@@jaysonkang The ghostwriter of the movie is A genius and also created many formats. He also designed the 3D technology for Avatar. Otherwise people would still be using red and blue glasses for 3D. What A twist? er
Thanks for an amazing 2 years everyone. Please don't be too hard on this video, I was very new at all this at the time. There's a few incorrect details: I switched the North American and Japanese PS4 release dates, I spelled Columbia the wrong way, I guess I say memory when I mean storage, and the V in DVD stands for versatile, not video. There may be some other little things but the story's accurate and I hope everyone enjoys it. Also here's a link to the new website: companymanideas.com
Company Man thank you for 2 years of informative and educational videos on companies/products. Seriously, without you, I had no idea how large some companies were and/or how they failed. Thank you again!
There was barely a noticeable difference for this video. The only thing I didn't like in this one was the background music which just doesn't fit with the style of of your of your channel. It just felt off in my opinion. I'm excited to see how this channel will evolve and as long as you keep doing what you're doing now I'll be back every Wednesday.
Ramsey Schaefer Where are you looking? There might be some rare movies better that much or people are trying to get that much. But that’s not the standard
I was 100% looking for this comment and you delivered. I remember making this argument at the time, as did many others. "Let's get a PS3 for the living room! It's half the cost of the only blu-ray player (samsung BD-P1000, $1000 bucks)" an easy sell to the family, by far.
Yup. And when I was growing up we got a PS2 because it had a DVD player. Back then both a DVD player and PS2 cost about $200. No reason to buy a DVD player then when you could get so much more for the same price. Oh did you forget it could play CDs, and PS1 games? It was a no contest decision.
@@a_literal_brick Well parents don't want to use a Console to watch Blu Rays or Dvds do they so that might have something to do with owning a blu ray player as well as the console
I bought my ps3 used and the version that would play ps2 games... so i could have the cheap blu ray player AND something to play ps2/3 games.... it was the best of all things together.
Part of it may be because it's not ubiquitous in the same way things like regular DVDs are. You actually have to buy a Blu-ray player, while almost every computer with a disk drive can play DVDs.
@Kai McCook physical products are just sold for memorabilia nowadays.. there will come a time when only collectors would buy CD's produced in limited edition
Not scientific, but I was sure BluRay would win when my boss Greg said he was convinced HD DVD would win (he had also been convinced the Zune would beat the iPod).
@@RyTrapp0 I've actually still got my 1st gen Zune that I use occasionally. and which stores ALL of my music collection through out my entire life. old and new. Love the hell out of it.
Why? It's their development. Do you think this is odd for other companies that profit from their inventions being used by others, or is this gamer wars silliness?
Ah yes, the annoyance of Disney's "Fast" Play... If you didn't mash "main menu" at that screen, you'd be subjected to 20+ minutes of trailers and promos (which were usually super outdated even at the time).
I mostly turn to RU-vid for games and wrestling. You are far and away the most oddball of my subscriptions, and just speaks volumes to how profoundly interesting I find you and your subject matter. Thank you for your time and effort dude.
Because it's been so consistently fun. We've had a landmark title on the PS4 almost every six months with at least one major standout per year, even if a multiplatform game.
Yeah, man! This console generation is almost over. Our sense of time with regards to consoles was skewed by the PS3 and 360's longer-than-average lifespans.
I felt Blu-Ray would win just because the name flowed better. Also the blue keep cases just looked more visually appealing than the harsh red to me. Basically I felt it was a format war fought to solve an issue most people didn't feel they had. Then with the PS3 having the built in BD Player, it was an easy win on the format war.
Kinkajou1015 even today the blue cases catch my eyes over the standard black ones. same with the green and blue colored Xbox and PS4 game cases. i think in general our eyes gravitate towards colors that arent basic like say black
@@mattfahringer148 We are quick to spot things that are different from the norm, and the norm was matte black cases for quite a while. Now if you get a Blu-Ray it's a glossy blue, and I think UHD 4K Blu-Ray is glossy black. If HDDVD had stuck around I would have gotten used to the red case but I'm glad it lost.
@@Kinkajou1015 i still have a few red cases just for nostalgic purposes. like for me game Console color is a big deal to me to. like my Xbox 1 is the special edition Gears of War 4 red
Not to mention the PS3 was a cheaper alternative to a regular Bluray player as the PS3 was $600 (for the 60GB) and the Bluray player was $1K! I remember an older man saying he bought a PS3 and doesn't even play video games but that it was cheaper so it made more sense. 2006-2008 was a weird time for this kind of stuff, haha.
