StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Posted: **2007-07-27 01:16am**

Culver City (CA) - Following in the footsteps of video rental chain Blockbuster, Target has decided to only stock Blu-ray Disc players, passing on rival format HD DVD.

Sony issued a statement today confirming that standalone high definition disc players at retail Target locations will be Blu-ray players exclusively, at least until the end of the year.

Target will begin selling Sony's least expensive player, the BDP-S300, by the end of October. The unit is priced at around $500. Target has also been selling the Playstation 3 since its debut last November.

However, Target also sells the HD DVD player add-on for Microsoft's Xbox 360 console, which was given a new MSRP of $179 today. It previously sold for around $200. And in fact, the retailer's online store is currently stocked with multiple HD DVD players but no standalone Blu-ray devices.

It's a bit of a one-two punch for HD DVD after a similar announcement from Blockbuster last month. In its first move to nationwide high definition rentals, Blockbuster decided to only stock Blu-ray titles, though some test stores and its online rental service offer HD DVD.

As expected, the HD DVD camp has already fired back and issued a statement about this development. "Target will continue to carry the Xbox 360 HD DVD drive as well as HD DVD titles so we don’t see much of a change in their plans to carry both formats. In fact, they continue to sell Toshiba HD DVD players on their web site. Sony appears to have bought an end cap, just as HD DVD has in retail stores such as BestBuy and Circuit City," said Ken Graffeo, vice president of Universal Studios' HD marketing team. Universal has pledged exclusive support to the HD DVD format.

Target has historically called the mark on dying formats, usually being one of the first major retailer to put a halt on products that fizzle out soon afterwards. It stopped selling Nokia's multimedia N-Gage phone just months before it officially died, and got rid of UMD movies for Sony's Playstation Portable system. Not long after that decision, third-party movie studios stopped supporting the format.

Posted: **2007-07-27 01:44am**

Bad, bad sign.

I still think that if HD-DVD hits $99 first it can regain Blu-ray's lead simply because despite Blu-ray having sold way more, both formats have sold like crap.

Posted: **2007-07-27 09:17am**

It doesn't mean much yet though. Rumor has it that Wal-mart may be stocking cheap HD-DVD players by Christmas this year.

And as far as the article is talking about Sony's UMD format, I thought I heard that Target was bringing it back? Or at least one of the chain's that stopped carrying it supposedly was.

Posted: **2007-07-27 11:43am**

So far the HD-DVD camp has really been fumbling the ball. The format that's cheaper to produce and sell always wins, but these idiots are fucking up so badly they might introduce the world's first exception. The way I see it, if they can get an HD-DVD player in the sub-$150 range while BD players are still $250 and over, they'll probably win. But if the cost difference shrinks with most of the producers and retailers favoring BD or if HD-DVD sticks to the idiotic idea that people will periodically plug their players into the Internet to update their firmware just so they can continue playing the movies they bought, they'll lose.

Posted: **2007-07-27 12:05pm**

My innate lack of caring for the Next Big Format is now conflicting with my even more powerful will to see Sony continue to fail at everything it attempts. So, er...go HD, pick up the pace?

Posted: **2007-07-27 12:20pm**

Unless you have a massive HD TV, or sit less than 4 feet from a smaller sized one, high definition videos still mean jack and shit.

Posted: **2007-07-27 03:00pm**

Flagg pretty much took the words out of my mouth. To be honest, I myself want both formats to fail miserably. They're just not needed.

Posted: **2007-07-27 03:23pm**

Tanasinn wrote:Flagg pretty much took the words out of my mouth. To be honest, I myself want both formats to fail miserably. They're just not needed.

They might not be "needed", but they're fucking nice. I have a HD-DVD player now, and the first movie I watched had me hooked on them. I don't plan on buying another regular DVD unless no other option for me exists.

Posted: **2007-07-27 03:39pm**

apocolypse wrote:
Tanasinn wrote:Flagg pretty much took the words out of my mouth. To be honest, I myself want both formats to fail miserably. They're just not needed.
They might not be "needed", but they're fucking nice. I have a HD-DVD player now, and the first movie I watched had me hooked on them. I don't plan on buying another regular DVD unless no other option for me exists.

They're somewhat less nice if you don't feel like spending $1,500 for a TV capable of actually handling them.

Posted: **2007-07-27 03:59pm**

I could honestly care less about how succesful either format is, as Flagg said. They're just opposite sides of the same worthless coin. I await the crash and burn of both really.

Posted: **2007-07-27 05:40pm**

General Zod wrote:
apocolypse wrote:
Tanasinn wrote:Flagg pretty much took the words out of my mouth. To be honest, I myself want both formats to fail miserably. They're just not needed.
They might not be "needed", but they're fucking nice. I have a HD-DVD player now, and the first movie I watched had me hooked on them. I don't plan on buying another regular DVD unless no other option for me exists.
They're somewhat less nice if you don't feel like spending $1,500 for a TV capable of actually handling them.

. . .But if you have the TV, they make a world of difference.

