still get their hands on 'em by christmas. In any case it looks like a setback for the HD-DVD camp (Toshiba, NEC & Sanyo) if one of their few advantages over the Blu-ray camp (Sony & Matsushita), an earlier product launch, is essentially eliminated. Sony has been rumoured to consider a Q1 2006 launch for Blu-ray in the form of the PlayStation 3 console. There was an earlier Slashdot story about the rivals giving up on a unified format."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Toshiba May Delay HD-DVD Launch to 2006 More

Toshiba May Delay HD-DVD Launch to 2006

Comments Filter:
  • Will this delay be all that blu-ray needs to become the market standard?

  • ...so there is no news (Score:3, Funny)

    by Uukrul ( 835197 ) on Saturday September 03, 2005 @09:42AM (#13470340)
    Toshiba may be delaying the launch
    I remember the old days when releasing something was the news.
    Maybe next Slashdot history could be: Duke Nukem Forever delayed [3drealms.com]

    • Typo (Score:2, Funny)

      by Donniedarkness ( 895066 )
      Should be Duke Nukem, Forever Delayed
      • Why would anyone choose an inferior standard? BLU-RAY has the capability of holding 100 gigabytes... HD-DVD only 1/3rd as much. Why choose a standard that is already so limited in space???

        That's why VHS won the war circa 1980... 6 hours per tape vs. only 3 for Beta. More storage space is better for the customer.

        troy

    • The news: No HD-DVD in this year's Xmas stocking. And next year's dvd "Easter egg" will be the player itself. (Other gags, about - say - resurrection, to follow...)
  • Without time advantage HD-DVD is dead. BluRay will be the standard.

    I mean, would you buy inferior device now (HD-DVD/February), when you will be able to buy better one is just a month (BluRay/March-April)?

    • Re:R.I.P. HD-DVD (Score:3, Interesting)

      by baadger ( 764884 )
      What is it with peopel saying HD-DVD is inferior?

      I was under the illusion both had advantages (HD-DVD's being it's compatibility layer, Toshiba pushing for a unified format, cheaper to produce, etc) and disadvantages.

      Why have all slashdotters seemingly decided blu-ray is just...better. We in buzzword town again? Ooo shiney blue lasers?

      Someone explain.

      • Re:R.I.P. HD-DVD (Score:2, Interesting)

        by tereshchenko ( 715289 )
        1. Yes, the only "advantage" of HD-DVD is compatibility layer (but you will hardly buy HD films for compatibility track with same DVD quality, aren't you?).

        2. Toshiba did not push for unified format - it was PR stunt, and they never intended for unification talks to succeed (I have proven industry sources).

        3. BluRay discs are actually a little cheaper then HD-DVDs, the only difference is one time switch of equipment for HD-DVDs is cheaper, but with the latest advancements to manifacturing cycle of BluRay th

        • Re:R.I.P. HD-DVD (Score:2, Insightful)

          by tereshchenko ( 715289 )
          Also - talking about data recordable versions of BluRay vs HD-DVD. BluRay has some cool advancements, like pseudo-overwriting, support for UDF 2.60, etc).
          • Oops, forgot to tell - BluRay Disc (BD) media is several times more scratch-resistant then DVD or HD-DVD media!
          • Why would anyone choose an inferior standard? BLU-RAY has the capability of holding 100 gigabytes now (200 gigabytes in the future)..... HD-DVD only 1/3rd as much. Why choose a standard that is already so limited in space???

            That's why VHS won the war circa 1980... 6 hours per tape vs. only 3 for Beta. More storage space is better for the customer.

            troy
            • This technology will not provide a solution to any problems that other technology will do much better. Hard drives are now priced at around 50 cents per gigabyte and with the introduction of vertical recording the price might even go lower. Just go to a wal-mart store and purchase a 160Gbyte hard drive for $90 and that is not even on sale. Video should be kept at the local isp and streamed to the customer when desired. In the long run it will be cheaper and more reliable. As for backup and other data a

      • Re:R.I.P. HD-DVD (Score:5, Informative)

        by KDR_11k ( 778916 ) on Saturday September 03, 2005 @10:06AM (#13470454)
        There's a DVD/BRD hybrid as well.

