Toshiba nixes Xbox 360 with built-in HD DVD rumor

Not that a denial means anything these days (right Sony?) what with one country's PR firm operating independently from another; nevertheless, a Toshiba spokesman told Stuff that the uber-speced, Toshiba-branded Xbox 360 console with built-in HD DVD rumor is bogus. "It's got nothing to do with us, " says Tosh, "But we know Microsoft doesn't want to include the HD DVD drive so as not to limit the user's experience." The rumor already sounded a bit too far-fethed from the get-go so we'll take Toshiba's word to be golden on this one.

[Thickey @ Oct 24th 2007 6:09AM]

Call me stupid.. but how does adding the ability to play HD discs "limit the user's experience". I would snap up a 360 with HDMI and integrated HDDVD drive in a second. I don't want to have an extra box hanging off my 360 just to play movies. Or am I missing something here?

[Fred @ Oct 24th 2007 6:24AM]

Because the HD-DVD drive can only spin at 2x speed, where the DVD drive can spin at 12x speed. So by building in a HD-DVD drive, you're effectively dropping load speeds to 16% of what they could be.

[MRCUR @ Oct 24th 2007 6:40AM]

I've never had a problem with load times when the DVD drive has slowed down in my 360. I would certainly take a much quieter 360 with a bit longer load times than the one we have now.

[JET @ Oct 24th 2007 6:43AM]

Not quite. A 2xHD-DVD reads at 8.8 MBs, compare to a 16XDVD which reads at 15.85 MBs. Your original point stands; the 2xHD-DVD drive does read data slower than a 12xDVD drive, but the drop is only about 40%, not 84%.

JET

[stretchsje @ Oct 24th 2007 8:42AM]

Aye, the forthcoming 4X HD-DVD drives will be sufficient. (As an aside, one popular critique of the PS3 is that it's 2X Blu-Ray drive is slower than the 360's DVD drive for the exact same reason.)

[ssuk @ Oct 24th 2007 11:18AM]

Because if a HD DVD drive was added to the main part of the 360, it would be more and more tempting for MS to up the 360's main disc format to HD DVD, leaving all other Xbox 360s high and dry, shelling out £100~ for a HD-DVD box which will be slower than the internal drive (data transfer wise). So yes, it is limiting for older adopters.

[Phil @ Oct 24th 2007 2:33PM]

The thing that is limiting about the xbox 360 add on, is that the Xbox doesn't output 7.1 channels of uncompressed PCM or raw Dolby TrueHD bitstreams over the HDMI.

That's what I was hoping this rumored 360 was about. That they would add highdef audio output to the HDMI port and make it a fully HDMI 1.3a device. Then that way you could plug in either the HD-DVD drive or future blu-ray drive and enjoy the format to its fullest extent.

[Mak @ Oct 24th 2007 6:14PM]

It's laughable some of the totally uneducated comments here. But then that how Microsoft managed to sell 11 million Xbox360's right...

@Fred 2x HD DVD is not directly comparable with the 360's 12x DVD(actually it's 8x DVD on dual layer 9GB games)

@stretchsje Read up on the difference between CAV and CLV. You will see that infact PS3's Blu-ray drive is marginally faster than the 360's DVD drive.

The reason WHY Microsoft can't do this, is to acually make buisness sense to include HD DVD (or more likely Blu-ray, as by the time the console is ready, HD DVD will be dead and buried), they would have to make games on HD DVD, and that would leave 11 million Xbox360 onwners in the lurch. But then they did exactly that with the original Xbox, by burying it so soon.

[Bassnote @ Oct 24th 2007 6:15AM]

how exactly is a DVD drive more "limiting" to the user experience than an Elite II with HD DVD built-in which is backwards compatible? Surely if HD flops they could still make a Blu Ray add-on which is no different than the existing combo (except slightly more expensive in the short term).

[Ihar `Philips` Filipau @ Oct 24th 2007 6:57AM]

> slightly more expensive

So you think that $170 qualifies as "slightly"???

