Blu-Ray/HD-DVD R1 Title List

[Gamewatcher]

If you're on the fence about HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray, or want to cut down on your double dipping (i.e., purchasing the same title twice), I've compiled a list of all announced, speculative and rumored titles for both formats:

The R1 HD-DVD/Blu-Ray List (http://www.gamestay.com/dvdlist/index-hddvd.html)

The list is actually a year old, but has seen more activity in the past 24 hours than all of last year. I've also been tracking UMD Movies (which, as you might recall, I've dubbed a ridiculous format) and non-anamorphic DVDs.

Expect another flurry of updates in the next 24 hours (Disney, in particular). Note that fencesitters like Warner Bros are in both categories since even if they don't release the competing format right away, they're expected to eventually.

[Suicidal ShiZuru]

If its not 100% fact I prefer not to read most of the list.


Why do you think UMDs are ridiculous? I slightly agree with you only because I dont travel. If I did however, Id own a ton of UMD movies.

[antoniogaud]

Call me ridiculous, but I am in no hurry to replace my DVD collection. I dont see how significantly better they would look anyway. Its not like HD is going to somehow ADD resolution to the movies. I honestly dont see why I - nor most of the American public -should care. Someone explain to me what the big excitement is here. PLEASE!

[Borys]

Damn them, both of them.

I need a HDTV to go with them and that is just too goddamn expensive ATM.

[Borys]

Whoa, 100 GB, recordable BR disk. That's like half of my HD on one, thin piece of plastic.

:O

http://www.theinquirer.net/images/articles/100gb1.jpg

And check out this PC with HD-DVD drive:

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20060105/ces6_14.jpg

[player_2]

I read some article where bill gates was being interviewed and he had something to say about the current format war to the effect that it was kind of pointless to fight over which would be the superior format since this is pretty much the last generation of optical storage, everything will be electronic transfers in the "not too distant FUTURE". Sounds kinda logical. How long will optical media take to die? I dunno, I haven't burned an audio cd for quite some time until last week, road trip in the little woman's car. I carry my collection around on mp3 now in my little white ticket to the bourgeoisie train car bound for hell, my ipod.

[Tia]

Whoa, 100 GB, recordable BR disk. That's like half of my HD on one, thin piece of plastic.

:O

And check out this PC with HD-DVD drive:

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20060105/ces6_14.jpg

It is the speed that matters, not the size. And BlueRay..... just wait till you realize how painfully slow they are. (hint... slower than DVD).

[Murtaug]

What I would like to know, is if my DVD movies will play on the new players that support these formats. I have a pretty large collection of DVDs, over three hundred, I am not about to start buying into either of these new formats unless my old stuff will play on the new drives. I'll just continue with regular DVDs otherwise, ride the wave until I can start picking them up at the prices I could get VHS at now.

[bone_matrix]

All that I want to say, Gamewatcher, is thank you for taking the time to do this. Its nice. Everyone else only seems to want to argue about the need (or lack thereof) of new media.

[automaton]

I don't give a shit which movie appears on which format. I'm not buying a god damn thing until they sort this out. I love high def more than most. I've got a pretty good HDTV, but I'm not going to spend any money on a format that may or may not become the standard 5 years from now.

Sony and Toshiba need to realize that they are going to blow the whole thing if they don't compromise. If they leave it up to the consumers to decide then the consumers will stick with what is cheap and readily available (read: standard DVD) and avoid this next generation completely.

I totally agree with Bill Gates that electronic delivery is right around the corner. Sony/Toshiba will only speed that along if they don't settle this crap.

[Sensei-X]

If they leave it up to the consumers to decide then the consumers will stick with what is cheap and readily available (read: standard DVD) and avoid this next generation completely.

This totally reminds me of what happened with the next-gen audio format war. SACD and DVD Audio were supposed to fight it out for the next level of audio format, but sadly for them no one was interested and pretty much everyone chose "none of the above" and stuck with the 20 year old CD format.

[Kelegacy]

Whoa, 100 GB, recordable BR disk. That's like half of my HD on one, thin piece of plastic.

:O

http://www.theinquirer.net/images/articles/100gb1.jpg

And check out this PC with HD-DVD drive:

http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/av/docs/20060105/ces6_14.jpg
It's goddamn sickening. I could back up all of my stuff I've been meaning to, but have been too lazy to because it would take so many goddamn DVD-R's. I just don't have time to sit through all that burning (or store the discs).

