SACD is interesting, it's a natively backward compatible format in that CD players can play SACDs (but at CD quality), and SACD players can play SACD discs at SACD quality and CDs at, well, CD quality. Thus far SACD's failed to take off largely because CDs are already "good enough" for most consumers, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have some good ideas.
The backwards compatibility thing is what Blu-ray needs and HD DVD should have had too. HD DVD had "combo" discs, but nobody in the DVD Forum thought to make it a mandatory part of the spec. The result is that anyone who buys Blu-ray discs can only play them on Blu-ray players, which means, in practice, the only TV they can watch them on is the big one in the living room. A parent considering buying Disney movies for their kids is better off getting the DVD version, as it'll play in the kid's room, and on the minivan system, etc.
It would be nice to see the same approach as with SACD taken with Blu-ray. Making a Combo disc can't be impossible, and it's probably one of many things that are necessary to get the format out there to everyone, not just the magic 10% with high-def infrastructure, especially as, arguably, DVDs are still more useful than Blu-ray discs even to that 10% given that nobody has 100% HD infrastructure.
Regular CD players can NOT play SACDs (even at CD quality). What they can do is read the CD layer on a "hybrid" SACD. Not all SACDs are hybrids though.
JVC revealed a DVD / BD hybrid disc several years ago. Why it was not commercialized is open to debate but frankly there is no need for combo discs any more. They're expensive and only necessary to allay consumer's concerns about buying into a potentially losing HD format.
The purpose of a combo disc is to ensure you only have to buy one copy of the movie to play on all your players.
Here's an example: My Sister-in-law wants the latest Disney movie for my nieces. She has two choices: A Blu-ray disc to play on the (admittedly non-existent, but let's pretend she has one) Blu-ray player in the living room, or a DVD that'll play on the living room player (albeit in poorer quality), the kid's room DVD player/TV, and her SUV's entertainment system.
Which do you think she'd buy? Which would she buy if the Blu-ray disc was actually combo DVD/Blu-ray format?
For Blu-ray to succeed, it has to be more useful than DVD. Better does not just mean higher quality, it means there should be no downside to using it.
I continue to be surprised at the number of Blu-ray fans who don't "get it" and insist Blu-ray should be as limited as possible, nothing more than an incompatible high definition format.
blu-ray has to have no downsides in order to succeed? your logic is horribly flawed. i suppose the fact that in 1998 many families had a dvd player in the living room and a vcr in the kids' room should have doomed that format as well?
i'm surprised at the number of people who don't seem to remember dvd players as expensive and limited in the format's infancy
@squiggleslash, you can churn out as many hypothetical scenarios as you like but it's up to Disney, Fox, Warner to decide if they want combo discs. If they were interested they would have made them, just as some are already packing digital copies on a supplemental DVD even though there is no compulsion to do so. BTW those digital copies are on a DVD so Disney & co. could pack a lower quality DVD on that same disk if they wanted, or even an executable which when run burned a DVD from the digital copy for you. But they don't want to. It is no good complaining at the blu ray format if studios don't want hybrids. If you must have two formats, the answer is simple - buy the Blu Ray version and rent the DVD and rip it, or if you have the know-how rip the Blu Ray version and make the DVD from it yourself, or rip to MP4/DiVx and stream to your XBox 360 or PS3 or AppleTV, or just buy the DVD and watch it on all your devices.
: @squiggleslash, you can churn out as many hypothetical scenarios as you like but it's up to Disney, Fox, Warner to decide if they want combo discs
Well, gee, do you think? And there was I thinking that I could wave a magic wand and force them to do what's necessary to make Blu-ray viable.
Seriously, what kind of an answer is that to my post? How does that in any way address the issues it raises? "X has fault Y" "Oh yeah, well it's up to Z to fix it, not you". Really?
It absolutely astonishes me that Blu-ray enthusiasts are not interested in addressing the issues with their format. Somehow you all believe it's going to succeed, regardless of how many faults it has. You're not interested in making it better than DVD (except in definition), you're not interested in making it work in people's existing infrastructure, you all seem to believe that people will blindly just drop DVD and switch to Blu-ray.
They're not going to. It's up to Warner, Disney, et al to fix it. It's up to consumers to want it.
Consumers don't want it, and will not until it's actually beneficial to them.