Posted: **2007-07-27 05:49pm**

Count Dooku wrote: . . .But if you have the TV, they make a world of difference.

Especially when most people already have the movies they want on DVD, and if you want to play the movie in a room you don't have your expensive TV in, there goes the functionality. The HD players costing three times as much as your average DVD player (at minimum) hardly helps.

Posted: **2007-07-27 06:12pm**

General Zod wrote:
apocolypse wrote:
Tanasinn wrote:Flagg pretty much took the words out of my mouth. To be honest, I myself want both formats to fail miserably. They're just not needed.
They might not be "needed", but they're fucking nice. I have a HD-DVD player now, and the first movie I watched had me hooked on them. I don't plan on buying another regular DVD unless no other option for me exists.
They're somewhat less nice if you don't feel like spending $1,500 for a TV capable of actually handling them.

Well, like Dooku said, if you have the TV for it, then it's imo worth it. I'm not about to go out and replace all the DVD's I can with them, but for new purchases that are available, then I'm on it.

Posted: **2007-07-27 06:14pm**

CaptHawkeye wrote:I could honestly care less about how succesful either format is, as Flagg said. Their just opposite sides of the same worthless coin. I await the crash and burn of both really.

I don't think either are going anywhere anytime soon though. Eventually, sure. Everything gets replaced. But I think at this point both sides are too heavily invested in their respective formats to just let them die without a fight.

Posted: **2007-07-27 06:24pm**

Is there any major difference between the two?

All I actually know about this little war is the names, and that these are supposed to be basically DVD+, using more layers and such techniques to increase data storage. Thus allowing a better picture by tying up more physical resources per frame...

Posted: **2007-07-27 06:28pm**

Andrew_Fireborn wrote:Is there any major difference between the two?

All I actually know about this little war is the names, and that these are supposed to be basically DVD+, using more layers and such techniques to increase data storage. Thus allowing a better picture by tying up more physical resources per frame...

Here's a good comparison of both formats.

Blu-ray is overall technically superior to HD-DVD.

Posted: **2007-07-27 06:42pm**

Hmm... indeed... Aside from that bloody relic of region coding it does indeed seem significantly better...

It at least clarifies why Sony made it the PS3's reader... Thank you.

Posted: **2007-07-27 06:42pm**

There's also a problem concerning Toshiba's practice of almost insane price-slashings for HD-DVD players that Praxis brought up: it's not something that can be sustained. It's more of an act of desperation to combat Blu-ray's higher title market share (66% vs 34% despite there being more standalone HD-DVD players than Blu-ray players), one that's making Toshiba practically bleed money, and while breaking below the $200 and $100 barriers is something they seem willing to do in time for the Q4 season, they're not going to recover from it.

Posted: **2007-07-27 08:01pm**

Torrents FTW.

Posted: **2007-07-27 09:20pm**

Andrew_Fireborn wrote:Hmm... indeed... Aside from that bloody relic of region coding it does indeed seem significantly better...

It at least clarifies why Sony made it the PS3's reader... Thank you.

Blu-rays region codes are a lot less crazy-assed then the DVDs were.

Posted: **2007-07-27 10:12pm**

Less crazy, yeah. But no less unnessecary.

Posted: **2007-07-27 10:45pm**

Count Dooku wrote:
General Zod wrote:
apocolypse wrote: They might not be "needed", but they're fucking nice. I have a HD-DVD player now, and the first movie I watched had me hooked on them. I don't plan on buying another regular DVD unless no other option for me exists.
They're somewhat less nice if you don't feel like spending $1,500 for a TV capable of actually handling them.
. . .But if you have the TV, they make a world of difference.

Yeah, if you have a large screen HDTV then there is a marked improvement. I can see a difference even with mine, but it's so minisclue that I won't be purchasing a dedicated HDDVD or Blu Ray player any time in the near future. When I get a PS3 I'll probably start buying Blu Ray movies, though. But only new ones, or those movies which I watch on a regular basis, like LoTR. I sure as hell am not going to replace my DVD collection. Not that that's even going to be necessary if/when I ever buy a dedicated player.

Posted: **2007-07-28 05:59pm**

General Zod wrote:
They're somewhat less nice if you don't feel like spending $1,500 for a TV capable of actually handling them.

...or maybe they're more for people that already have these TVs and want to utilize them to their potential... and HD quality kicks ass.

Posted: **2007-07-28 07:15pm**

Isil`Zha wrote:
General Zod wrote:
They're somewhat less nice if you don't feel like spending $1,500 for a TV capable of actually handling them.
...or maybe they're more for people that already have these TVs and want to utilize them to their potential... and HD quality kicks ass.

Not a very good way to gain market saturation and replace DVD as a viable format when only a few people are actually capable of making full use of their features, though.

Posted: **2007-07-28 10:37pm**

Andrew_Fireborn wrote:Is there any major difference between the two?

Sony Pictures owns a lot of studios.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Format war over? Target refuses to sell HD-DVD players

Format war over? Target refuses to sell HD-DVD players