The real reason Warner went Blu?

If you want to know why Warner (owned by Time Warner, which also owns Engadget's parent companies) choose Blu-ray and why now is the time, you should head over to Engadget HD. We had the chance to have a few words with the president of Warner Home Video and he was more than happy to clear up a few questions for us.

[michael @ Jan 4th 2008 9:02PM]

Kind of feel sad about this. I got an HD-DVD player and I love it. I chose HD-DVD because it's a cheaper format, and to me, looked pretty high-res enough on my HDTV. And I also heard that HD-DVD had better interactive features than BluRay would. Sigh.

But if this gets the darn format war to an end, then maybe it's for the better.

[Kurian @ Jan 4th 2008 9:38PM]

Interactive features?? Oh please, thats the biggest load of crap I've ever heard.

Find one person who sits and goes through that extra crap with their player's klunky remote.
All that happens is you pop in the disc and watch the main movie.

Hence from the realworld point of view Bluray=More Space=Better quality=Win.

[michael @ Jan 4th 2008 9:43PM]

@Kurian:

I do. I usually do DVD's on my computer and the extra features are something I love to explore through when I have time.

Of course you don't really have the option yet (if ever) to play HD-DVD's on the computer, but I have a nice Media Center remote I got for my birthday, and thumbing through the d-pad isn't that much of a problem with me.

[Paul @ Jan 4th 2008 10:41PM]

"Bluray=More Space=Better quality=Win."

The quality of the movies on Blu Ray are exactly the same as the ones on HD DVD.

[kcmurphy88 @ Jan 5th 2008 2:49AM]

Gotta love the way blu-ray folks like to win ugly.

[primetime4 @ Jan 5th 2008 1:19PM]

The same video codec will look close to identical on either format. But Blu-ray can support AVC at a higher bitrate which many reviews find to be better. Up to now, videos were encoded at the lowest common denominator which was HD-DVD so there there were not many opportunities to see much difference.

[Totalfixation @ Jan 4th 2008 9:05PM]

"We closed the call with the most pertinent question of all, "where's the Matrix on Blu-ray?" to which the answer was, as soon as they work out the details of BD Java and PIP."

The only thing good about BD is the size of the storage, but other then that HD DVD is clearly a better format at the moment. The Interactive HD of HD-DVD has almost fully matured while BD hasn't even worked out the kinks yet. I hope Warner can some how get out of this contract and side with the HD DVD camp.

[Jamesology @ Jan 4th 2008 9:15PM]

I personally do not see a difference. You seriously got to have personal issues if you actually see that big of a difference between HD DVD and Blu Ray. I just went Blu b/c of personal prefence in movies and Blu Ray has got some good movies under their belt. The only disappointment was Transformers but I can live with it, I think.

[Rk @ Jan 4th 2008 9:24PM]

What sort of personal issues MUST people have Doctor? Better eyesight? An affinity for noticing different levels of picture quality? The need for different kinds of interactive features? Yes some severe personal issues there for our discerning customer. A heightened sense of perception is NOT a personal issue.

[Jamesology @ Jan 4th 2008 9:48PM]

WOW really!! Kind of like how some ppl still compare the difference between the games of 360 and PS3. If you don't like the contrast settinga on the 360 or PS3 then changs the setting on your television. And no, that's not "A heightened sense of perception," that's called fanboyism or what I like to call "whiney b!+@hes." Are you PMSing b/c you're loving format is losing this stupid format war that only whiney b!+@hes make a big deal about.

Well do you want to know another difference? Most of the big companies are choosing Blu Ray, I guess "different kinds of interactive features" doesn't help with it's future. Even Blockbuster chose Blu Ray.

http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/17/blockbuster-chooses-blu-ray-is-the-war-over/

[Curtis @ Jan 4th 2008 9:21PM]

So basically Paramount is a cheap ass crack ho; while Fox and Warner are high-class call "girls"! lol

Long live Blu-Ray!!!

[Clark @ Jan 4th 2008 10:44PM]

Good God...