In the optical disk business, as HD DVD vs. BluRay war progresses, changes occur every quarter: or BD adds another feature, or HD adds another layer.

The point of not including the format is two fold: (1) it is expensive in short/mid-term and (2) the winning format might have compromised something - in order to win - rendering older drives obsolete.

So here you have: optional external drive. I think it's pretty perfect. (*)

(*) Well. MSFT might have worked more on Xbox360 form-factor to make it (and its HD DVD add-on) more fitting into Hi-Fi stands. It looks cool on retail shelf - but at home, put beside hi-fi, it looks weird. HD DVD add-on only adds to the out-standing (cable) mess.

[Boyo @ Oct 24th 2007 6:18AM]

I too would snatch it up but turning the xbox into a dvr..Yuck.

Honey turn up the TV I can't here Nathan Petrelli over that fan!

[ssuk @ Oct 24th 2007 11:20AM]

Wow, what quick wit and humour. Get the fuck off.

[DickHardknocks @ Oct 24th 2007 8:15AM]

XBOX 360 is the device that COULD HAVE SAVED HDDVD.

Regardless what people think, the simple fact is, very few consumers are going to walk into the store to buy a $400 game system and simultaneously purchase a dedicated HDDVD player that itself will cost over $500. And they certainly aren't going to do that if they #1 don't have an HD television (which the majority of American homes DON'T HAVE) and #2 if they don't see the need to switch from $5 ~ $15 DVD's to $20 ~ $30 HDDVD.

Furthermore, lets not forget, American families are cash strapped. The housing market is a mess...America's jobs are silently getting shipped overseas and the cost of fuel (and consequently food) is costing more and more Americans their disposable income that might be used to buy LUXURY items such as these.

SONY's master stroke was to include Blu Ray in the PS3. The PS2 when released was the cheapest DVD player you could buy and because of that, it found itself in Japanese stores that normally only sold home audio/video simply because it was a viable DVD alternative.
The PS3 is currently the cheapest Blu Ray player you can buy and is the primary reason Blu Ray is outselling HDDVD.

HDDVD has NO ADVANTANGE over Blu Ray besides the shrinking cost benefits of the stanadard red laser over the newer blue laser. Blu Ray has higher capacity and thus offers more future proofing. As a video game format and a storage medium, Blu Ray wins hands down.

Microsoft's backing of HDDVD over Blu Ray, yet, their determination not to risk the Xbox360's future by installing an HDDVD player SPEAKS VOLUMES !

Another stupid decision.

[TrentD @ Oct 24th 2007 8:45AM]

Are you not aware of the $179 HD DVD add-on drive, which still makes the Xbox360 + HD DVD less than the $600 PS3?

No one doubts the merits (ON PAPER) of the Blu-ray format. It's just that in practice, their players are overpriced and under-featured, almost half of the movies are only on 25 GB discs, mastering costs are higher due to low yields (reducing studio profit), and they still cling to old technologies like MPEG2 and LPCM on some releases.

I'm an HD DVD owner, but I bought HD DVD because it's a format performing to its full potential - Blu-ray is starting to improve, but the bottom line is that it's still a beta format, not realizing any of its THEORETICAL advantages in the marketplace.

[keithgregoire @ Oct 24th 2007 8:54AM]

In response to DickHardKnocks:

HD DVD does not use a red laser. It uses the same blue-violet laser that Blu-Ray does.

I believe that the Xbox 360 strategy of having an optional external player was the wiser one and the one that most benefits the consumer.

However, the price of standalone players will determine the winner, not a game machines. By a very wide margin, folks will purchase a standalone player for their home movie viewing.

The PS3's downfall was to include a Blu-Ray player in the mix.

[TrentD @ Oct 24th 2007 8:57AM]

Also, what the heck are you talking about with Red Laser vs. Blue Laser?