        People here prefer Bluray because it has 10GB more per layer (25GB vs. 15GB) and a much higher upper layer limit (8).

      • Re:R.I.P. HD-DVD (Score:5, Informative)

        by swillden ( 191260 ) * <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Saturday September 03, 2005 @10:15AM (#13470495) Journal

        What is it with peopel saying HD-DVD is inferior?

        Blu-Ray has much higher capacity, meaning that it will last longer before having to be replaced by some higher-capacity format. The higher capacity will also make it a more useful medium for backup and storage. Blu-Ray did have a disadvantage in the area of durability, because it places the data closer to the surface of the disk, but with the addition of a hard topcoat, this disadvantage has been turned to an advantage. Blu-Ray disks are expected to be more durable than DVDs. Both the Blu-Ray and the HD-DVD camps have demonstrated that they can produce a comptatibility layer... putting a DVD layer inside the next-gen disk, so there's no advantage either way. Both are going to come with much better DRM than DVDs, so there's not a clear advantage there. From a consumer's point of view, they both suck.

        HD-DVD's only clear advantage is that it will be easier to modify existing DVD production lines to produce HD-DVDs. So there's a short term cost advantage to HD-DVD. Assuming an appropriately retooled production line, Blu-Ray disks won't be any more expensive to produce, and may be cheaper.

        Ooo shiney blue lasers?

        Both formats use blue lasers.

        • actually, no. hd dvd uses modified red lasers.

          that's one of the reasons why it's a lot cheaper to produce... in theory.

          in theory, they also sold the dvd discs at 70 bucks a pop about 4 years ago. and they still overcharge a huge amount today. so cheaper is for the manufacturer, not for the end user.
        • I won't buy one until the DRM is cracked. That's what I did with DVDs. If it isn't cracked then I'll never buy one. Big loss for them. I own thousands of legally purchased DVDs - many expensive collectors versions. I hope other end-users protest and refuse to buy this crap too.

          I'll spend my money towards funding opensource movie development before I'll spend it on movies and hardware that tell me how I can use what I've purchased.

          • I won't buy one until the DRM is cracked.

            I won't buy many. Not so much for any kind of philosophical reasons but because a DRMd disk will be much less useful to me than a DVD. I rarely ever watch a movie from a DVD now... I copy them onto my laptop drive to watch while traveling, and at home I rip, transcode and store all of them on my file server, then we watch them from there (I have a MythTV box with DVI and TOSLINK outputs connected to a 50" HDTV and a Yamaha surround system). I started ripping an

        • HD-DVD's only clear advantage is that it will be easier to modify existing DVD production lines to produce HD-DVDs. So there's a short term cost advantage to HD-DVD. Assuming an appropriately retooled production line, Blu-Ray disks won't be any more expensive to produce, and may be cheaper.

          Yes, and I'm sure the producers will only temporarily pass on the extra costs of manufacturing blu-ray to the consumer, then lower them once the new factories are paid for, just like they said they would with cds.

      • They drool over the storage capacity. Yet they'll whine when they discover that BR is DRM'ed up the ass and they'll scream for an alternative after the fact.

  • Give us a unified format... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tool_army ( 742066 ) on Saturday September 03, 2005 @09:50AM (#13470385)
    It's really a shame that one of the groups can't swallow their pride and agree to a compromise. In my personal opinion, the perfect compromise would be HD-DVD with Blu-Ray sized layers and data storage. I think people will be disappointed at how fast HD-DVD discs will fill up. Regardless of what format becomes popular, though as of now, I would say Sony as the edge because of PS3, I'm sick of the whole "we didn't include a DTS track to the lack of space" argument. All HD discs should contain stereo, DD, and DTS tracks for both the video, and all extras. All content should maximize the bitrate, no more 5 MB per second or less... To stay on topic...I think this is both a great decision by Toshiba (primarily because I don't think the consumer is quite ready for HD discs yet) and a really bad decision because it eliminates, or at least greatly lessens, one of its major advantages - that it is being released first with a great list of available titles (Sopranos, Forrest Gump, Batman Begins, etc.). I hate to wait, but I either want the format war to conclude or for dual format players to launch before I venture into the HD movie world!
    • ...Mostly because 1) we will soon see a new generation of Blu-Ray media that doesn't need a caddy to protect the disc itself and 2) Blu-Ray's higher storage capacity in recordable form is highly-desirable for computer users who manipulate a lot of multimedia data (large-sized digital still images and full-motion video in digital format).

