Toshiba's Mike Eves wackily compares format war to fuel

Although one has to consider Toshiba's obvious bias in the format war, we still can't quite wrap our heads around what Mike Eves is trying to get at here. Reportedly, the company's retail marketing executive for its consumer products division told Pocket-Lint that the "HD DVD / Blu-ray battle is like petrol versus diesel at the pumps," and somewhat clarified his thoughts by asserting that "both would probably exist together rather than a single format winning out." Of course, that last statement doesn't deviate too far from the sentiments issued by Sony's Howard Stringer just days ago, and while he couldn't be coerced into admitting whether or not combo players were a good thing, another spokesman did state that he wasn't keen on having two units under his TV. Whatever the case, we can't imagine that having two formats for the duration would be a boon for consumers, but regrettably, we're hardly any closer to seeing a clear-cut winner today than we were on the day these two left the gates.

[Thanks, Timothy, image courtesy of SciFi]

[zargon @ Nov 22nd 2007 10:15AM]

People need to face it, both formats are here to stay. Sony and BDA have claimed how many times now that they won the format war and yet, HD-DVD is still around.

Dual format players are going to be the way to go for most people. Only one player needed and then you can buy all the HDM movies in confidence. They just need to drop below the cost of buying both formats players, $500-$600 now, but they will need to hit $200-$300 to get more people to jump aboard.

[Jason @ Nov 22nd 2007 10:39AM]

I don't see the value HD-DVD or BR provide.

I'm perfectly happy with DVD. I can rip copies onto a NAS at home, and keep the originals safe from damage. The resolution is fine, even at 100' projected in my basement sitting 7-10 feet away. I know HD would look better, but not $5000 better. My projector, DVD player and surround sound system cost less than $800.

[zargon @ Nov 22nd 2007 10:47AM]

@Jason

Well, if you only spent $800 for your projector, DVD player and surround system, you not exactly in the demographic for HDM. Especially since your projector, considering what you probably paid for it, is most likely not even HD. With out a HD display, there really is no point in a HDM player.

However, someone with a HD display. A $99 HD-DVD player is more than a sound investment to get the best possible picture you can get. Especially if you are talking a projector on a larger screen, which most people push their projector beyond their limits (like the el cheapo infocus x1, x2 and x3... should never be pushed much past about 80", let alone 100"), the added detail is only going to help (as long as it is a HD projector and not a ED or SVGA).

[JeffDM @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:41AM]

Jason; If you think it still takes $5000 to go HD, then 2003 called and want their prices back. Seriously. It's hard to believe that someone that visits this site can be THAT out of date with their pricing knowledge.

A very nice Epson 720p projector can be had for $1300. Add an HD video player with 10 movie free deal and you're getting great HD for $1500. HD flat panel displays can be had for even less.

[Phaedrus @ Nov 22nd 2007 3:32PM]

Frankly, I don't get what the big deal is. It'll be like VHS vs. BETA - they'll both be used for a while, then one of them will just fade out. I don't see why all the one-up-manship is necessary.

As for HD quality, I really can't see that much difference between 720p and 1080i, and barely any difference between 1080i and 1080p. I mean, come on, there's a point where it just gets ridiculous.

[Jason @ Nov 22nd 2007 3:34PM]

I suppose they stayed DEADLY silent over if existing players would play the new 51GB HD DVD discs. The cynical people are saying the $99 fire sale was to get rid of 50,000 incompatible players..

[Temple @ Nov 22nd 2007 5:37PM]

I'm sure neither side will mind if we end up with dual-format outcome, since royalties will be paid to both sides. The people that will pay are the consumers.

[zargon @ Nov 22nd 2007 7:54PM]

@Phaedrus

The reason you can't hardly see the difference between 720p vs 1080i and 1080i vs 1080p is because there really isn't one. You, and most people, most likely won't see one unless they are side by side. 720p is going to look slightly better at some fast motion stuff, having less blur and artifacting. While 1080i is going to have slightly sharper detail. But over all, they booth look good and the difference is minor. As for 1080i vs 1080p, it is even less because there is no information difference between the two. 1080p is just going to handle motion a little better due to it being progressive, but other than that, there is no major difference. Companies like Sony would like you to believe so, hence the marketing BS phrase of 1080p being true HD. Not to mention the FUD of the BD fanboys and zealot of 1080i not being worth it and only cheap HD-DVD players having it.