I was a full supporter of HD-DVD and had complete faith that they’d win the battle. Even got one of those HD-DVD Xbox 360 extenders. I might actually have it lying around still.
Both Sony and Toshiba lost IMO. Blu-Ray, even the supposed winner, isn't the primary media format for HD movies. The migration to streaming services beat them both. Blu-Ray will never be as big as DVD was.
they learned their lesson for sure, they made some big mistakes with the betamax that JVC didn't with the VHS. Betamax's biggest downfall was that Sony didn't license the technology so only Sony could make the players whereas JVC licensed the technology so there was variety in products. Betamax's video quality was better but it was too costly.
They needed it too what with their failed foray with the Mini-Disc (when MP3 was more popular). Oh and let's not forget their own memory sticks for their devices, lol. Sony has had a lot of blunders over the years.
@@edlomonaco2637 Not true. Sony did license beta to other companies. Both Sanyo and Toshiba made beta VCRs. www.betamaxcollectors.com/toshibabetavcrmodelv-s36.html www.betamaxcollectors.com/sanyobetahi-fimodel7200.html I worked in a store that sold Toshiba Beta VCRs. NEC also made beta VCRs www.betainfoguide.net/NEC70eu.jpg
@@Voldemorts.Nipple That's subjective, yes, but in my opinion that's wrong - Sony's always had the superior controllers. Why? Because Sony's always gone with aligned analog sticks, instead of the awkward unaligned stick design Xbox has always had - and now Nintendo's changed to. Y'see, I didn't grow up with Xbox - I grew up with the PlayStation 2 (and Nintendo DS Lite). My first controllers were DualShock 2s, followed by DualShock 3s years later, then the Wii U GamePad and Pro Controller, Wii Classic Controller, and Dualshock 4 (and now 8bitdo SF30 Pro and SN30 Pro+). What do all these controllers have in common? That's right - *aligned analog sticks* . So yeah, I find this style a lot more comfortable and natural. Oh, and I wrote before that I grew up with the DS Lite - followed by the DSi, 3DS, and Wii U later on. Because of this familiarity, I've come to map lettered buttons (instead of Sony's shapes - triangle, circle, square, cross) with Nintendo's layout instead of Microsoft's. Ergo, when I use a controller, I expect (clockwise) XABY - *not* YBAX. If the console wants me to press X, I instinctively press the upper button; if it wants me to press A, it's the rightmost button. Xbox doesn't do this, so it's not as comfortable or natural as the Switch controllers, let alone the superior Wii U or 8bitdo controllers.
The physical format of the Betamax tape lived on to become BetaCam. As crazy as it sounds we still use it today to send commercials to tv stations around the world.
I am a technology nerd and often an early adopter. My brother and I were roommates in our early adult years and we were one of the first people in our circles who had an HDTV, albeit a 65-inch projection CRT before HDMI existed. We had each contributed to our home theater, so it became painful when we went our separate ways in the early 2000s. I got married in 2005 and as a wedding present, my brother bought me an HDTV (with HDMI now but 720p). Owning a higher quality screen, I craved higher quality content. When Blu-Ray and HD-DVD were announced, I researched both very closely. On the technical grounds, I immediately favored Blu-Ray due to higher storage capacity. I didn’t think the software differences were enough to give an edge to HD-DVD because the players could have firmware upgrades to rectify software differences. When it came to actually spending money, I realized that if I bought a PS3 and Blu-Ray lost the war, I still had a cool gaming system, whereas if I bought an HD-DVD player and that format lost, I’d quickly have a useless piece of equipment. I bought my PS3 when they first came out. Oddly, that first model was the best model made. Subsequent models DELETED hardware and capabilities.
HD-DVD has too many D's... nobody likes to say it. Blu-ray has a better ring. Also Japanese companies fighting each other for world domination.. thats like an anime
It's actually 04:48 for me. I was curious about the difference between DVD and Blu-Ray and accidentally endeded up on HD DVD vs Blu-Ray. Fascinating nonetheless :)
A waste? Man, I bought my HD-DVD player after they lost the war. I also bought an absolute ton of amazing movies on HD-DVD for like 2-5 dollars a piece. They are filled with great special features and menus because they were made in the middle of a format war. I honestly feel like the HD-DVD's were a bit higher quality than the Blu-Rays I bought around the same time.