      By the way, in many ways the whole Dolby Digital versus DTS arguement is kind of moot, mostly because if properly mastered Dolby Digital sounds just as good as DTS (ever hea
      • Neither one of the formats will win any more than DVD-R or DVD+R won. The initial round of players will be single format, expensive, and rare. The second generation players will play both. Either they'll both live happily together, or they'll both fail.
      • DVD will win in the end. It's here, it works, and I could honestly give a shit about a new, even more heavily DRMed disk. At least with DVD I can redily decrypt, copy, transcode, sample, and burn all without a single piece of "approved" software by any DRM loving studio. HD-DVD seems stillborn at this point and Blur-Ray is just one more thing to make the PS3 more expensive and will likely be no more than a gimmick to tell devs to fill up. I remeber when people were telling me VHS was dead and laserdisk was
        • "I remeber when people were telling me VHS was dead and laserdisk was going to replace it."

          I think the problem with Laserdisks wasn't so much that the public wasn't ready to embrace the technology.

          The format didn't offer recording capabilities which VHS was popular for, and the selection of movies wasn't as good as VHS (at least in the US Market.)

          Also they were a little large and unwieldy, as well as prone to scratching or if dropped, cracking.

          I own about 10 LDs (Star Wars Trilogy, Dune, Terminator 2, Free
          • DVD had all those same disadvantages, minus the size factor. At least when it came out. There used to be no recordable DVDs. I'm sure Recordable laserdisks would have happened if the format got more popular. I think they should bring in a minidisc type format with the new high storage capacity formats so that I can throw my music across the room, leave it in a car with no case, and do just about anything with them without having to worry about losing my data. Vulnerable disks like CDs and DVDs are just
        • I think the biggest reason why DVD's succeeded was the fact DVD discs could use improved versions of the same optical drive mechanisms used by Compact Disc and CD-ROM drives, which meant tremendous economies of scale.

          Because Blu-Ray discs when they finally reach the US market in Spring 2006 will essentially use an improved version of current DVD optical drive mechanisms, that means backward compatibility, a major issue for many users of the latest technology.
    • > In my personal opinion, the perfect compromise would be HD-DVD with Blu-Ray sized layers and data storage.

      I believe everyone involved would like to see that. However, putting as much data onto a disc as Blu-Ray does means significant changes, which is what HD-DVD is trying to avoid. I personally think Blu-Ray will succeed, as while it may be more expensive to manufacture the discs, unless they're dramatically more expensive, or the people backing it decide to shoot themselves in the foot price wise, ac

    • IMPOSSIBLE. (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      A compromise between Bluray and HD-DVD is impossible like you suggest. The very difference between the two is the thickness of the protective media. THAT IS ALL.

      A compromise "hybrid" format would merely be one format winning over the other and the two camps splitting the royalties. Obviously realizing this Sony and Toshiba et al could never agree on A) which format bites the dust and B) How to split the royalties.

      Toshiba wanted its format to win because they represent the DVD manufacturers that did not want
      • There are other differences in the logical formats. Blu-ray has BD-J (Java) and various other interactive features, along with more DRM. One compromise that was suggested months ago was putting the HD-DVD logical format on the Blu-ray physical format (or vice versa).
    • i think you mean 5 Mb.

      5MB is 40 megabits /sec. , greater than the Bluray spec.

      why 5Mb is about .6 MegaBytes /sec.

      just being a little pedantic whore.

      carry on.

    • I'm sick of the whole "we didn't include a DTS track to the lack of space" argument.

      Okay then: "We didn't include a DTS track because normal-bitrate AC3 sounds just as good, unless it was mastered by a DTS stock-holder who intentionally sabotaged it."

      I hope you don't think that the "no space" argument is made-up. It's quite true that just about any DVD with a DTS track has terrible-looking video.

      All HD discs should contain stereo, DD, and DTS tracks for both the video, and all extras.

      Screw that. One or t

      • I hope you don't think that the "no space" argument is made-up. It's quite true that just about any DVD with a DTS track has terrible-looking video.