But you will always have those people that believe there is a huge difference and that they can easily distinguish between the formats. This BD vs HD-DVD is almost as fun as the 720p vs 1080i arguments of the past and now the 1080i vs 1080p arguments. Us geeks will continue to argue about our technology preferences and opinions.

[macona @ Nov 26th 2007 2:50PM]

I paid I think about $800 for my Infocus SP5000 that is 720p native. Great projector!

[Esat @ Nov 22nd 2007 10:20AM]

Digital downloads are the future (for a large number of people anyway). Until that becomes the norm (internet speeds increase for normal households) then these two disc formats are here to stay.

[[e-mail] @ Nov 22nd 2007 10:25AM]

Considering that both formats use the same video codecs, this is no surprise.

Blu-ray and HD DVD both support MPEG-2, MPEG-4 AVC, and VC-1 video codecs, which are the actual basis for picture quality. The discs themselves are simply data storage, containers.

Yes, there is some variation to how the containers work, but bits are bits. The same video data bits come out of a VC-1 encoded video file, irrespective of if it is stored on Blu-ray or HD DVD.

This is what early adopters arguing for the superiority of one side or the other don’t seem to get.

There never should have been a format war but for greed driving the split over who owned what intellectual property rights for the container.

And the container has no bearing on the consumer experience.

[Vanillacide @ Nov 22nd 2007 10:47AM]

"This is what early adopters arguing for the superiority of one side or the other don’t seem to get."

At first Blu-ray discs were all MPEG-2 on single sided 20GB disc, and HD DVD discs were all VC-1 on double sided 30GB discs. VC-1 is a more efficient codec and it had more space, so HD DVD titles did look better (sometimes significantly) and were free of artefacts.

However, these days most dual format releases are both in VC-1 and look as good as each other; however, some single format Blu-ray releases can still be MPEG-2 or H.264/AVC. The HD DVD discs sometimes have more interactive features than Blu-ray ones, but who really cares about that stuff anyway?

I tend to think of Blu-ray as the HD format of the PS3, wheseas HD DVD is the format of the dedicated player (albeit with a sprinkling of Xbox 360 add-ons). Maybe in 2008 we'll see increased sales of dedicated Blu-ray players, or maybe they'll continue to be outsold by cheaper HD DVD players.

Either way, this 'war' is far from over, and I just wish that dual-format players were prevalent.

[JeffDM @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:49AM]

Vanillacide, there are problems with your post. for one, Blu-Ray is 25GB.

Another, I've seen roll-overs comparing the same movie encoded differently, a single layer Blu-Ray in MPEG-2 and a dual layer HD-DVD in VC-1, both were the exact same movie, and there isn't that much difference. I just don't see why anyone harps on MPEG-2, it's obvious they aren't comparing the same source video encoded two different ways. You can't compare two different movies very easily. The film stock might be very different, the age of the film is a major factor as well. I've seen HD movies encoded in all three CODECs and I really haven't had any issues with any of the CODECs.

[Vanillacide @ Nov 22nd 2007 1:31PM]

Typo on the 25GB vs 20GB, I noticed it as soon as I posted the comment, but you can't edit them afterwards. :(

Anyway, JeffDM, nothing else wrong with my post ... I was explaining to don.task why the very early adopters went for HD DVD. Which was that HD DVD camp used to claim superiority of picture quality (i.e. much more efficient codec in more space) over Blu-ray. As you say "there isn't that much difference" but there is a difference and over on places like AVSforum and AVforums it was different enought to matter, especially to people who spend tens of thousands of dollars on their home theater setups. Blu-ray camp didn't help itself with first discs such as 'The Fifth Element' and others that they later had to reissue.

[Charles @ Nov 22nd 2007 5:58PM]

“Yes, there is some variation to how the containers work, but bits are bits. The same video data bits come out of a VC-1 encoded video file, irrespective of if it is stored on Blu-ray or HD DVD.”

