Pre-order your Toshiba HD-A1 HD DVD player

Yeah, we already knew the price and anticipated release date, yeah, it's been on Amazon a little while, and yeah, we don't normally care too much about stuff you can pre-order online. But it's still kind of crazy to think that for $500 now you can actually pre-order a Toshiba HD DVD player on Amazon (a HD-A1 to be exact). It's actually happening people, brace for impact.

[Thanks, Jonathan]

[Joe @ Jan 27th 2006 11:38AM]

Picture shown is the higher-end $800 model, not the stripped down $500 model made for Toshiba/RCA.

[Ravi @ Jan 27th 2006 11:41AM]

Thanks, but i'll wait for a blu-ray player. they have more support from movie comapines i think. so that means more movies on blu-ray :)

[destro @ Jan 27th 2006 12:07PM]

I'll wait for one that will actually fit into my living room.

[Jon @ Jan 27th 2006 12:40PM]

Who in their right mind would buy HD-DVD or Blu-Ray right now...I'll take a wait and see with both formats...I want to see movies on the shelves of stores and Netflix / Blockbuster before I jump to any conclusions.

Don't bet your bottom dollar on Blu-Ray, as Blu-Ray players won't have wide adoption in US until likely 2007 when PS3 is released.

Windows Vista arrives in Fall of 2006 with HD-DVD support, which by then 360 HD-DVD add on will be available as well.

[Julio @ Jan 27th 2006 12:50PM]

Forget B-Dvd! HD-DVD allows you to copy your videos in the computer or portable devices. Familiar with iPOD, well the same for video. GO DRM... GO HD-DVD!

Finally I can put my movie in my future HD-HDD and shelve the discs.

[Rami @ Jan 27th 2006 12:52PM]

Brace for impact? I think for a lot of people "impact" will consist of HD-DVD players costing significantly less than $500 USD. Besides, I want more than that, and I'm willing to wait. Blu ray / HD, and media center / multiple card reader all-in-one. That's where it's at. If it needs to be a computer instead of a dedicated unit, so be it. I want it all in one box, and I want that box to be pretty.

[Arash @ Jan 27th 2006 12:54PM]

you've been able to preorder for a while on bestbuy.com ...

[Paul @ Jan 27th 2006 12:58PM]

Ayup - you can sit that HD-DVD player right next to your betamax player and Coleco Adam computer :)

[M @ Jan 27th 2006 12:58PM]

DVD Empire has some HD-DVD titles listed - no release dates yet. The kicker is the $60.00 price tag! As if the situation wasn't sick enough with HD-DVD vs Blu Ray. I think I'll sit this one out for a while!

[Popstand @ Jan 27th 2006 1:13PM]

Can somebody explain to my why this has to be so freaking big. Does changing the laser wavelength really require that the enclosure has to triple in size?

[Todd H. @ Jan 27th 2006 1:18PM]

Will I be able to rip HD-DVD's with AnyDVD? And burn them, if not, I'll wait...

I like getting my movies for free...

[Ramos @ Jan 27th 2006 1:40PM]

Yes, that will look good next to the betamax player. But, I'll buy a Blu-ray player and put it right next to the VCR and DVD player. Blu-ray all the way!

[Sean DL @ Jan 27th 2006 2:09PM]

mmmm...a $500 HD-DVD Player or a $1000 Blu Ray player....

Of course that will be moot when the PS3 comes out at sub-$500...

[bmitsuda @ Jan 27th 2006 2:42PM]

Are you sure that the PS3 will be sub-500? Sony has not announced anything and seeing that stand alone blue-ray players are going to cost over $1,000 by themselves it is hard to beleive that they will be able to fit everything into the PS3 that they have announced and still be able to charge as little as $500.

I also would not bet on blue-ray right away - remember that beta was one of the many Sony formats that failed (remember the mini-disc anyone?). Anyways I will wait until they come out with the dual player or there is a clear winner.