        Not even remotely true. Most Superbit releases (Columbia) have fantastic video and a fantastic DTS track. They don't have extras like interviews, "Making Of..." and games. The space issue is real, but it's not a trade-off of video vs. DTS; it's a trade-off of the best movie experience vs. cramming lots of non-movie pieces in. I'll take the Superbit+DTS, tha

  • XBox360 (Score:2, Insightful)

    by bhunachchicken ( 834243 )
    How will this damage the XBox360 in the long term? Microsoft has already said that the initial models may ship with just a standard DVD drive with later production models being shipped with a HD DVD drive. But if they have to further delay the HD DVD enabled XBox360 will this just simply cause even greater confusion for the two model market they have already created with their Core and Premium systems?
    • Microsoft has already said that the initial models may ship with just a standard DVD drive with later production models being shipped with a HD DVD drive.

      No, that's not what they said.

      Gates said: The initial shipments of Xbox 360 will be based on todays DVD format. We are looking at whether future versions of Xbox 360 will incorporate an additional capability of an HD DVD player or something else. [link [techwhack.com]]

      ... as you can see - they're not really saying anything at all.

  • Some background on the formats (Score:5, Informative)

    by Saiyine ( 689367 ) on Saturday September 03, 2005 @09:59AM (#13470421) Homepage

    Blu-ray (BD): backed by Sony and Philips, 22Gbytes capacity, expensive, 54 Mbit/s read speed. [ Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] ]

    HD-DVD: Toshiba, NEC, Sanyo and Microsoft, 15Gbytes, cheaper. [ Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] ]
    --
    Superb hosting [dreamhost.com] 4800MB Storage, 120GB bandwidth, $7,95.
    Kunowalls!!! [kunowalls.host.sk] Random sexy wallpapers (NSFW!).

    • Re:Some background on the formats (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Rocketship Underpant ( 804162 ) on Saturday September 03, 2005 @10:05AM (#13470447)
      Perhaps this comparison is just as relevant:

      Blu-Ray: has a real name that North American consumers will be able to remember when they go to Blockbuster or Wal-mart.

      HD-DVD: has a name consisting of five random letters that no non-geeks will remember. Most people will just call it "DVD" and get it confused with the older format.

      • Yes, I also forgot to say that that the PS3 will use Blu-ray. Don't know in the USA, but here in Europe, and in Japan, it's a huge point for that format.

        --
        Superb hosting [dreamhost.com] 4800MB Storage, 120GB bandwidth, $7,95.
        Kunowalls!!! [kunowalls.host.sk] Random sexy wallpapers (NSFW!).
      • I am waiting to see how long it takes BR-D to acquire a nice nick name. Something like B'rd(Bird)
      • The public isn't as stupid as you think they are. Most households have at least 1 DVD player. If they're smart enough to know about high definition TVs and DVDs, "HD DVD" is not a tough concept to grasp. They're already familiar with the name. I think the opposite is true. What the heck does BluRay mean to anybody? It's literally named after its technology, which is more likely to go over peoples heads than HD DVD.
        • From a marketing perspective, Blu-Ray is the better name. It's just sounds flashier, more modern. To me, HD-DVD kinda sounds like something that might come out of the mid 80s. I also think people are tired of "High Definition" as a buzz word, mostly as it's said too often as it is (it was in a freaking windex commercial explaining the "high definition clean" _)
        • " If they're smart enough to know about high definition TVs and DVDs, 'HD DVD' is not a tough concept to grasp."

          You just proved my point. The majority of consumers who've bought TVs in the last 5 years, including my Dad who just dropped big bucks on a huge Sony, had no idea that their new TVs weren't high-definition. They don't even get the difference yet.

          Have you noticed how when a movie comes out on DVD, the commercials still say "available now on DVD and Video"? They say Video because the average person
          • PCMCIA: Peoplc Can't Memorize Computer Industry Acronyms
          • They say Video because the average person never got the hang of the acronym "VHS" and found it easier to refer to those black tapes as videos.

            I think that has a lot more to do with VHS being a shitty acronym coined in the 70s, when people who could come up with good names were in short supply. I think the marketing department decided that the best way to avoid comming up with another awful name like "Betamax" or "DiscoVision" was to use as few letters as possible. They still used a few too many.
      • I think you have it completely backwards.