That’s not entirely accurate. Blu-ray has a 47.6% higher transfer rate than HD-DVD (53.95Mbit/s vs 36.55 Mbit/s) which allows it to support higher bit rate (and thus higher quality) audio and video. Blu-ray supports video at up to 40.0 Mbit/s while the HD-DVD specification allows a maximum bit rate for video of 29.4 Mbit/s.

The same is true for the audio codecs, for example Blu-ray supports DTS-HD Master Audio at bit rates up to 24.5Mbit/s while HD-DVD only supports DTS-HD Master Audio at up to 18.0Mbit/s. DTS-HD High Resolution is supported at 6.0Mbit/s on Blu-ray but only 3.0Mbit/s on HD-DVD.

While “bits are bits” Blu-ray allows those bits to be read at a higher rate meaning more data per second meaning higher quality audio and video.

[eferz @ Nov 22nd 2007 10:27AM]

Historically Sony hasn't had much success in getting their formats widely accepted.

Sony projects that never got mass market appeal...

Adaptive Transform Acoustic Coding (ATRAC)
BetaMax
Digital Audio Tape (DAT)
Digital-8
eBook
High capacity Floppy Disk (HiFD)
High capacity Mini-Disc (HiMD)
Memory Stick
MultiMedia Compact Disc (MMCD)
MicroMV
Mini-Disk (MD)
Mini-Disc Long Play (MDLP)
Music Clip
NetMD
Professional Disc for Data (PPD)
Sony Dynamic Digital Sound (SDDS)
Super Audio CD (SACD)
Universal Media Disc (UMD)

Sony projects that were abandoned
Aibo
Clie
Copy-Protect CDs
Direct Digital Stream
DVD-RAM
Pen Tablets

Sony success... telling Apple to use 3.5" Floppy on their Macintosh.

They may not have a winning track record but one of these days that ant will move another rubber tree plant.

[Carbonize @ Nov 22nd 2007 10:45AM]

No but Sony do tend to produce the technically superior formats (except ATRAC). I mean DAT and Betamax are used in professional studios.

I actually had Minidisc when they first came out and still have a Minidisc stereo and personal recorder/player. Something more satisfying in listening to a music player where you physically change things as opposed to just pressing play and having your entire collection played at random.

As to Memorystick I never saw it as a bad thing just another stupid addition to a market that didn't really have room for anything new.

[JeffDM @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:33AM]

S/PDIF is half Sony. CD is half Sony. IIRC, Sony is one of the DVD format's founding members.

[tekdroid @ Nov 23rd 2007 12:49AM]

*Sony had nothing to do with the brilliant DVD-RAM.
*MiniDisc, ATRAC (and HI-MD) are great products, just hampered for many years by crappy DRM; I wouldn't call any of them inferior.
*MemoryStick lives on in more products than I can count.

Market failure is not indicative of inferiority. Many factors come into play that determine the popularity and success of a format or technology. For every non-success or mediocre-selling product range, they've had 10 in which they've done extremely well, as far as I can guess as an observer of their name on everything and their chips in almost everything.

[eferz @ Nov 23rd 2007 2:32AM]

I'm not putting down Sony or their innovations. They've made some excellent technology advancements and creations over the years. However, they haven't had much success in getting mass market appeal, and they tend to give up or move onto more proprietary markets.

For example, we all know the outcome of the VHS and Betamax format wars. Betamax lost. Though it was superior technology over VHS. VHS was the winner simply because they allowed the customer to choose longer playing/recording times over clarity. However, in the professional arena, Sony Betamax flourished because that's where people were willing to pay the price for quality.

Digital Audio Tapes (DAT) was another example. Clearly a better technology than standard cassette tapes but it never took off. In fact, as Compact Discs (CD) were introduced they were nearly forgotten. Again, DAT tapes were the defacto standard in the professional audio business. It was also introduced to the computer field as DDS for backing up data.

As a consumer, I don't want to get stuck with the post-apocalyptic disaster of another format war. That is, to invest in one media, only having to repurchase everything in another because of the final outcome. As the guy above me said, "they support the same codecs... these discs are simple storage containers.. and the container should not have any bearing on the consumer experience". Greed is what is driving the split over who owned what intellectual property rights.