Once these things become affordable, I'm all over 'em.

[bebop]

Call me ridiculous, but I am in no hurry to replace my DVD collection. I dont see how significantly better they would look anyway. Its not like HD is going to somehow ADD resolution to the movies. I honestly dont see why I - nor most of the American public -should care. Someone explain to me what the big excitement is here. PLEASE!

???? That's the whole point of HD, it will add resolution to movies.

DVD format is 768x480(often much less) interlaced at 30fps.

HD is 1920x1080 progressive at up to 60fps.

DVD = 184320 pixels per frame
HD = 2,073,600 pixels per frame. A 1200% improvement!

[51|RandoM]

???? That's the whole point of HD, it will add resolution to movies.

DVD format is 768x480(often much less) interlaced at 30fps.

HD is 1920x1080 progressive at up to 60fps.

DVD = 184320 pixels per frame
HD = 2,073,600 pixels per frame. A 1200% improvement!

wrong.

1st. HD is a multitude of resolutions, not just one. You're describing 1080i as HD, which it is, but 720p is also considered within the HD spec. DVD is also more than one resolution, which runs the gamut up to about 540 horizontal lines.

2nd. You're confusing medium with material. HD doesn't 'add' resolution to movies. If they don't have an HD master, or they don't take a very good analog master and then achieve a good transfer, you're just ending up with the same data as before, spread across more pixels. Playing SD or ED content to and HD device often makes it look worse, sorta like how low bitrate MP3s sound find in a portable, but sound like crap on a nice home system.

3rd. Your improvement figure is misleading, implying that just improving the pixels of the display, you've suddenly increased the quality from end to end, which just isn't the case.

Lastly, the point of HD wasn't to add resolution to movies, they quite honestly don't need it. The point was to add resolution to TV(I'm talking the data here, not just the display, want an HD camera in the studio, and then HD through the entire path), piggybacking on the forced switch to digital transmission mandated when the FCC started reallocating the spectrum.

All my hot air aside, anybody buying movies on either of the two new formats is just wasting money. The last thing you should be doing is buying non-HD content on a transitory HD format---which is what I believe these to be, even if one of them does 'win'. If you really must be an early adopter, your best bet will be any of the few tv series that are recorded in HD and end up with seasonal sets.

[ruprect]

Dammit. Catwoman is on both formats. I was planning on using that movie as the tie breaker.

Serenity is from Universal, right? So HD-DVD looks like the winner for now. Also I can copy it to my hard disk.

[Maskatron]

Serenity is from Universal, right? So HD-DVD looks like the winner for now. Also I can copy it to my hard disk.

Yeah, I was going to stick with Blu-Ray (since I'm definetly getting a PS3), but I'm guessing Battlestar Galactica will only appear on HD-DVD. Damnit.

[bone_matrix]

It's goddamn sickening. I could back up all of my stuff I've been meaning to, but have been too lazy to because it would take so many goddamn DVD-R's. I just don't have time to sit through all that burning (or store the discs).

Once these things become affordable, I'm all over 'em.

Why don't you buy another hard drive and back everything onto it?

[Kelegacy]

Why don't you buy another hard drive and back everything onto it?

I did, initially. But the drive is now installed into my computer (It would be silly for me to rationalize buying a HD, installing it, putting everything I want onto it, and then uninstalling it and keeping it as storage) and I always fear that someday I'll get some sort of weird bug and the entire contents of the drive(s) will be gone. I have 300+ gigs and I find myself having to delete things every so often.

But high capacity discs could solve all of that for me. I'd only need a couple, though, so a 500-1000 dollar drive is impractical. 200 might be fine, but I'm so goddamn cheap I'd have to wait until it hit ONE Benjamin. So I'll probably never own one. :)

[subgenius]

Call me ridiculous, but I am in no hurry to replace my DVD collection. I dont see how significantly better they would look anyway. Its not like HD is going to somehow ADD resolution to the movies. I honestly dont see why I - nor most of the American public -should care. Someone explain to me what the big excitement is here. PLEASE!

I don't buy DVD's anymore except for the rare special release.

Use Netflix!!! It's the only way to fly. Has anyone heard when and if they'll be offering HD content?