Just wanted to write the same comment, but will just support this one. Did exactly the same thing! But besides the cheap players and discs, which I was ordering from all over the world, including Russia and Australia, I bought that thousand dollar HD DVD player XA2 with a Reon-VX HQV chip for upscaling DVDs.
The extra content on HD DVDs was amazing. Well discs from Universal anyway. Blu Ray wasn't even close to HD DVD for value for money. And now unless you buy a special edition Blu Ray you get bigger all extra content. I can understand why Blu Ray sells so little compared to DVD. Sony destroyed their own chance to monopolize.
I think some HD-DVDs were better quality. I use to read the reviews for movies that came out on both formats. I think HD DVD quality was superior on earlier releases because they used a more efficient video codec compared to the Blu-ray MPEG-2 codec that was used on early blu-ray releases. Once Blu-ray moved to the MP4 codec, it got better. There were some early blu-ray movies that looked that same as their unconverted DVD counterpart.
Quroa says that 4k video at 30 fps takes up 375 MB per minute. Ignoring any more compression or sound files, that averages out to 0.208 MB per frame. So you'd have to swap out a new floppy every 6.92 frames (We'll round down to 6 since that's makes my math easier.), or 5 times every second. For a 3 hour movie like Endgame, that's 54,300 floppies.
Never heard of HBO Max, but Amazon Prime should be up there too. Like I know Disney bought almost every other studio that exists, but that also means paying that many companies and having like half the entertainment industry employed by a single company. It's dangerous, do you have any idea how many people needs to stay subscribed to Disney Plus for it to make financial sense? At this point, Disney could collapse like a black hole, and take out the entertainment industry as a whole. I'd estimate they need 200 million subscribed at $15 a month to be profitable. And that is assuming that people still keep buying Blu-ray and DVD like normal.
Backstage Bum Then again, HBO Max has Studio Ghibli films, so it’s still a win for most people (like, seriously, who the hell watches Gone with the Wind unless you’re a film student, enthusiast, or a Confederate sympathizer?) 👍
@@daniellaufer6204 That's why DVD was known as DVD video discs. It would make alot of sense to call it a digital video disc video. The logo literally says DVD video. It's versatile because it can be used for data or video, hence the meaning of versatility.
The only mistake Toshiba made was to not be able to strike a deal with Microsoft to have an HDDVD player installed within the Xbox 360 and instead just made a cheap addon.
Our Xbox 360 drive broke, and it turns out there are certain design issues that will only allow a specific drive to work in the Xbox system. I don't remember all of the details, but when the proverbial turkey timer popped on HD, naturally both the media and the piggy back drives were fire-sale cheap, so we bought a few movies and the piggy back HD drive, which allows regular DVD's to play. Although I assume games might have been an issue (by coincidence I did not have any games I liked at that point) we got a cheap band aid for our broken CD/DVD drive and picked up a couple movies we love archived in HD format.
DVD almost had a format war. But they all agreed on one standard. The SD card logo was supposed to be for a different disc format, but once Toshiba agreed on DVD, they didn't want to scrap it. Also the PS2 did the same thing with DVD.
11:42 " The real losers are the people who bought hd dvd" Listening to this video while purchasing a HD DVD player and HD DVD movies on eBay for Nostalgia reasons
I worked at Best Buy in the Home Theater department when the war went on. I remember when they finally announced that Toshiba would no longer sell HD DVD Players, they went from hundreds of dollars down to 50 or 40 dollars or so. Owning one wasnt a complete loss back then since they also upconverted regular dvds (as in stretched them out to make it look HD and then tried to fill in the gaps).
Nice!I didn't get into Blu ray until Xbox 360 had been out for awhile.I purchased the HD dvd player on 360 first and was impressed how clean and sharp the movies looked!