So, for now... I'm going to stick with a dual format player and rent High Definition Discs from Blockbuster and Netflix. I honestly don't care which format "wins" only that one format dies, so I can start buying video discs again.

I'm not a betting man, but if I were... I'd bet a cup of coffee that Sony's format isn't going to win the mass market appeal based on their history.

[Jeffery Haas @ Dec 2nd 2007 6:03PM]

You forgot one, a MASSIVE screwup that has plagued camcorder owners ever since...
THE FOUR PIN FIREWIRE connector---uuggghh!

[Jouten @ Nov 22nd 2007 10:27AM]

HD DVD is cheaper, has enough space to get the job done and has set universal standards that it abides so that all are on the same sheet of music.

Personally, I have the HD DVD ext drive for my 360 in one room, and the Toshiba HDA2 in the living room (for sound, 360's drive not really built for it). I plan on getting a PS3 soon, and that should take care of 'blu ray'. Personally, I'd like to maybe see Blu Ray as a media for storage and just for PS3 games as the UMD is to the PSP. I really got turned off by Sony's ploy to 'force feed' us Blu Ray.

As for digital downloads, we're not quite there yet. There are alot more people than you think that are still using dial up for crying out loud. But that would be nice. Personally, I would like to have the option of going to a brick n' mortar shop and get some type of physical media for collection purposes though. There's just something about having an actual disc in your hand versus having just a file saved on your hard drive...

[Duo @ Nov 22nd 2007 10:54AM]

Hmmm... Let's see. I could spend a few thousand for the BR and HD-DVD players, the HD tv, all the movies I already own, and let the cartel get richer. On the other hand, I can download movies on Bittorrent, for free, and stick it to the suits who are just out to perpetuate their money making schemes.

Take what you can, give nothing back. You can't sue all of us, and you sure as hell can't stop us. I guess your only option is to take your ball and go home, whiners.

[Josh L @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:23AM]

And then you'll have no more movies to watch. I guess you win.

[m-p{3} @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:54AM]

That's because of people like you we got DRMs.

[Duo @ Nov 22nd 2007 4:06PM]

"And then you'll have no more movies to watch. I guess you win."

Highly ranked? You people are tools. Maybe multi million dollar budget catastrophe films will stop being pumped out, but thats like crying over the loss of boy bands. "Oh no, our precious over produced pieces of trash have stop being released, what ever shall we do?"
Oh wait, did you mean all movies? Because if you did, you're bigger tools then I previously thought. That's like saying that piracy is going to kill music. Oh noes, the interweb is killing our entertainments! Ha!

[zeroaxs @ Nov 24th 2007 8:20AM]

Hey Duo, that's why it's called a business! They're in it to make money. Always have been. Always will be. It's one thing to ask that they be fair in their pricing and in ensuring that we have fair use access (which we do not legally have anymore), it's something else altogether to ask that the people who put their hearts and souls into the projects that you are stealing to get nothing for their work. I guess when you go to work, you don't get paid for it. You just do it "for the love of your job." Yeah, right.

[N30 G30 @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:04AM]

If this format war never dies, then for me and other consumers that's waiting for one to win, then DVDs win.

DVDs are still out selling all other formats. The sales would've been different if there was just one format for it to compete with.

[BigD145 @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:07AM]

Diesel is not making a rebound. American car companies do not make diesel engine passenger cars. They probably won't be seen until well after 2010 when the sulfur emissions of standard diesel are forcibly lowered. Biodiesel is not supported by the federal gov't or car manufacturers.

[mike @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:09AM]

Well since both of them use the same codecs. Then its all about how much each of them could hold... I mean, maybe now you think single layer 12.5 GB is more than good enough, but this is the format of the near future. HD Movies will be even much bigger.. So I think the better one is Blue-Ray. Now, since Sony integrated it in their PS3s, this means that Blue ray is here to stay. even if HDDVD wins the war and dominate for the first year or two because they have cheaper HD DVD players. But time will reduce all prices down including blue rays, and then the trend will go towards blue ray again.

[Austin @ Nov 22nd 2007 12:58PM]

How much bigger do you think a movie is going to get?
At 1080 HD and Blu Ray are more than big enough. Movies likely aren't going to start being released with runtimes of 5+ hours.