[bobbler]

It is the speed that matters, not the size. And BlueRay..... just wait till you realize how painfully slow they are. (hint... slower than DVD).

That's pretty awful logic. Sure, 1x BR is slower than 12-16x DVD (standard speed of today), but a 4x BR will cream a 12-16x DVD and have less noise (slower spin speed). What planet are you from?

HD-DVD is the same way, 36mbit/s per 1x.

Tia you need to lay off the crazy crackers.


wrong.

1st. HD is a multitude of resolutions, not just one. You're describing 1080i as HD, which it is, but 720p is also considered within the HD spec. DVD is also more than one resolution, which runs the gamut up to about 540 horizontal lines.

2nd. You're confusing medium with material. HD doesn't 'add' resolution to movies. If they don't have an HD master, or they don't take a very good analog master and then achieve a good transfer, you're just ending up with the same data as before, spread across more pixels. Playing SD or ED content to and HD device often makes it look worse, sorta like how low bitrate MP3s sound find in a portable, but sound like crap on a nice home system.

3rd. Your improvement figure is misleading, implying that just improving the pixels of the display, you've suddenly increased the quality from end to end, which just isn't the case.

Lastly, the point of HD wasn't to add resolution to movies, they quite honestly don't need it. The point was to add resolution to TV(I'm talking the data here, not just the display, want an HD camera in the studio, and then HD through the entire path), piggybacking on the forced switch to digital transmission mandated when the FCC started reallocating the spectrum.

All my hot air aside, anybody buying movies on either of the two new formats is just wasting money. The last thing you should be doing is buying non-HD content on a transitory HD format---which is what I believe these to be, even if one of them does 'win'. If you really must be an early adopter, your best bet will be any of the few tv series that are recorded in HD and end up with seasonal sets.

1. Both HD-DVD and BR are encoded in 1080p (24/30/60 fps... mostly 24). Starting next year you'll see 1080p HDTVs trickle in and slowly replace the 720p/1080i sets. 1080p is HD; we're going to have for the next 10-15 years (720p and 1080i were more or less stepping stones, regardless of what you believe).

2. Any film movie is going to have an original that far surpasses 1080p in detail (since its a film the resolution is sort of hard to tell, but it's considered to be around 4k res or ~4 times 1080p, essentially). Any non film movie is going to have done at at least 2k. Many movies from the last 20 years already have HD masters and have just been downsampled to DVD resolutions (lawrence of arabia, for example, had its HD master done in the 1980s planning for this).

3. Look above.

Lastly, DVDs are quite nasty looking on an HD display, often times OTA/Cable HD looks better than DVDs. Add to that OTA/Cable HD is running at pathetic bit rates, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know there is quite a difference.

Why do you say people are wasting money? 1080p is what these are at, and 1080p is what we'll have for the next 10-15 years. I wouldn't tell anyone to go and replace their DVD collection with BR stuff (why does everyone assume thats necessary all of a sudden? It's kind of absurd, considering both BR and HD-DVD players will play DVDs as well), but I see no reason not to buy new stuff in these formats, as it's what we're stuck with.

Why do I feel like I already made this post? I could have sworn I had to correct someone on the exact same shit the other day.

[Achilles]

That's pretty awful logic. Sure, 1x BR is slower than 12-16x DVD (standard speed of today), but a 4x BR will cream a 12-16x DVD and have less noise (slower spin speed). What planet are you from?Isn't an "x" a completely arbitrary number based only on how fast the first production drive was spinning? I seriously doubt a 1x BR drive spins as fast as a 1x DVD drive. It probably spins as fast as a 12x DVD drive, or faster. If they could make a 4x one they would, but that's not currently their plan (I think they're aiming for 2x max with the PS3), probably because it would be spinning way too fast to be useful.

[Last of the Red Hot Mamas]

1x for Blu-ray and HD DVD is 36Mbps. A standard BD-Video drive (i.e. a drive that meets the minimum specifications necessary to play Blu-ray movies) is about 1.5x, roughly equivalent to a 5x DVD-ROM drive. I'm guessing the drive in the PS3 will be at least 2x, possibly more.