“An engineer explained to us that hundreds of ear impressions were gathered in the name of research, and while each one obviously boasted its own unique shape and size, one single characteristic remained uniform across the board: the entrance into the ear canal is not a perfect circle, it's an oval.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
SACD is interesting, it's a natively backward compatible format in that CD players can play SACDs (but at CD quality), and SACD players can play SACD discs at SACD quality and CDs at, well, CD quality. Thus far SACD's failed to take off largely because CDs are already "good enough" for most consumers, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have some good ideas.
The backwards compatibility thing is what Blu-ray needs and HD DVD should have had too. HD DVD had "combo" discs, but nobody in the DVD Forum thought to make it a mandatory part of the spec. The result is that anyone who buys Blu-ray discs can only play them on Blu-ray players, which means, in practice, the only TV they can watch them on is the big one in the living room. A parent considering buying Disney movies for their kids is better off getting the DVD version, as it'll play in the kid's room, and on the minivan system, etc.
It would be nice to see the same approach as with SACD taken with Blu-ray. Making a Combo disc can't be impossible, and it's probably one of many things that are necessary to get the format out there to everyone, not just the magic 10% with high-def infrastructure, especially as, arguably, DVDs are still more useful than Blu-ray discs even to that 10% given that nobody has 100% HD infrastructure.
Regular CD players can NOT play SACDs (even at CD quality). What they can do is read the CD layer on a "hybrid" SACD. Not all SACDs are hybrids though.
JVC revealed a DVD / BD hybrid disc several years ago. Why it was not commercialized is open to debate but frankly there is no need for combo discs any more. They're expensive and only necessary to allay consumer's concerns about buying into a potentially losing HD format.
The purpose of a combo disc is to ensure you only have to buy one copy of the movie to play on all your players.
Here's an example: My Sister-in-law wants the latest Disney movie for my nieces. She has two choices: A Blu-ray disc to play on the (admittedly non-existent, but let's pretend she has one) Blu-ray player in the living room, or a DVD that'll play on the living room player (albeit in poorer quality), the kid's room DVD player/TV, and her SUV's entertainment system.
Which do you think she'd buy? Which would she buy if the Blu-ray disc was actually combo DVD/Blu-ray format?
For Blu-ray to succeed, it has to be more useful than DVD. Better does not just mean higher quality, it means there should be no downside to using it.
I continue to be surprised at the number of Blu-ray fans who don't "get it" and insist Blu-ray should be as limited as possible, nothing more than an incompatible high definition format.
blu-ray has to have no downsides in order to succeed? your logic is horribly flawed. i suppose the fact that in 1998 many families had a dvd player in the living room and a vcr in the kids' room should have doomed that format as well?
i'm surprised at the number of people who don't seem to remember dvd players as expensive and limited in the format's infancy
@squiggleslash, you can churn out as many hypothetical scenarios as you like but it's up to Disney, Fox, Warner to decide if they want combo discs. If they were interested they would have made them, just as some are already packing digital copies on a supplemental DVD even though there is no compulsion to do so. BTW those digital copies are on a DVD so Disney & co. could pack a lower quality DVD on that same disk if they wanted, or even an executable which when run burned a DVD from the digital copy for you. But they don't want to. It is no good complaining at the blu ray format if studios don't want hybrids. If you must have two formats, the answer is simple - buy the Blu Ray version and rent the DVD and rip it, or if you have the know-how rip the Blu Ray version and make the DVD from it yourself, or rip to MP4/DiVx and stream to your XBox 360 or PS3 or AppleTV, or just buy the DVD and watch it on all your devices.
: @squiggleslash, you can churn out as many hypothetical scenarios as you like but it's up to Disney, Fox, Warner to decide if they want combo discs
Well, gee, do you think? And there was I thinking that I could wave a magic wand and force them to do what's necessary to make Blu-ray viable.
Seriously, what kind of an answer is that to my post? How does that in any way address the issues it raises? "X has fault Y" "Oh yeah, well it's up to Z to fix it, not you". Really?
It absolutely astonishes me that Blu-ray enthusiasts are not interested in addressing the issues with their format. Somehow you all believe it's going to succeed, regardless of how many faults it has. You're not interested in making it better than DVD (except in definition), you're not interested in making it work in people's existing infrastructure, you all seem to believe that people will blindly just drop DVD and switch to Blu-ray.
They're not going to. It's up to Warner, Disney, et al to fix it. It's up to consumers to want it.
Consumers don't want it, and will not until it's actually beneficial to them.