Size is not an issue for DVDs. Maybe for games, maybe for storage, but IF I am going to back up I use magnetic tape, or external harddrives. Better durability than disc. Easier to recover. I appreciate HD DVD for a few reassons.
1) They went through the means that were set up to protect consumers when releasing HD DVD.
2) The format is stable
3) Out of the gate, the quality of HD DVD was superior, showing Toshiba and its partners cared about their product enough to develop to a true GAMA cycle. Sony released a BETA.

My problems with Sony is that they have not released a quality product since, BETA MAx, and they always push their products wrong. Their TVs, CD players, DVD players, Blu ray are low quality expensive piles of Crap. Even if Blu Ray held a technologically superior edge (Storage)I would buy it because of the definite flaws. If Samsung introduced the blu Ray it might be a different story. I Have nightmares of the tech in the PS2, and the PS3. The PSX was great, and that was the end for Sony it seems. Maybe they should allow Nintendo to direct more of their R&D.

[mattclarkie @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:37AM]

I'll probably suffer for saying this, but;

The sooner HD-DVD goes away, and Blu-ray becomes the standard the better. I am fed up of going into Blockbuster and seeing 20 blu-ray films for rent, and not a single one being instock for me to actually watch.

[Daemonios @ Nov 22nd 2007 1:26PM]

That's if you consider 720p to be HD :)

[mattclarkie @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:44AM]

Sony are very important. Most broadcasting equipment is Sony, would you like to live in a world without TV. And as someone mentioned they did give us the CD/DVD/SPDIF in collaboration with other companies, but as a major key to the success. Would DVD have taken off so fast without the PS2?

[Bill Cros @ Nov 22nd 2007 12:01PM]

VHS sucked, thats why DVD took off

[Nex @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:51AM]

is anyone here old enough to remember the Beta max vs. Vhs format war...?

[Malcom O @ Nov 22nd 2007 1:02PM]

Yes, I was around, I remember video store being crowded with two copies of everything, when they had them in. Most of the times you were in a queue anyway, since all of the Mom-n-Pop joints couldn't afford multiples.It was shit then, and shit now. With format wars, consumers lose. For a comparison, the CD also had a hard transition as well, and does anyone else here remember Laser-Disc from Pioneer, and the awful V-CD. That is just how it goes.

[Tavis Veighey @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:54AM]

I was originally planning on staying out of the format war untill one format remained, OR combo players that could do both formats were the standard.

Alass my laptop died, and my new Toshiba laptop came with an HD-DVD Drive and 5 free HD-DVD Movies.

However I am not planning on getting ANY MORE HD-DVD movies. My laptop is the only HD-DVD Player in the house.

I plan to continue to purchase regular DVD's. They are quite affordable, and suit my needs. I see no point in spending a load of money on all new gear, when the gear I have works just fine. I may consider upgrading, as things fail. But I am in no hurry, as I do not have that mutch "Extra Money".

[Tavis Veighey @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:55AM]

DVD Had already taken off before the PS2 came out...

[Wilder.K.Wight @ Nov 22nd 2007 11:57AM]

From the Blockbuster perspective, there's not a lot of incentive to push Blu-Ray more than the stores already do. Consumers haven't adopted either technology in large numbers. It's the niche owners- the bleeding edge- that rent them. Everybody else pretty much thinks DVD is "good enough" because it's a huge jump over VHS.

And remember, a lot of people are still upset over their VHS collection becoming obsolete. I've had people ask me where they can get a widescreen VHS player/recorder. There are people out there who are STILL complaining that they can't rent VHS at Blockbuster anymore... Blockbuster "forced" them to get a DVD player.

So Blu-Ray and HD-DVD aren't going to see widespread adoption. By the time one or the other becomes truly dominant, digital distribution will win the day.

[CDN Crockett @ Nov 22nd 2007 12:33PM]

HD DVD!!!

[stephenbratz2 @ Nov 22nd 2007 1:45PM]

Windows has a 90% marketshare vs. OSX's (generous) 10% marketshare. The Apple fans will tell you that the Mac is far from dead.