[Totalfixation @ Jan 4th 2008 9:54PM]

People probably are forgetting that its not completely over it just means the stakes are higher for HD DVD. How i see it is lion gate, fox, Disney and all those BD siders, there exclusivity contracts with BD(that's if they have any) will expire eventually. That leaves things up on the table for HD-DVD to buy them up. You never know how these things all end up to be.

[Davey @ Jan 4th 2008 10:08PM]

Call Warner at [phone] to let them know how you feel.

[Fall-Apart @ Jan 5th 2008 1:01AM]

And say what, exactly? Thanks for ending the format war?

[steveo @ Jan 5th 2008 2:37AM]

addresses from http://www.campaignhd.com/080104_WARNER.html

At least some of these are real, as I got an auto-reply and a read receipt already...

[Posted multiple times to increase exposure - we are dedicated consumers, so let's let the execs know what we think about Warner dumping HD DVD, be you red or blu]

-----

Meyer, Barry; Horn, Alan; Credle, Gary; Fleishman, Susan;
Fox, Richard; Robinov, Jeff; [e-mail]; Rosenblum,
Bruce; [e-mail]; Tsujihara, Kevin; Antonellis, Darcy;
Baker, Debra; Cohen, Polly; Cookson, Chris; Fellman, Dan; Frank, Doug;
Frankel, Eric; Gilbert, Jon; Globe, Brad; Judson, Lisa; Kroll, Sue (WB);
Levitz, Paul; [e-mail]; Maday, Gregg; Nelson, Diane;
Noonan, Jim (WB); Rosenberg, Jennifer (NLC); McDonough, Candice (NLC);
Hemphill, Alexis

[Greg @ Jan 4th 2008 10:10PM]

I am not an avid movie viewer. Aside from Christmas movies and a couple favorite SiFi discs I don't collect them. I will not purchase either Bluray or HD until I can buy a combo BluRay/HD/DVD player at a reasonable price (How much? Ask me when I see it.) Until then it's DVD's. Content, nor bells & whistles.

[hemmy @ Jan 4th 2008 10:17PM]

Call Warner at [phone] to congratulate them for ending this inane war.

[michael @ Jan 4th 2008 10:54PM]

I'm quite sure if Warner went HD-DVD, a lot of you guys would complain that they're prolonging the war.

Warner goes BluRay and it's an instant end.

[hemmy @ Jan 5th 2008 12:22AM]

Uh, No. Warner going HDDVD would mean a 50/50 Hollywood marketshare split and guarantee HDDVD survives indefinitely. The Paramount deal bought them life support.


"I'm quite sure if Warner went HD-DVD, a lot of you guys would complain that they're prolonging the war."

Not me personally, but I'd agree with that assessment :)

[ipodmacman @ Jan 4th 2008 10:57PM]

This is great now I can watch bugs bunny on my PS3 and it gives a good dose of defeate to anyone going HD DVD!

GO BLUE RAY!!!!!

[Plutarch @ Jan 4th 2008 11:48PM]

What a wonderful way to validate your life.

[ipodmacman @ Jan 5th 2008 7:33PM]

Thanks Man now I am wating on Paramount so I can get Star Trek on my PS3.

GO SONY!!!!

[Jonathan Bergeron @ Jan 5th 2008 12:30AM]

Good to hear the Matrix is going Blu-Ray

[Wolfticket @ Jan 5th 2008 12:34AM]

I'm still sticking to my initial opinion that it had something to do with Sony, a dump truck full of money and Warners lawn.

[Jamesology @ Jan 5th 2008 1:45AM]

Well it worked for Blockbuster and Apple.

[Brian @ Jan 5th 2008 5:06AM]

I will not go Blu-Ray until they do dual format disc's like HD. I don't want to buy a player for every TV. If it's not dual format I'll stick to DVD. I have a PS3 and a 360 with HD. I only buy HD at the moment.

[stephenbratz2 @ Jan 5th 2008 6:22AM]

The Blu group made up an unsubstantiated $150MM figure, even though Paramount said they were not paid off, and they stick by that to make themselves feel better. Rumors are that Warner was paid off, they deny it, and the Blu group make up excuses like "it was the better format that won the day" rather than accepting that they were. I don't see this as the better format winning, but rather the 12 year old PS3 Blu boys saying anything, making up anything to make sure they win in the face of growing competition from the Wii and 360.