        "Blu-Ray" is a play on a basically meaningless technical detail of the product. Nothing about the term "Blu-Ray" implies 'video' or 'movie' or 'something that you can get at Blockbuster'. People will have to say "Blu-Ray video disk" or something equally redundant. To even tell someone what Blu-Ray is you basically have to say "It's like a DVD, but in HD."

        "HD-DVD" is a concatenation of two very common and well-known terms. It isn't, as you say, five "random" lette
    • Sony vs. Microsoft... There is no way we can win here.
    • HD-DVD may be cheaper innitially, but Blu-ray are a simpler disc, and will be cheaper in the long run. HD-DVDs use a disc like DVDs where the reflective layer is put between two layers of plastic, while Blu-Rays are more like CDs, with a plastic layer on the bottom and the reflective layer is on top (though the Blu-Ray discs are a lot thinner then CDs).

  • So what? (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by pair-a-noyd ( 594371 )
    I was at Fry's the other day and I looked at DL blank media. FIFTY DOLLARS for 15 blanks.

    Sure, the DL burners are cheap, Fry's had some down to the $40 range. BUT, they screw you on the media.

    I was looking just out of curiosity, I don't need one.
    Sure I would like to back up 8+ gigs on a disc but they had 120gig hard drives for TWENTY dollars (after rebate)

    My MO is buy big, cheap hard drives, back up to them, remove them and store them in a fireproof safe.

    And for the nay-sayers, I have old full heigh 5.25
    • I was at Fry's the other day and I looked at DL blank media. FIFTY DOLLARS for 15 blanks.

      15 blanks at 9 GB per blank is 135 GB for $50. Seems very competitive to the price of a hard drive to me.

      • Until you realize how volatile the data on a dvd is. I mean, I've lost data on hard drives, but that was only after using them daily for years. If I were to use a Hard disk strictly for backup, it would probably last 20 years. DVDs die if you scratch them, or if you leave them in the sunlight. especially without a jewel case. I'm not even going to get into the advantages of having to use 1 hard drive over managing 50 seperate disks. Hard drives are a much better storage option.

  • Wait and see (Score:4, Insightful)

    by canuck57 ( 662392 ) on Saturday September 03, 2005 @10:27AM (#13470549)

    For me, this is a wait and see. It was only this last year I bought a DVD player and DVD-RW. Why? Cheap and they now work. When the CDRW first came out more coasters were made than working images. I know, I made a few coasters but don't have that problem today.

    For most of us, we will wait and see. But part of the reason I bought my first DVD-RW was that I could get programs like DVD Decrypter. The only program I know that can burn DVD_ISOs of Linux and Solaris reliably.

    That was short lived as the article at http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/11914 [cdfreaks.com] will show how this industry is doing.

    So this person will opt out until less restrictive and functional tools are available. I will be quite content to let someone else break this in.

    • Perhaps I'm missing something you are doing, but I back everything off on DVD-R or DVD+RW, and K3B works great, and I haven't made a coaster of a Linux iso in years. (only the rapid update schedule most Linux distros follow effectively turns them into coasters...)

      As for "backing up" dvds, I let Blockbuster do it for me.

      For stuff the grandkids watch over and over, mplayer rips to the MythTV setup, played on the XBox frontend in the living room prevents scratched media pretty effectively.
      (Although I DO have s
  • Do we know what the DRM tech is on the blu-ray, and is it bypassable for legitimate fair-use backups?
  • Sony is pretty smart. While the guys pushing competing technology are held up with the usual industry standardization delays, just release your version as a stand-alone product. Having a marketing lead like that is the kind of advantage money can't buy.
  • Delay? Blu -Ray recorders have been out for a while here. Saw it like 4 months ago at Bic Camera. http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/BD/ [www.sony.jp]
    • Blu-Ray recorders are little more than expensive novelty items until the format is completely standardized, playback devices are on the market, and people can buy Blu-Ray movies. That'll be a while yet.
      • I don't know, having a tested product at market is pretty invaluable to me. If they change the standard, it'll require a software upgrade. If they don't ship movies in cartridges, it'll require a new transport mechanism. Tweaks to an existing product. Until I can see an HD-DVD player, it's vapor.
      • HDTV in North America (and Korea) is 9GB/hour, so a 25GB single-layer Blu-ray disc stores 2:45 or thereabouts of video without the serious nuisance of transcoding to a more space-efficient format. These things are going to sell like hotcakes to the HTPC market, at least once media costs get semi-reasonable. Pioneer's Blu-ray drive is definitely going on my shopping list. I just hope the street prices for the drives and media are semi-reasonable. I'm not even going to consider HD-DVD.
  • It's funny to hear that HD-DVD *may* be be delaying the launch...since NEC has already announced that they will be selling HD-DVD burners in November [freshdv.com] of this year. And at a fairly reasonable price, $600. Not bad for a first-gen hi-def burner. Not to be outdone, Pioneer has also announced a BluRay burner. A shame that there is no source for either formats media. (permalink here [freshdv.com])
    • From http://www.i4u.com/article4108.html [i4u.com]