Sony’s ps1 was Sony’s first console with a CD player Sony’s ps2 was their first console with a DVD player Sony’s ps3 was their first console with a blu-ray player Sony’s PS4 was their first console with a 4K UHD player... oh wait, they fucked up on that one...
ps4 was their first console that was stupid AF cause it loads even disc games PS5 is their first console that sony isn't try to sell you a media format with
But the PS3 was also cheaper than it ought to be, since it was pushing the Blu-ray format. It's the Gillette principle. Gillette sells razors at a loss, because no one needs more than one razor anyway. It's the blades that really make the money. It's the same thing here. You buy one player, but a lot of movies, so it would make sense for Sony to add support for 4K to the PS4 in order to support their own 4K Blu-ray format. I'm really wondering if the 4K format will last, or go the way of 3D Blu-ray.
There is a universe out there where we're renting Corporation Guy (Company Man's AU counterpart) HD DVDs from Blockbuster in 2019 after getting an HD DVD player from Kmart.
in that universe... jeff bezos is making videos on youtube, about Company Man.. and selling his online merch on Company Man's website *i support company man any universe we exist
Interesting that you brought this up as its somewhat common when large companies actually have separate divisions that act somewhat independent. A good example of this is Samsung making not only their own smart phones but also making the ram chips for most of the smartphones that are direct competitors. Also how LG makes both their own OLED TVs and also make the TV panel for Sony OLEDs due to the division of LG that actually sells the TVs and the one developing the tech are independent of each other.
I bought my HD-DVD player add-on from Best Buy on Valentine's day 2008... They eventually bought them back for $50 gift cards to avoid complains and possible class action lawsuits based on their marketing.
Blu-rays are pretty cheap and affordable these days; unlike in 2006 when they came out. We're talking that there's tons of movies on such format for 5 bucks in sites like eBay, which is great: given the fact that you actually own something, when you buy a disc. The one thing I hate the most about streaming platforms is that you're at the expense of an internet connection and having to pay only to have access, not to own anything. Besides, movies are sometimes removed, while nobody can erase your discs.
I think that may have also increased its base price (not to ps3 lvl but still a bit) which would've made it a less compelling option for new consumers or ps fans...
@@akashP998 at the same time tho even with a higher base price if its still cheaper than the PS3 it may have been a more desirable option for many. Lets also remember the PS3 didn't have any interesting games at launch and third party titles were inferior compared to 360. Plus the 360 wasn't so reliant on a large hard drive while the PS3 required an install on most games
Sony was still a monster in the movie and sound business at that time, so it wouldn't of had that major of an effect on the format change. The additional storage of a standard, single layer Blu-ray still beat out the HD-DVD, and would continue to do so for a few years.
Given the extremely high failure rate on the first model XB360 it would most likely have made the situation even worse for the HDDVD side. Of course, with such a drive that unit would of course also have to be much more expensive, at lest closer to PS3 price or loss. The higher cost of the drive itself, and also no super speed spun-up ordinary DVD because of that, means no base model without HDD anymore, adding even more cost. So maybe the system would have been more reliable as a more premium product, but that is really stretching the ifs and whataboutisms.
@@Stoppskylten in retrospect I actually feel like if they did include the drive the console mightve launched later (close to the PS3 and Wii in November 2006). Granted this is again going into major what ifs. While bad for the HD DVD format I feel MS made the right choice sticking to duel layer DVDs. The PS3 really overshot the need to Blu Rays until way into the gen and it really hurt the console and Sony
i don't see it that way, i have both. sure they don't release any more hd-dvd movies, but what is out there is pretty good. it's nice as a collectors item.
@@bubba842 The thing is though that Microsoft wouldn't have done that in a million years. Their goal was always to launch first and build up a library as cheaply as possible. The only reason the 360 Core SKU even existed was so they could advertise the console at $300, compared to the PS3's ludicrous $500 starting price. What's also strange is that the HD DVD add on wasn't released until November of 2006... Microsoft needed to launch the HD DVD player with the console to gain any foothold with it, but no one bought it after the fact.
@@jktwice8235 it wasn't in their plan to. As you said they needed the 360 to be cheap to Compete with the PS3. They addbon was released a little late because of the price of the tech at the time. A statement was more of a what if, it was very unlikely to happen due to the price.
I don't like the cases of HD DVD. It's the very reason why I like Blu-ray more. Blu-ray covers look like game CD covers. HD DVD covers look like chocolate boxes with a film's poster on it.
Except its now taking orders from disney, it is not its own entity anymore. A 20th century fox production is now a disney production by nature of hierarchy and ownership. To me, anyway, it can't be a major studio if its owned by another major studio.