[lucasbarton @ Jan 27th 2006 3:46PM]

why does everyone joke about how huge this player is? read the specs 4"x17"x14". that seems pretty standard issue with the exception of the height.

[TylerDurden @ Jan 27th 2006 4:35PM]

mmmm...a $500 HD-DVD Player or a $1000 Blu Ray player.... Of course that will be moot when the PS3 comes out at sub-$500...

Don't you mean "if" rather than "when"? If not, this remains to be seen.

[dennis @ Jan 27th 2006 6:21PM]

I view the push towards higher capacity / higher resolution video hardware as a way for the video content industry to push past filesharing. One reason the music recording industry was caught by filesharing was that they upgraded their hardware to CD audio and then sat on it for twenty years. When CDs first came out, the recording industry assured everyone that the prices would come down when the costs to manufacture CDs dropped. Although the prices have dropped relative to inflation, really the music recording industry kept the price of CDs artificially inflated. In the meantime, the cost of the blank media was so cheap and the means to record on that medium became standardized throughout the computer and gaming industry. So the music recording industry got caught with their pants down, and now their whining about it.

Furthermore, audio content is inherently more vulnerable than video content, in part because of the relative amounts of information involved in recreating audio vs. video content. Better than CD resolution audio doesn't have a real market, since everyone is perfectly happy degrading their audio content with lossy compression so that they can store more music. Bandwidth and hard drive storage costs have also changed to make filesharing of music that much easier and have further changed to the point where sharing compressed video files (usually with stereo compressed audio) has become popular.

So, one strategy to stay ahead of filesharing is to upgrade hardware, to increase the quantity of information, etc. You can't successfully modify the media or pre-existing hardware after the fact. The ridiculous Sony DRM fiasco is evidence of that, simply because the hardware already works by simply allowing full access to whatever digital information is on the media. So you can outcompete by putting out new hardware, allowing for higher information content and potentially to build in some measure of copy protection sufficient to discourage what has happened with music. In the video industry, this translates into higher resolution content (which people can actually appreciate), more audio channels, more complex decoding algorithms, etc.

The music recording industry has tried to pursue a similar strategy with DVD Audio and SACD. The problem here again is that they started too late and are acting out of desperation, and they're trying to push a product that has little built in demand. They didn't agree on a format. People don't need and in fact usually can't appreciate "higher quality" audio. And there hasn't been a single major recording artist (gold record or higher) that has made good use of surround sound in their DVDAudio or SACD recordings. There was more interest in quadraphonic systems in the 70s than there is in DVDAudio or SACD right now, even though increasing numbers of people are getting surround speaker systems to watch movies at home or play games or whatever.

The electronics and video content industries have the greatest interest in pursuing this strategy. Since video is going digital (TV broadcasts, digital cable and satellite, TIVO, video on demand through iTunes or cable, HDTV PC card tuners, etc.), the video content industry is trying to be careful up front. The digital consumers have not yet caught up to dual layer DVDs, in part because digital mass storage devices are getting cheaper by the second (flash memory, hard drives). The PC gaming industry has not yet caught up to DVDs. Movie stars don't want ot upgrade movies to higher resolution because it makes them look worse (i.e., like real people). The average consumer is not going to be interested in getting a HDDVD or Bluray optical drive to put in their digital encoding workstation if they can get a standalone player they know how to use already to hook up to their single 52" DLP TV with surround sound speakers. They're not going to set up a dual core 64 bit system with 4GB of RAM so that over three days they can transcode a BluRay movie to watch it on their iPod, when they can buy the iPod version for, let's say, $9.99. Nor is the average consumer going to wait seven days to download a two hour super high resolution movie with 7.1 channel audio to put on their 1TB network RAID to stream on their 802.11n home network to their HDTV capable media PC.

Unlike the music industry, the video industry has an actual product. Higher than TV or S-video resolution video is a better viewing experience, movies in surround sound are better than in stereo, etc. But if it's going to work, the companies have to compete with each other to bring actual content and actual hardware that will interface with the video display technology that already exists for PC games, console games, and digital television. These other products are in competition with the movie industry and the movie industry has to move.