BOTH FORMATS use Blue (Actually violet) lasers. If you're going to rant, you may want to get your information from somewhere other than the PS3 fanboys at Blu-ray.com.

[nerrrrrrd @ Oct 24th 2007 9:49AM]

TrentD, the 40gig ps3 is $400.

[munkyballz @ Oct 24th 2007 9:56AM]

@ TRENTD

I don't know where you're buying a 600 dollar PS3 but you might want to get a hundred bucks back, because the 80 gig only costs 499.

[USGS @ Oct 24th 2007 10:58AM]

The blue laser is what gives you the higher capacity in both formats. Red lasers have less resolution so they take up more space on the disk. From what I heard(very limited) the big change from DVD to HDDVD was the laser nothing else.

[TrentD @ Oct 24th 2007 11:10AM]

My mistake on the PS3 - I wasn't aware the Price Drop had occurred yet.

HardKnocks, you're beyond help. Red lasers don't have short enough wavelength to read the small pits and valleys on an HD DVD's surface.

[TrentD @ Oct 24th 2007 11:13AM]

munky,

I'm not buying a PS3 - don't worry :)

[DickHardknocks @ Oct 24th 2007 9:58AM]

WRONG.
When HDDVD first was released the industry was still using the red laser found in todays DVD recording ( .6 numerical aperature)

There was a worry that the cost overruns of switching from RED lasers to Blue lasers would be too high and that the higher production costs would lead to Blu Ray's demise. WRONG lasers got cheaper and HDDVD manufacturers switched over to a .65 numerical aperature while Blu Ray uses a .85 NAp

[mike @ Oct 24th 2007 9:38AM]

Blue-Ray players support resolutions up to 1080P ( which is the best thus far). HD DVD supports format up to 1080i (a little less quality than 1080P). You will especially notice the difference when you are using a 1080P TV (most of the newer generation of LCDs are 1080P). Blue Ray has more space than the HD-DVD. Also Blue ray is faster and processes data more effeciently. If you want more information you should go to the manufacturers websites and compare the differences. Toshiba recently came up with a 1080P HD DVD, However, it is still 12.5 GB per layer. But those newer ones cost around 500 dollars alone....

[insertAlias @ Oct 24th 2007 10:11AM]

You know, Betamax was the technically superior format as well...

I don't actually own either format player, so I'm not supporting one over the other. But you may be surprised at how many times the "superior" formats have come in second place or never even finished the race.

[Cracked @ Oct 24th 2007 10:22AM]

Wrong. Toshiba has had 1080P HD DVD players out for a long while now, and they're no where near $500, try $300 for an HD-A20 at Amazon. Even the newest model, the HD-A30, is only $400 at Best Buy. I'm not going to get into which is faster or processes data more efficently (it's just something I don't know anything about), but I've never had any long loading times with my HD DVD player.

[TrentD @ Oct 24th 2007 11:11AM]

You're just spewing falsehoods - HD DVDs are recorded in 1080p/24, just like Blu-ray. With most players, it's output as 1080p also.

[TrentD @ Oct 24th 2007 11:14AM]

Mike, you're so full of crap - that's the only way to put it.

All HD DVDs have capacity for 1080p video.

They're 15 GB per layer, and newer 17 GB layers have been designed as well. You really need to stop embarrassing yourself.

[paul.davis @ Oct 24th 2007 12:51PM]

Umm.. I just picked up a Toshiba HD-A30 from Best Buy for 300 bucks.. 3rd generation 1080p HD-DVD player FTW!!

[Matt @ Oct 24th 2007 9:50AM]

I'd have been great if Toshiba was in between Sony & Microsoft, uniting the 2 opponents by manufacturing pieces for both companies: Chips for the PS3, Drives for the XBox360 :D

[booticon @ Oct 24th 2007 10:08AM]

This is the one thing that's keeping HD-DVD from dominating the format war. I currently own a 360, so buying an add-on is doable (albeit impractical as I have a mere SDTV), but I think it's just too damn clunky. The average consumer doesn't want to think about which optical drive to use for what media.