So, if U remember guys the HDDVD used bonus online, I never seen any BD with this kind of things, I steel buy HDDVD cause for me, it was the best from them, I really regret this cause now Sony has kill himself is video disc and the streaming wins format (like if this quality is not equal at all!) sorry for my english, I am french. Have a nice day ! All@n
@@DarkepyonX Superior format? It was too big for FHD and it is to short for UHD.. BD started as a very fragile disc with a poor slow interface... hardware decoding with HD DVD and interaction with the viewer were second to none in 2007
2019: Still own HD DVD Xbox add-on and still have my HD DVD collection. I consider it a part of electronics history and keeping mine in near mint condition.
This lamb has a Toshiba HD-DVD player purchased at Walmart for $99.99 in October 2007. It’s still in this lamb’s equipment rack, along with a 4K Ultra HD disc player, S-VHS VCR, and Laserdisc player.
What's even more interesting, is that the HD-DVD used to be the technically superior format, at least in the beginning. HD-DVDs used the more efficient and qualitatively better VC-1 codec from the beginning, while the first Blu-Rays still used MPEG2. HD-DVD players had full interactive features from the start, while Blu-Ray players had to go through a lot of profile updates until they catched up to what Toshibas machines where able to do, not to mention that some of the first machine couldn't even been updated to the latest profile. That's for example why it took MATRIX so long to be released on Blu-Ray. Ultimately the Blu-Ray had only one advantage from the start and that was its higher capacity. While a single layer BD could hold up to 25GB (not 20 as wrongly mentioned in the video) and therefore 50GB as double layer, the HD-DVD was only able to hold up 15GB per layer and therefore 30GB as double layer. But before all went downhill for the HD-DVD, a three layer standard was finalized, using 17GB per layer resulting in a 51GB version, beating the maximum BD capacity at that time (if only by 1GB). Of course when 3D startet to become a thing, the BD got a also a three layer version with 100GB, but that was far later. So if the XBOX360 would have launched with a built in HD-DVD player (not only wasn't the add on an elegant solution, it also was a movie player only. Games on HD-DVD where never supported) it could have maybe changed something. But in retrospect I'm glad that this format war didn't last any longer. Wars like this only hurt sales and therefore thank god that we didn't get another one of these with the UHD-BD.
The internet at the time implied that HD DVD was gonna take off, so I bought the $129 player for my X360....which became a paperweight within 6 months. At least I can still watch King Kong and Constantine on HD DVD if I want to,
Every movie you’ve ever watched at home is compressed. It’s just a matter of how much it’s compressed. An uncompressed 2 hour movie would have a size of around 1 TB if not more. Not only is the image itself compressed but the color is compressed (YCbCr 4:2:0). This means that Y (the black and white image) is at full 1080 lines resolution while the color is at 1/4 the resolution or 540 lines. Even the DCPs (digital cinema prints) you watch in the theater are compressed but they’re compressed differently and have a much higher quality than Blu-ray and 4K Blu-ray. Blu-rays and home media are video. DCPs are actually individual JPEG2000 pictures. 24 of these JPEG2000 pictures every second instead of a continuous video stream. What is truly better on Blu-ray is the audio. While again it’s still compressed, it’s lossless compression (Dolby TrueHD, DTS HDMA) instead of lossy (DD 5.1, DTS). So when your receiver decodes these tracks the sound is identical to the 24-bit/48 KHz uncompressed LPCM master. Of course how much of a difference you can tell depends on the quality of your speakers and your ears. With internal TV speakers most people will not hear a difference. With a solid AVR and 5.1 setup most people should be able to hear more clarity, punch and dynamic range.
@Nerdism . . . a benefit with having a physical copy of a Blu-ray disc is that there are no assurances the video title will remain available on streaming services. I've heard of several popular movie titles from the 1980s and '90s that have been discontinued on streaming.
"The Oxford English Dictionary comments that, "In 1995 rival manufacturers of the product initially named digital video disc agreed that, in order to emphasize the flexibility of the format for multimedia applications, the preferred abbreviation DVD would be understood to denote digital versatile disc." The OED also states that in 1995, "The companies said the official name of the format will simply be DVD. Toshiba had been using the name ‘digital video disc’, but that was switched to ‘digital versatile disc’ after computer companies complained that it left out their applications."