That's my analysis, at least. It's kind of conspiracy minded, so it should appeal to many of us for that reason alone, I think. (Feedback would be appreciated.)

[Home Theater Dude @ Jan 27th 2006 7:36PM]

If I wait for anything, it'll be to see which format takes dominance.

It's way too early in the game to make a solid call.

[Aaron @ Jan 27th 2006 10:01PM]

dennis: Your argument that movie stars don't want movies offered in higher resolution because it makes them look worse is flawed. Even on BluRay and HD-DVD, the detail will still be lower than what you see in the theater.

[dennis @ Jan 27th 2006 10:11PM]

17 .. aaron ..

that's what i get for watching the E! network. thanks for pointing that out.

[tekdroid @ Jan 27th 2006 10:23PM]

enjoy the DRM. These corporations change laws that erode your fair use rights and you still support them. Free would be too much to pay for this DRM'd crap.

[Dave @ Jan 28th 2006 12:31PM]

I'll wait for the blu-ray player - it`s better in my opinion. :)

[Tyler @ Jan 28th 2006 3:46PM]

As a very early adopter of the DVD format. I will defintately be waiting this one out as long as possible. I don't see the rush to support to high capacity formats which both seem to have their own bag of problems.

Right now I think Mark Cuban has it right forget capacity based media storage and move to full digital delivery of high-def content.

Large portable drives are falling in price daily and thats where i want to see the market move. I want to play my Content on the device of my chosing and know that it will work and look great.

[just some guy @ Jan 28th 2006 6:38PM]

it only has an hdmi port. i hope i didnt read that right cause thats a lil messed up

[HDMI Fanatic @ Jan 29th 2006 10:12PM]

Dennis-that was a very good summation. I am an early adopter and enjoy my A/V setup tremendously. I recently purchased a 50" plasma because my 42" plasma I bought less than a year ago seemed small after awhile. I have the Sony STRDA7100es receiver that has HDMI repeaters in it and kicks 170Watts to all 7.1 channels (or 9.1 if you want). I also think the audio and video that comes through the HDMI cable is stunning. And since I don't steal I don't care that my freinds can't copy it and get it for free.
Todd H-I'm hoping you install pools for a living so you can come over and put one in for me. And when your all done I'll tell you "You like free movies-I like free pools. I ain't paying you. Thanks so much for your hard work."
But of course Dennis you are correct in that most people don't care (until they see it) about the quality of video-and even less about audio. People are playing their MP3's through their car radios, and now ipod's have stereo's you can plug them in to.You get what-20% of the sound quality? NO THANKS! I have a freind who benefits from my constant acquisitions-he got a 42" plasma cheap, along with a stereo and 6 speakers-all top quality (not the minatiure pre-packaged all in one's that go for $199 either by the way) and all under a year old. So now he has a set-up better than 98% of the people in America. Would he have bought it all for what I paid for it? Of course not. He appreciates it, but he doesn't care enough to go out and buy it new.
And of course now that the new HDMI 1.3 standard has been approved, and the new plasma's are coming out with 1080P, I will have to upgrade again this Fall-to a 60" or maybe 70". So, I for one, very much care. But I am proabably 1 in only 500,000, that do.
HD DVD vs Blu-ray? I'll get the HD DVD in March, then the Blu-Ray in June. And when they come out with a Universal player, I'll sell them on ebay and get that too. I am totally jazzed about DTS-HD and Dolby Digital TrueHD-both lossless audio. You know, the movie studio executives were not keen on HD video either-until they saw samples of their work in HD. I think when people see it they will convert-just as most people that see HDTV in someone's home-not just the store's-put it at the top of their To-Do list.
And finally, I for one do not want my computer to do it all. I like my puter in my den and my A/V in my living room. I like to own my movies and hold them in my hand-along with my SACD's and DVD/A's. Bill Gates-stay out of my Living Room! I will never be first on board that ship. And I think most people feel the same way-for now at least. Thanks for the great post Dennis!