[stephenbratz2 @ Jan 5th 2008 6:31AM]

it is interesting how the same people who claim that companies like Microsoft takes away consumer choice in operating systems, are cheering on companies taking away consumer choice in which disk format they support. Really, what difference does it make to you what format people use? Blu had a majority of formats, Warner was releasing in a format you support so you were not missing out. If all the studios released in both formats, what difference does it make if it used both? It is like EA releasing all their titles on the PS3, Wii, and 360. Does it hurt you that the release on all 3?

It is comments like yours that show how petty the Blu supporters are.

[PSM @ Jan 5th 2008 8:13AM]

While choice and competition is good, incompatibility can be really annoying. Even assuming the two formats survived and were equally supported and you could get whatever movies you want for both formats, what happens when you want to borrow a movie from a friend and he has HD and you have Blu? Or you're burning a disc for someone and your computer has one format and the recipient has another? I find that kind of scenario annoying enough that I'd rather somebody, anybody, just pick one so that the industry can focus its resources on developing and improving that one format.

[boe @ Jan 5th 2008 8:31AM]

I think one of the formats might win if the studios just released all their movies in 1080p DTS MA. Stop releasing poor quality pressings on your new media and people will find a reason to buy the DVDs. Right now because the studios are releasing pretty close to the same quality transfers on both standard DVD and the new format I find little reason to buy the new format.

I hate the "special edition" good pressings that come out 8 months after the crap mediocre quality pressings. Just release the DTS MA 1080p version in the new format and the consumers will take interest in the new formats. Why pay more for a transfer that isn't significantly better than a standard DVD?

Would you pay 35% more for a bag of potato chips which comes in a bag that can hold 10 times more chips but only contains about 10% more potato chips?

[Rob @ Jan 5th 2008 10:44AM]

I want a dominant format so the masses can move to a new data-disc format. Unlike most people, I care more about burning lots of data than watching movies. And it seems if we only had one format (so we wouldn't have to worry about being an early adopter in a format that may fade away), the movement to adopt disc writers in that format would proceed on a larger level, and prices for media and burners would come down sooner. CD... DVD... What is our next broadly accepted optical disc format? I've been burned by two many disc formats in the past (MO discs, Jazz, Rev) that never gained broad consumer acceptance.

[Keith @ Jan 5th 2008 12:55PM]

Actually the real reason Warner went Blu is because they were originally (and possibly up until 1 week ago) were going to announce HD DVD exclusivity with FOX, but then FOX was offered a bunch of money to stay Blu. With the FOX deal not going on, WB didn't want to be the only studio to switch sides, and decided to go Blu.

Source: An industry insider over at AVSforum

[Todd @ Jan 5th 2008 4:15PM]

so what you mean to say is HD-DVD was offering fox a lot of money to switch and the blu team countered the offer and fox stayed which then in turn warner decided to go blu.

[WL @ Jan 5th 2008 4:58PM]

Why is it that any time there's any kind of news about this "format war" so many people assume its going to end? I still don't see either format going any where any time soon...and if the HD-DVD camp can continue to sell more cheap players movie studios aren't going to want to miss out on that consumer action no matter what they're saying at the moment.

[td @ Jan 7th 2008 5:01PM]

You people must remember, this is not just for movies and games but an industry standard for optical storage media in general. That can mean, PC, console, movies, games, data, blank media for storage, home tv disc recording... There has to be a standard, without the standard format pricing will continue to be outrageously high as well as compatibility issues. Do you think a corporation with 10,000 pcs can run efficiently if they have half the pcs with HDDVD and the other with BluRay just because Dell backs one company and Gateway backs another (the example is just for illustration I'm not claiming either company backs anything)? You get the idea. If the standard war was just for movies and games, it would not matter AT ALL, both could survive, it's MUCH BIGGER than movies and games. Who do you think makes more money a company replicates DVDs for movie studios or a company that can punch out blank media all day long...