[bobbler]

Isn't an "x" a completely arbitrary number based only on how fast the first production drive was spinning? I seriously doubt a 1x BR drive spins as fast as a 1x DVD drive. It probably spins as fast as a 12x DVD drive, or faster. If they could make a 4x one they would, but that's not currently their plan (I think they're aiming for 2x max with the PS3), probably because it would be spinning way too fast to be useful.

No. It is rather arbitrary, but, no, a 1x drive isn't spinning as fast as a 12x DVD.

16x DVD speed is roughly 9500rpm (12x should be around 6500rpm) or 55m/s.

1x BR speed is 4.5-4.9m/s (not sure on the exact rpms, but you could do the math and figure it out -- both BR and DVD are 12cm discs). 4x would be around 20m/s, 12x BR would be ~10krpms (and 400mbit/s, compared to ~170mbits for 16x DVD).

CD per 1x is 1.2m/s and 150kbit/s
DVD per 1x is 3.5m/s and 11mbit/s
BR per 1x is 4.5m/s and 36mbit/s

I think that's all the information: 1 (http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=74614), 2 (http://www.blu-raydisc.com/Section-13470/Section-13628/Index.html) heres a couple links with all the info (the CD/DVD stuff I checked elsewhere, but that first link has both stats in one place).

[Achilles]

No. It is rather arbitrary, but, no, a 1x drive isn't spinning as fast as a 12x DVD.

16x DVD speed is roughly 9500rpm (12x should be around 6500rpm) or 55m/s.

1x BR speed is 4.5-4.9m/s (not sure on the exact rpms, but you could do the math and figure it out -- both BR and DVD are 12cm discs). 4x would be around 20m/s, 12x BR would be ~10krpms (and 400mbit/s, compared to ~170mbits for 16x DVD).

CD per 1x is 1.2m/s and 150kbit/s
DVD per 1x is 3.5m/s and 11mbit/s
BR per 1x is 4.5m/s and 36mbit/s

I think that's all the information: 1 (http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=74614), 2 (http://www.blu-raydisc.com/Section-13470/Section-13628/Index.html) heres a couple links with all the info (the CD/DVD stuff I checked elsewhere, but that first link has both stats in one place).It looks like anything under 2x can't stream enough information to play HD movies. So it's pretty much assured that there's going to be a 2x drive in the PS3.

Thanks for the info. It'll probably be quieter than the vacuum cleaner sounding drive they've got in the 360 since it'll be spinning at about 1/5th the speed. But it'll also have a slower transfer rate by about half (70 vs 120?).

[Tia]

That's pretty awful logic. Sure, 1x BR is slower than 12-16x DVD (standard speed of today), but a 4x BR will cream a 12-16x DVD and have less noise (slower spin speed). What planet are you from?

first of all, when you will grow up and get over the insults? I know you are a gamer, but that doesn't HAVE to mean you are also a jerk.

4x BR will be faster than DVD, but that won't happen on your PS3. It as sure as hell won't be faster than Hard Drive. So it might be usefull for backups, but I wouldn't want to run anything from it, unless it is a movie.

Oh and didn't sony said that PS3 will be 1x?

[bobbler]

first of all, when you will grow up and get over the insults? I know you are a gamer, but that doesn't HAVE to mean you are also a jerk.

4x BR will be faster than DVD, but that won't happen on your PS3. It as sure as hell won't be faster than Hard Drive. So it might be usefull for backups, but I wouldn't want to run anything from it, unless it is a movie.

Oh and didn't sony said that PS3 will be 1x?

I didn't use any insults, I asked what planet you are from and suggested you stop eating the crazy crackers. Those were more reactionary responses rather than insults, if you ask me! The way you worded your initial post was a bit questionable, as to imply that BR was inherently slow, which is absurd, as it's ~2.5 times faster than DVD at the same rotation speed. I was just clarifying for everyone else.

Nobody said it would be faster than an HDD; a 4x BR would probably be comparably fast, especially to those 2.5inch drives that are going into X360/PS3 -- the seek times are where an HDD takes the lead. I'm not really sure how it is relevant to the topic though.

Also, Sony hasn't made any mention of the PS3's BR speed. I'm assuming somewhere around 2-3x, but I wouldn't be surprised if they managed 4x (as there shouldn't be too much limiting them) -- it also depends on if its CLV or CAV (I believe CAV is a pisser on the seek times, but nice for keeping the average transfer speed up).

