Re: [OT] To****ba climbs on 'HD DVD exit'

In article <7dqdnU3KAJ3G1l7anZ2dnUVZ_oaonZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Ned Ludd
<andy.block@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> >> The big difference is that most of the authoring and production 
> >> standards are refinements from DVD, and much of the DVD pressing gear

> >> can be used to press HD DVDs, while Blu-Ray basically needs a new
factory.
> > 
> > Why should this be im****tant to you?  Are you a stockholder?
> 
> I'm a consumer.  If the studio can get HD DVD disks pressed more readily

> than Blu-Ray, at a lower cost, it goes to the end-cost of the product. 
> If the Blu-Ray factory is a brand new factory, that thing has to get 
> paid for somehow, and that is reflected in the retail price of the disk.

HD-DVD is a new product, which should also be reflected in the retail
price of the machines.  And yet, somehow, To****ba was selling them at
greatly reduced prices.  So do Blu-Ray discs have to be more expensive? 
I don't know.

> 
> Is it a big deal?  Not that much.
> 
> I do think Sony learned from the Beta fiasco, and they spent money on 
> Blu-Ray the same way the VHS contingent "bought" the standard.  

I thought the big thing about Beta/VHS was that VHS could hold an
entire two hour movie, whereas Beta was limited to -- what was it? --
60 minutes?  Consumers responded to that advantage and embraced VHS.

> The 
> decision was made on marketing money, not technical merits or cost.

Well, the format still has a long way to go before it can be crowned
king...