Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Dvorak in PC Mag on HD-DVD vs. Blu-ray

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 8:56:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In the 2/8/05 edition of PC Magazine (print edition -- I could not find the
column on their website at http://pcmag.com ) John Dvorak has an interesting
column comparing Blu-ray DVD with HD-DVD and forecasting the future
regarding the two new HD-DVD formats.

He says HD-DVD is cheaper to make and more easily made backward-compatible,
while Blu-ray has more capacity. HD-DVD is being sold as uncrackable while
Blu-ray goes for "limited copy" mechanisms. Paranoid Hollywood types, of
course, like HD-DVD for this reason. And there's a bunch of stuff about the
codecs.

Bottom line, Dvorak says it's apparent to him that HD-DVD will win the
battle.

mack
austin

More about : dvorak mag dvd blu ray

Anonymous
January 12, 2005 8:56:27 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Mack McKinnon wrote:
> In the 2/8/05 edition of PC Magazine (print edition -- I could not find the
> column on their website at http://pcmag.com ) John Dvorak has an interesting
> column comparing Blu-ray DVD with HD-DVD and forecasting the future
> regarding the two new HD-DVD formats.
>
> He says HD-DVD is cheaper to make and more easily made backward-compatible,
> while Blu-ray has more capacity. HD-DVD is being sold as uncrackable while
> Blu-ray goes for "limited copy" mechanisms. Paranoid Hollywood types, of
> course, like HD-DVD for this reason. And there's a bunch of stuff about the
> codecs.
>
> Bottom line, Dvorak says it's apparent to him that HD-DVD will win the
> battle.

Given his track record, you don't know any more after reading his column
than before.

Matthew
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 8:56:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Matthew L. Martin (nothere@notnow.never) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> Mack McKinnon wrote:
> > Bottom line, Dvorak says it's apparent to him that HD-DVD will win the
> > battle.
>
> Given his track record, you don't know any more after reading his column
> than before.

So, what you're saying is that he isn't as accurate a predictor as Bob.
Since Bob is *always* wrong, it's easy to figure out that the opposite
is going to happen. ;->

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Dilbert/LostPassword.gif
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 8:56:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:

> Matthew L. Martin (nothere@notnow.never) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>
>>Mack McKinnon wrote:
>>
>>>Bottom line, Dvorak says it's apparent to him that HD-DVD will win the
>>>battle.
>>
>>Given his track record, you don't know any more after reading his column
>>than before.
>
>
> So, what you're saying is that he isn't as accurate a predictor as Bob.
> Since Bob is *always* wrong, it's easy to figure out that the opposite
> is going to happen. ;->
>

You got it!

Matthew

--
Thermodynamics and/or Golf for dummies: There is a game
You can't win
You can't break even
You can't get out of the game
January 13, 2005 1:26:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Mack McKinnon wrote:
> In the 2/8/05 edition of PC Magazine (print edition -- I could not
find the
> column on their website at http://pcmag.com ) John Dvorak has an
interesting
> column comparing Blu-ray DVD with HD-DVD and forecasting the future
> regarding the two new HD-DVD formats.
>
> He says HD-DVD is cheaper to make and more easily made
backward-compatible,
> while Blu-ray has more capacity. HD-DVD is being sold as uncrackable
while
> Blu-ray goes for "limited copy" mechanisms. Paranoid Hollywood
types, of
> course, like HD-DVD for this reason. And there's a bunch of stuff
about the
> codecs.
>
> Bottom line, Dvorak says it's apparent to him that HD-DVD will win
the
> battle.
>
> mack
> austin


Dvorak's reputation for acuracy isn't so good these days. Why he insist
on tackeling tough topics and going trying to force his (often
unsubstanciated opnion) on us is beyond me. I think he brought up some
good facts in his column, but then he had to cross the line and declare
a winner (as if any of us knows).

So here's a hint, if there were such a clear winner, the corporatations
wouldn't be backing two different standards. One would have already
lost. I seriously doubt you'll see a clear winner declared in this
battle anytime soon, buying an HD-DVD or BlueRay device in 2005 is
going to be a big risk, don't let "creditable" authors with egos
convince you otherwise.