And Blu Rays laser is not blue it’s ultra violet more like a purplish colour. Plus’s DVDs hold 8gb of data and Blu Ray holds 50 gb yes there are single layers but all store bought Blu Rays and DVDs are all mostly double layers. Plus some the other reasons Blu Ray won. Better picture and sound quality Protective layer that resists scratches Blu Ray players could still play DVDs as well There was one in every PS3
@@ryans413 It is not Ultraviolet, because then it would be invisible to our eyes (so no colour at all, rather than purple-ish). The reason it is named "Blu-Ray" is that the higher frequency (lower wavelength) part of the spectrum is generally called "the blue end of the spectrum".
I heard about HD-DVD from a nerd classmate at the highschool, he said that there was a format war between it and another format but he didn't remember the name (Blu-ray) soon Blu-ray started to be a thing and I thought that HD-DVD didn't get to be commercialized. I have never seen an HD-DVD personally and until I saw some of them in the Internet by chance some years ago, I thought they were never released at all.
I didn't think anybody even bought hd DVD when I was in high school. Nobody really cared. To us and maybe most of America it was just accepted Blu Ray was the only option left.
@@TheBrainSquared I think you're remembering it wrong. The difference between VHS and Beta was so small you'd need equipment to measure the difference. Unless your talking real early on and the Beta I speed but that was gone by 1979 and no Beta machine used that speed afterwards to record.
@D B 4 heads had nothing to do with picture quality during playback. The were for clear fast forward viewing, pause and slow-mo. Yes there was a quality war going on but VHS quickly matched any Beta improvements and for less money. VHS was simply the superior format in every way that mattered to consumers of the time period. Beta 1 may have looked slightly better but it was useless in the real world.(to short of a recording time)
The PS3 wasn't so expensive because of the Blu--ray player. Though it did have its impact, it was mostly due to having a full on PS2 inside every PS3 for backwards compatibility on the earliest units that made the PS3 so expensive. The price dropped significantly when they decided to remove the PS2 hardware from PS3s and rather use software emulation for backwards compatibility
Majority was the blu-ray and the two chips. The full PS2 chip was nothing in comparison to the rest of the system. They only removed it to drop the price to remain competitive with the 360. You cant remove the blu-ray or the cell/rsx to save money because then it wouldnt be a ps3. The ps2 hardware probably cost $20 for the silicon if that, they also removed the card reader and 2 usb ports. It was overall part of the cost cutting measure, but the blu-ray drive was still a far larger chunk of the cost to manufacture. I think the cell processor alone was over $200 and the original blu-ray drive was estimated to be $300+. They still lost money on every $400 non-BC ps3 because of the blu-ray and the cell, it just hurt sony less and made it more price competitive at the cost of all the features many people didn't use. The PS2 SoC wasn't $200 worth of hardware, they were selling ps2 slims for less than that when the ps3 launched, and they were making a profit on those.
Honestly love and miss these “vs” videos, it’s great to see this gem be brought to the light and some of my favorite videos of yours have been the old vs vids, especially NBA vs ABA, love all your vids tho !
The current year is two-thousand and nine-teen. Ten years ago the year was two-thousand and nine. I think it sounds better using two-thousand for the 2000s and nine-teen for the 1900s.
Subscriber Yeah I don’t think OP is confused on that. Most people I knew back then and now refer to 2008 as “two thousand (and) eight” not “twenty oh eight” Saying “twenty nineteen” is more common because it sounds less strange.
Yeah, what they said. Nobody in 2008 said twenty-oh-eight. People didn't start using the "twenty so-and-so" convention until the 2010's, and I've never heard it used retroactively to refer to the 00's. Just sounds super awkward.
But, e.g., as far as I know everybody describes the year the Great San Francisco Quake happened as "nineteen oh six". Why should "twenty oh six" be any different?
I don't know why they don't just discontinue stand alone DVD releases. The blu-rays pretty much all come as DVD & blu-ray combo packs. This would pull people into the HD era
@Bob so I'm assuming that your message wasn't for me. I'm actually NOT into the whole streaming thing as I too would rather have the movie or Album in my collection and not have to worry about Raising my data plan to watch it listen to them
blu ray, dvd, cd, spotify, netflix, youtube & even the ps store to get digital downloads of movies & games. all in one was great for me, tho i watched movies on it more then played games lol
@@NintendoPsycho Thanks for your comment, I've been trying to correct people for years, with not much success. I ask them, "How would you say this number...1999?" Universally their answers are all the same...it starts with NINETEEN. Then I add that saying One Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety Nine just sounds stupid and shouldn't the next century start with a TWENTY, but usually by then they've lost interest in what I'm talking about and just tell me to shut up.