[DickHardknocks @ Oct 24th 2007 10:13AM]

your point is the same one I am making.

#1 Most US Homes lack HD Televisions.
Furthermore, most of the homes that do have them have either OLDER MODELS that only support 720p, or they have cheap models that only support 720P.
The problem here is COST though prices are dropping recently.

#2 360's lack of an HDDVD format causes it to be a hinderance of market penetration for HDDVD.

#3 Consumers DON'T WANT to have to brainstorm shopping just to buy a movie.

The worst thing I've seen recently is the desire to release certain movies on HDDVD and DVD only rather than include BLURAY.
Transformers for example.
That's just stupid.

I can only guess that those people out there with upconverting DVD players might not notice the difference if they get the widescreen version.

[mike @ Oct 24th 2007 10:53AM]

Consumers who don't own an HDTV are not going to buy either format. They will stick to their everyday DVD player, and they should, because the picture quality is not going to be any better if they get either one. Thats why Blue ray and HDDVD are called next-gen Dvd players. They target people with HDTVs. Now, since the "war" between those two formats is still fierce (even though both of them are selling slowly). What will be deciding factor is the cost and the quality at the same time. For those people who are not gamers and have a 1080P HDTV they will probably buy a Blueray Player because they want to use their TV to the max. At the same time 1080Ps are considered the real HDTVs by many people and retail stores.. If you go to best buy they'll tell you that 1080p is the best quality ever... but they are a little more expensive, however, they are dominating the market and becoming the standard format of LCD...
The internet has made it much easier for all of us, consumers, to decide and quality is very important especially when the price difference is no that big. (299 Blue ray vs 249 HD DVD -coming). Its a different era than the one when VHS and Beta were competing.

[captain underpants and the bringdown gang @ Oct 24th 2007 12:40PM]

If I were MSFT I would get make a Xbox 360 with a 250GB HDD and the combo blu-ray/hd-dvd player. (upsacle to 2540p?)

[paul.davis @ Oct 24th 2007 1:00PM]

Wow.. I bought transformers to watch it on my 56 inch Samsung 1080p DLP and that was one of the best movies i've ever seen. I guess growing up with transformers as a kid helped out. But still it was a very good movie on HD.. why can't HD-DVD and Blu-Ray just get along? I want to watch all of the movies... just not pay another 400-500 bucks for a separate Blu-Ray player. There is a player called SuperBlue but for some reason tons of them were returned recently at my local BestBuy.. any news floating around about that?

[Phil @ Oct 24th 2007 2:26PM]

Yeah, the first gen of the "superblu" sucked. The main reason is because it supports blu more than HD-DVD. It doesn't support any of the advanced features of either format. So you would be spending over $1000 to get a player that already sucks, and will suck worse in a year. It doesn't play any PiP special features or connect to the internet for either format. It was already obsolete the day they announced it.

The next generation of combo player from LG and Samsung might be better, but so far the only BD profile 2.0 player I've heard of is the unreleased Deawoo. Although the PS3 probably has enough processing power to do profile 2.0 in software with an update. So it is really the ONLY blu-ray player anyone should buy.

[paul.davis @ Oct 24th 2007 1:02PM]

LOL..that may take awhile..i think the next step is going to be 1440p? Even that'll be a year or so.. then Quad HD.. 2160p? Probably 3 years or so? Sounds sweet though... hella pricey. I'm going to go ahead and line up somebody that needs a new lung and kidney. LOL

[Ricky Davis @ Oct 24th 2007 1:50PM]

Microsoft is playing it the right way here. The casual consumer market is NOT ready for HD-DVD or Blu-Ray yet and the external add-on is the way to go so that those who really and will use the hd-dvd player will get one. Sony on the other hand is looking to shove Blu-Ray down our throats by overpricing their video game system disguised as a very competitively priced Blu-Ray player.