-Jeremy
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 9:46:31 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Mack McKinnon" <MckinnonRemoveThis@tvadmanDeleteThisAsWell.com>
wrote:

>In the 2/8/05 edition of PC Magazine (print edition -- I could not find the
>column on their website at http://pcmag.com ) John Dvorak has an interesting
>column comparing Blu-ray DVD with HD-DVD and forecasting the future
>regarding the two new HD-DVD formats.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1750098,00.asp

joemooreaterolsdotcom
January 13, 2005 12:03:27 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Joe Moore" <munged@bad.example.com> wrote in message
news:s76cu0119cl7h85v1gr6s3pmndhsun4re6@4ax.com...
> "Mack McKinnon" <MckinnonRemoveThis@tvadmanDeleteThisAsWell.com>
> wrote:
>
>>In the 2/8/05 edition of PC Magazine (print edition -- I could not find
>>the
>>column on their website at http://pcmag.com ) John Dvorak has an
>>interesting
>>column comparing Blu-ray DVD with HD-DVD and forecasting the future
>>regarding the two new HD-DVD formats.
>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1750098,00.asp
>
> joemooreaterolsdotcom

OK; I read his piece, and it is full of inaccurate statements. Beta did not
die because it supported less time. A 720 Beta tape at the highest speed
provides more time than a 120 VHS tape. (At the highest speeds).

The software needed to extend the time on HD-DVD, currently has real
problems in the real world of production work and may not deliver all that
is being promised.

Just because Blu-ray may be more expensive to introduce does not mean that
it will be significantly more expensive once it becomes a mature product.

His article just happened to forget that Disney is in the Blu-ray camp.

His conclusion may wind up being correct, but his arguments are inept.

Richard.
January 13, 2005 1:19:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Matthew L. Martin" <nothere@notnow.never> wrote in message
news:10uaqk7fi7v43d5@corp.supernews.com...
> Mack McKinnon wrote:
>> In the 2/8/05 edition of PC Magazine (print edition -- I could not find
>> the column on their website at http://pcmag.com ) John Dvorak has an
>> interesting column comparing Blu-ray DVD with HD-DVD and forecasting the
>> future regarding the two new HD-DVD formats.
>> He says HD-DVD is cheaper to make and more easily made
>> backward-compatible, while Blu-ray has more capacity. HD-DVD is being
>> sold as uncrackable while Blu-ray goes for "limited copy" mechanisms.
>> Paranoid Hollywood types, of course, like HD-DVD for this reason. And
>> there's a bunch of stuff about the codecs.
>> Bottom line, Dvorak says it's apparent to him that HD-DVD will win the
>> battle.

> Given his track record, you don't know any more after reading his column
> than before.
> Matthew

And, IIRC, in HDTV's infancy, Dvorak was a very loud detractor.

He recently got smart and changed his tune, though...
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 3:57:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

("Richard" <rfeirste at nycap.rr.com>) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
> OK; I read his piece, and it is full of inaccurate statements.

This is true.

> Beta did not
> die because it supported less time.

This is not.

> A 720 Beta tape at the highest speed
> provides more time than a 120 VHS tape. (At the highest speeds).

By the time Beta had 720 tapes and multiple speeds, it was already "dead"
from being unable to record a football game on a single tape.

--
Jeff Rife |
| http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/Zits/AttentiveIgnorer.jpg
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 5:39:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Thanks for posting the website address for the article. Either it was not
there yet or I could not find it for some reason when I checked a couple of
days ago.



http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1750098,00.asp


mack
austin



"Joe Moore" <munged@bad.example.com> wrote in message
news:s76cu0119cl7h85v1gr6s3pmndhsun4re6@4ax.com...
> "Mack McKinnon" <MckinnonRemoveThis@tvadmanDeleteThisAsWell.com>
> wrote:
>
>>In the 2/8/05 edition of PC Magazine (print edition -- I could not find
>>the
>>column on their website at http://pcmag.com ) John Dvorak has an
>>interesting
>>column comparing Blu-ray DVD with HD-DVD and forecasting the future
>>regarding the two new HD-DVD formats.
>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1750098,00.asp
>
> joemooreaterolsdotcom
January 13, 2005 8:40:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:03:27 -0500, "Richard" <rfeirste at
nycap.rr.com> wrote:

>
>"Joe Moore" <munged@bad.example.com> wrote in message
>news:s76cu0119cl7h85v1gr6s3pmndhsun4re6@4ax.com...
>> "Mack McKinnon" <MckinnonRemoveThis@tvadmanDeleteThisAsWell.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>In the 2/8/05 edition of PC Magazine (print edition -- I could not find
>>>the
>>>column on their website at http://pcmag.com ) John Dvorak has an
>>>interesting
>>>column comparing Blu-ray DVD with HD-DVD and forecasting the future
>>>regarding the two new HD-DVD formats.
>>
>> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1750098,00.asp
>>
>> joemooreaterolsdotcom
>
>OK; I read his piece, and it is full of inaccurate statements. Beta did not
>die because it supported less time.

I believe that was a deciding factor for most people.
Thumper
>A 720 Beta tape at the highest speed
>provides more time than a 120 VHS tape. (At the highest speeds).
>
>The software needed to extend the time on HD-DVD, currently has real
>problems in the real world of production work and may not deliver all that
>is being promised.
>
>Just because Blu-ray may be more expensive to introduce does not mean that
>it will be significantly more expensive once it becomes a mature product.
>
>His article just happened to forget that Disney is in the Blu-ray camp.
>
>His conclusion may wind up being correct, but his arguments are inept.
>
>Richard.
>
>

To reply drop XYZ in address
January 14, 2005 4:16:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Beta came in second because Sony aligned itself with Zenith which did a very
poor job of marketing for various reasons, VHS's parent, JVC aligned itself
with RCA and several other venders that did a much better job in pricing and
product placement. Today my top of the line Sony Super VHS recorder runs
rings around my top of the line Sony Super Beta recorder. (Except the Beta
still loads and handles tape quicker). Both now mostly gather dust.

Richard.
January 14, 2005 6:00:33 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 01:16:21 GMT, "Richard" <rfeirste@nycap.rr.com>
wrote:

>Beta came in second because Sony aligned itself with Zenith which did a very
>poor job of marketing for various reasons, VHS's parent, JVC aligned itself
>with RCA and several other venders that did a much better job in pricing and
>product placement. Today my top of the line Sony Super VHS recorder runs
>rings around my top of the line Sony Super Beta recorder. (Except the Beta
>still loads and handles tape quicker). Both now mostly gather dust.
>
>Richard.
>
I and nearly everyone I have asked chose VHS primarily because of
recording time.
Thumper
To reply drop XYZ in address
January 15, 2005 4:23:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Thumper" <jaylsmithXYZ@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:o 59gu05kgdmcjq1vg45jugcoaiiaa55qbe@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 01:16:21 GMT, "Richard" <rfeirste@nycap.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>>Beta came in second because Sony aligned itself with Zenith which did a
>>very
>>poor job of marketing for various reasons, VHS's parent, JVC aligned
>>itself
>>with RCA and several other venders that did a much better job in pricing
>>and
>>product placement. Today my top of the line Sony Super VHS recorder runs
>>rings around my top of the line Sony Super Beta recorder. (Except the Beta
>>still loads and handles tape quicker). Both now mostly gather dust.
>>
>>Richard.
>>
> I and nearly everyone I have asked chose VHS primarily because of
> recording time.
> Thumper
> To reply drop XYZ in address

You were an early adaptor. Most people took the plunge after 720 tape and
longer recording time (Beta II and II recording time) Beta players hit the
street. But the higher prices involved with the Sony-Zenith marketing forces
never let Beta recover from Beta I recording times; even HiFi Stereo and
Super Beta were not enough to turn the tide. The longer recording times, Hi
Fi Stereo and smaller tape boxes were Beta's real advances, along with
superior tape handling mechanics. The majority of the public did not care.

Richard.
!