      The NEC HD DVD Drive HR-1100A will be shipping in limited numbers in November. The HD DVD drive can play HD DVDs with 2x speeds.

      ... Also, no HD-DVD movies will be released in 2005 so you can play nothing on it in this year. Duh.
      • Good catch. This german press release [de.nec.de] mentions that as well. The press release also states Prominent maintenance companies announced to offer their films on hp DVD. So far nearly 100 titles were selected, among them films like "Batman Begins", "million dollar baby", "Alexander", "Ocean's Twelve" and "The Bourne Supremacy". Also classical authors like "12 Monkeys" "Forrest Gump" and Harry Potter do not come too briefly.

        ... Also, no HD-DVD movies will be released in 2005 so you can play nothing on it in th
    • As someone else has said, that's just a reader. :P

      On the other hand, BluRay (BDR) readers/writers will be out pretty damn soon. Here's an article discussing Pioneer's BDR-101A drive:

      First look: Pioneer Blu-ray BDR-101A [cdfreaks.com]

      Be sure to check out the Nero InfoTool screenshots showing the formats it can read and write. :D

      Note: the original article link in that forum thread is dead, but there are images/discussion by people who read it. You might also be able to find a cache of the article on Google or Archive.org.

  • They're BOTH dead (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Spy Handler ( 822350 ) on Saturday September 03, 2005 @12:23PM (#13471165) Homepage Journal
    HD-DVD will be DOA, and Blu-Ray will be relegated to a niche market (PS3). Joe Consumer is pretty happy with regular DVD. These new things don't offer anything over DVD other than theoretically better picture (only with the right kind of HDTV), while being way more expensive and with confusion over competing formats to boot.

    On the data storage side: double-layer DVD blanks are still hideously expensive. Can you imagine how much Blu-Ray blanks will cost? By the time they come down to a reasonable price, Fry's will be selling 800 gig hard drives for $50.

    • These new things don't offer anything over DVD other than theoretically better picture

      25% of all TVs sold today are HD. That is a pretty big and rapidly growing market.

      Can you imagine how much Blu-Ray blanks will cost?

      When the first DVD blanks were introduced they were $20 a pop. Just chill out a bit, they will come down.
      • actually, if you did your homework, you'd realize that when blanks first came out, they were close to 80 bucks EACH.

        this was around 2000 i think. maybe they were more expensive the farther back you go but that was when i started seeing them on store shelves.

        they like to rip the early adopters a new one each generation.

        today, they produce dvd discs that don't cost any more than cds that sell for almost 2-3 times as much as cds, and those are the generic no-name brands.

        they are charging extortionist prices. a

    • These new things don't offer anything over DVD other than theoretically better picture (only with the right kind of HDTV),

      No, not with "the right kind of HDTV"... With ANY KIND of HDTV, you'll have a better picture than DVDs can offer.

      while being way more expensive and with confusion over competing formats to boot.

      DVD was "way more expensive" than VHS too, but that didn't slow it down. I'd bet VHS was more expensive than film at the time, too. High-speed broadband: more expensive than dial-up. Microwave

  • The DRM is hacked...... otherwise whats the point? I have a dvd recorder I can do pretty much anything I like with, (provided I'm willing to mess about a bit with programs/disks etc

Slashdot Top Deals

Put your Nose to the Grindstone! -- Amalgamated Plastic Surgeons and Toolmakers, Ltd.

Close