that's all nice from a corporate standpoint. but if people don't buy the disks, then blu ray will loose.
as far as publishing in two formats...
i would rather have a 25 buck movie in HD DVD than a 30 buck movie in blu ray.
the extra security of these disks is good for companies- but it rather discourages consumers. i like CDs. copy protection was retrofitted.
as far as the new standards- i will personally support HD DVD. because of less copy protection.
what blu ray is presenting itself as is the techno powerhouse, the better technology.
i could care less if a movie were on two HD DVD disks instead of one blu ray.
but if a blu ray burner will cost 600 bucks and each disk 3 bucks, and an HD DVD burner 450 bucks and each disk 2 bucks (arbitrary number), but likely given that sony likes to overcharge for thier better technology, i know what i'm buying to store my data on.
(well it'd be an external hard drive, but oh well. )
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
alienshards @ Dec 19th 2005 1:06AM
that's all nice from a corporate standpoint. but if people don't buy the disks, then blu ray will loose.
as far as publishing in two formats...
i would rather have a 25 buck movie in HD DVD than a 30 buck movie in blu ray.
the extra security of these disks is good for companies- but it rather discourages consumers. i like CDs. copy protection was retrofitted.
as far as the new standards- i will personally support HD DVD. because of less copy protection.
what blu ray is presenting itself as is the techno powerhouse, the better technology.
i could care less if a movie were on two HD DVD disks instead of one blu ray.
but if a blu ray burner will cost 600 bucks and each disk 3 bucks, and an HD DVD burner 450 bucks and each disk 2 bucks (arbitrary number), but likely given that sony likes to overcharge for thier better technology, i know what i'm buying to store my data on.
(well it'd be an external hard drive, but oh well. )