360 consoles and games outsells, on a typical week, the PS3 counterpart 2:1. For example, Assasins Creed (in the first week) on 360 sold 585,064 while it sold 226,177 on the PS3 (as per vgchartz.com), and for the first week that I have seen PS3 sales are close to the 360 sales. Neither the 360 nor PS3 fans would say that either colsole is dead (actually, through some twisted logic, many PS3 fans say that the 360 is, but that is another story).

And yet, Blu-Ray, with the millions of PS3s sold and 100,000s of standalones vs. the around million HD DVD players sold, has a 2:1/3:2 movie ratio, and the Sony boys and BD members over and over again say that HD DVD is deader than the Turkey I will be enjoying in a few hours. To me, those numbers do not indicate deadness.

[Mike @ Nov 22nd 2007 2:16PM]

HD-DVD doesn't have region coding. Sony are region-coding hypocrites.

[tadmarketing @ Nov 22nd 2007 2:39PM]

I disagree that they could realistically co-exist as consumers really want clarity and just have one format to worry about. It is really in the best interest of all us for more cool products to come out where we can use our new shiny media!
http://www.tekbite.com/2007/11/next-gen-problem-in-perspective.html

[Patrick @ Nov 22nd 2007 2:46PM]

I guess we'd have to look at what is different between the two options.
(This is for the "common" consumer. Assume that I know very little here...)

PC/MAC: Mostly I hear that people like the Mac interface and how it works, some better software, usually more features. PCs are compatible and often cost less, with similar functionality.

360/PS3: They have different games. PS3 has more processing power (correct?), but there is not much visual difference between games. 360 costs much less.

HD: HD DVD costs much less. Blu (is easier to abbreviate) holds more for data storage, and could hold a lot more bonus video, use fewer discs for long films and series.

So, both HDs do the same thing, and one costs much less, so absolutely I think it will begin to become more popular. However, I agree that they will both be around for a while. If the prices were 25% of what they are now for all the gear, people would rush out and buy HD DVDs, and I would worry for Blu, but right now people don't see the reason for HD. They don't have HD displays and haven't experienced HD. They may see it in a store on display occasionally, but they don't pay attention, or if they watch, they don't consider themselves at home watching the content they're seeing (if it's not some DVD playing in the store). When I see HD being played in a store, it looks nice, but the extra detail in the content doesn't affect me emotionally because I'm standing there in a noise polluted retailer looking at tech specs.
Also, displays still, for the most part, cost more than the players. When the displays get cheaper, people will think more about content.

So yes, I think they'll both remain, as they both have a foothold, and (correct me on this one...) I believe both formats have a good number (10%+) of film publishers on their side exclusively.

Ultimately then, and I risk being accused of being a Blu "fan boy" here, I think Blu could eventually win out as a storage medium. When, several years down the road, a combo player costs $50, and HD DVD media is $.5, and Blu media is $.7, but has much more capacity, I think I would use Blu, assuming no other major differences. When things of high price come down in price, they all seem to settle at a certain line. Recordable DVDs and CDs now are even pretty similar in price, last time I checked. CDs hold on because of the CD player, which is still pretty popular. What does HD DVD have?

I have always more hoped for Blu because the last thing we need in the world of data storage is more format changes, so I would support the higher capacity one(assuming other factors equal). If Blu would cost twice as much, I still would support it. It will all come down eventually...

But for pre-recorded content, yes, in a year or two, I may be an HD DVD player owner...with a Blu or combo player a couple more years down the line. My first DVD player was a drive for $35.

[Jouten @ Nov 22nd 2007 4:00PM]

HD DVD technology has been advancing in the way of capacity lately. They are now at 50G capacity as we speak. Who knows how much more they can milk out of it.

[Klaus Burton @ Nov 22nd 2007 2:50PM]

Since when did American car companies represent any significant or meaningful portion of car companies? Many of the most successful car companies make diesel cars

[Adrian Williams @ Nov 22nd 2007 4:24PM]

@BigD
American car companies use to make them I had a diesel 82' Caddy sedan Deville

[Dan @ Nov 22nd 2007 4:59PM]

If you all just downloaded your movies illegally like me then you wouldn't have a format war to worry about.

[Duo @ Nov 22nd 2007 5:12PM]

Exactly my point. Arrrr.