Big HD DVD fan here. I still collect these. Thrift stores are a great source for finding these for under $2. Own two HD DVD Xbox 360 add-ons and a Toshiba HD DVD Player. It's a fun side hobby.
@@nthgth The Universal releases on HD DVD and Blu-ray look exactly the same. Same menus and all, some of the other studio releases are similar, some differ. Overall, it's pretty much the same thing.
I think part of why Blu-Ray also wasn't a bigger hit is because it felt like a DVD 2.0. I, personally, didn't even purchase a Blu-Ray player until 8 years ago, when I discovered that Blu-Ray discs were scratch-resistant. I didn't care about technical specs, but that was an instant win in my eyes.
Also, when it came out, HD content was being sold to everyone who was still watching DVD on an old, probably massive 480p max CRT. True 1080p displays didn't come down in price enough until around 2008-2009 or so for most everyone to upgrade and actually SEE the difference I believe.
@@ballsrgrossnugly Plus many people were probably hesitant to rebuy their entire DVD collection on Blu-Ray, so they were sticking to DVD. Why buy an expensive player for a handful of discs when you already have a system that works fine? I also know quite a few people who have a problem watching HD movies. They are so used to low quality home video that the sharpness of HD puts them off. I only switched over when Blu-Ray releases of my favorite movies started to add more bonus content than the regular DVD release... but I only purchase films I love and know I will watch again. For everything else, streaming...
@@jeanleconquerant4594 Yeah. Why would I spend several hundred dollars more on a prettier-looking video player? I need a more-convincing reason than that.
I bought an LG Blu-Ray/HD-DVD/DVD player a couple of years ago to add to my electronics systems. I still look for cheap HD-DVDs to add to my collection.
Physical discs feel more valuable and make me feel nostalgic from going on vacation with the portable video players or the family getting together to choose a disk to watch.
It stood for Digital Video Disc. They later changed the acronym from Video to Versatile, which was supposed to help "sell" the idea that it was, well, "versatile". Toshiba kept using the acronym "Digital Video Disc" longer than most of the companies in the consortium that developed the format. Almost nobody who actually says the acronym out loud says "versatile" because that is how sentient spiders in human suits talk, not actual humans. The change is a retrofit that sounds terrible and is clearly the result of a board room meeting without enough oxygen in the room. trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=digital%20video%20disc,digital%20versatile%20disc
It originally stood for "digital video disk", but when DVDs started to be used for data storage (around the time of consumer DVD-R being introduced), they revised the term to "digital versatile disk", to symbolize both movie & data storage capabilities.
Actually, You are inaccurate so you did not properly interject with "Actually." It was called first adopted the other then completely abandoned the "Versatile" label option. Also because they knew people like you would ruin DVD format by themselves. Don't be "this guy" doing this you are not wanted at any party or gathering being 'this guy'...
I'm very surprised you didn't mention anything about the porn industry choosing to go with blu-ray. This was also a major reason why blu-ray won the format war.
LOL! I was gonna comment this too. Well not exactly the same thing. I remember discussing this with co-workers and somebody saying it would lose because of porn.
I made the switch from DVD to Bluray, I rarely ever buy DVDs anymore unless it's the only option available for a particular title. Still, I know plenty of people that buy DVDs all the time because for them it's cheaper and "good enough" in their eyes.
Missing some important information in your video including the facts that: HD DVD was cheaper to produce since it used the same manufacturing tools as current DVDs at the time compared to Blu-Ray which required new manufacturing tools since the reading layer is so close to the surface which also explains why it can hold more data and had scratch resistant surface that was first introduced on DVD-RAM for archival purposes. Another important fact is that Blu-Rays were capable of holding 50GB since they had dual layer support.
That was an important distinction. The perk is that the thin hardened layer on the Blu-ray is actually more scratch resistant than the thick layer on the DVD and HDDVD. Blu-rays really can take a good beating and still work without issues.
@@leny4838 Yep, www.researchgate.net/publication/233283035_Triple-wavelength_optical_pickup_head_designs_for_compact_disk_digital_versatile_disk_and_high-density_digital_versatile_disk_devices since 2005