[DVD fan @ Feb 3rd 2006 12:44PM]

# 24.
I looked into this and the Toshiba player does have component AV output and it does support HD output. It's actually a requirement for HD DVD. There have been some mistakes in the specs posted. But the fear of not being able to get HD video through component is completely unfounded. I've made my pre-order.

[BumVille @ Mar 10th 2006 7:15PM]

I will hold out and wait for the universal player. It's a real bummer that the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray people couldn't come to an agreement on a single format.
If we all could band together and hold out for the uni-player, it might teach them a lesson to play nice for any future formats.
The movie studios could compromise on standard DVD, why not the hi-def?
Oh well, I'm getting kinda depressed and need a beer to cry in.
Chow4now.
BTW: Dennis, great job on your comments. You should do it for a living!

[Jerry @ May 25th 2006 5:11AM]

Remember HD-DVD is essential same cost as DVD. Check amazon right now. Prices for HD movies are same (and in couple cases cheaper) than their DVD counterpart.

Despite Sony FUD an HD-DVD is essentially a higher focus DVD using a smaller wavelength laser to put more info on the disk. Kinda like the change from CD to DVD. Other than the initial retooling a HD-DVD can be produced for about the same cost as a DVD. Blue on the other hard requires a substantial change in equipment, it also has a much higher tolerance and it's disk are nothing like anything else in the optical world. The medium will always be substantially more expensive (just boils down to economies of scale). It will be a long time before/if the # of blue blanks exceeds HD-DVD + DVD blanks.

Ok so why would Sony be against a combo drive? Well imagine in 4 years most consumers have a combo drive and the cost is low enough say $200 that many are adopting it as there next purchase. Single spec drives (other than PS3, and xbox360) are dropping to nothing.
At this point some exec is going to argue that Fox should switch from blue to HD-DVD. Their competitors have better pricing and higher profit margins by using HD-DVD. While the world was split they were happy to back blue but now with projections showing 87% of consumers having a combo drive why would they want to stay with the expensive format?

Now Blue has 3 major pros over HD-DVD
1) Included with PS3. Initially this will boost adoption but eventually (say in our 4 year scenario above) it will not matter. What % of adults user their xbox, or PS2 to play DVD? Not many.

2) Blue holds more than HD-DVD but it is 50GB to 30GB. The idea (as many have proposed) that you can put a whole season on 1 disk of Blue is crazy. Take Alias for example one season is about 18 hours (24 45 minutes episodes). If you put 18 hours on 1 blue disk it would be compressed to about 2.8GB / hour. That would be lower rez than normal DVD. The point of HD is to be high def. I have been recording HD to hard drives for about a year now. It takes about 9GB/hour, anything less than that and you end up with serious artifacts. So that would be 3 Blue disks or 5 HD disks. Now Blue cost more to make so it ends up a tie (which wins more cheap disks or fewer costly disks?).

3) Blue has a tighter DRM. However within few years (or months) I predict that both Blue and HD-DVD will be bypassed. Now sony does have a method to kill compromised DRM methods and require the player to be updated before it will play new disks but I dont see that happening in real world. First it requires internet access, and the first time it doesn't work and someone brings home a disk says "sorry you don't have permission to play this disk" expect lawsuits, bad press, media field day, etc.

So if you were the executive in charge of DVD in US what would you do. What reason could you come up with for staying on a more exepnsive platform that is costing your company hundreds of millions of $$$ each year for essentially no net benefit?

Before the flame wars start let me give you some ammo:
Yes I have an HDTV (Samsung HLS5686W).
Yes I record HDTV with a PC for playback onto my HDTV.
No I dont own an HD-DVD player but I will.
I prefer HD-DVD over Blue.
Yes I think Sony is evil (I hate all their proprietary junk - memory stick anyone?)
Yes I watch and record alias in HDTV.

Yes sadly like most consumers if I get screwed by adopting HD-DVD early then I will need to switch but I will keep my betamax HD-DVD and movies. They may be worth something someday as a collectors item.