[Borys]

first of all, when you will grow up and get over the insults? I know you are a gamer, but that doesn't HAVE to mean you are also a jerk.

4x BR will be faster than DVD, but that won't happen on your PS3. It as sure as hell won't be faster than Hard Drive. So it might be usefull for backups, but I wouldn't want to run anything from it, unless it is a movie.

Oh and didn't sony said that PS3 will be 1x?

Sony didn't say anything about the BR drive yet but thanks for playing. You had to cram as many Sony bashes in your post as possible.

Fission Mailed.

[Wonka]

Hmmmm. I have seen the numbers. I have an HDTV. I have an X360. And I have watched DVDs on it and also watched HD Movie trailers.
I honestly don't see THAT much difference.

Yeah the trailers look do *slightly* better.

But for the most part I have to say: big fucking deal! It's certainly nothing to write home about.

Sure I know that 1080p is coming. It might even become the most popular type of HDTV 5-6 years down the line (IF they make them really price competitive with the other flavors of HDTVs). Maybe then these movies will look good enough to merit switching...

But I don't see how EITHER of these formats is going to take off anytime soon. They may have the support of the industry, and they may have the hardcore videophile nerds on board (yeah nerds), but it's the consumers who really decide. I just don't see a lot of incentive here for normal *consumers*. At least not in the next 5-6 years.

I think that Bill is right about this. I think that these formats are a bump on the road to HD-IPTV. I also think that HD-DVD is actually just a temporary distraction/bet hedging to slow down Blue-Ray just enough so that it never quite catches on before HD downloadable content on demand becomes reality. My guess is that they have about 4 years max to get blue-ray into consumer hands before time is up.

[Vandenh]

>My guess is that they have about 4 years max to get blue-ray into consumer hands before time is up.

Maybe...

I think the real future is probably more movies on demand services. Heah it is nice to own a hard copy but imagine if you would just own virtual copies on video servers somewhere. You could watch your movie collection anywhere in the world/plane/hotel. Log on and stream them to any TV/PC. ETA for that? At least 10 years... but it is probably gonna happen.

Or not http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4586468.stm and don't forget Apple. Video on iPods seems to be getting bigger and bigger.

[Achilles]

I wonder how long it’ll be before we can buy movies over Live Marketplace for $10 or whatever and download them in 720p. It’s fairly secure, which is the only real reason that movie companies don’t currently release their stuff to the net, and there’s a perfect vehicle to browse for and pay for moves in Marketplace, without the chunk taken out be retailers and distributors, or cost of manufacturing.

Judging by downloading the trailer for Narnia at 720p on there, it would probably take a day to download a movie. But you can also interrupt and pick up a download on Live, so you don't need to do it all at once.

I also agree with the others that the 720p HD trailers don't look that much different than a properly mastered DVD.

[Qoz]

2. Any film movie is going to have an original that far surpasses 1080p in detail (since its a film the resolution is sort of hard to tell, but it's considered to be around 4k res or ~4 times 1080p, essentially). Any non film movie is going to have done at at least 2k. Many movies from the last 20 years already have HD masters and have just been downsampled to DVD resolutions (lawrence of arabia, for example, had its HD master done in the 1980s planning for this).

True.
Past content can be improved if the source material is filmed with film cameras.

Content filmed with TV resolution cameras cannot be improved (more pixels).
This includes almost all sitcoms, news broadcasts etc.
This does not include all TV content. The big expensive TV series (also several old ones) are filmed with film cameras. All music videos are also filmed on expensive film as it is vastly better quality even after scaling it down afterwards.
So series like Lost, Alias, Stargate will be HD because they are on film already.

For the TV quality sitcoms (like Seinfeld and Friends) they can fit almost all of the episodes on one BR-disc or HD-DVD. That would be really nice!
I don't think they will artificially increase the pixels, as that would look awful and only increase the amount of media we would need to store.

[bapenguin]

I wonder how long it’ll be before we can buy movies over Live Marketplace for $10 or whatever and download them in 720p. It’s fairly secure, which is the only real reason that movie companies don’t currently release their stuff to the net, and there’s a perfect vehicle to browse for and pay for moves in Marketplace, without the chunk taken out be retailers and distributors, or cost of manufacturing.

Judging by downloading the trailer for Narnia at 720p on there, it would probably take a day to download a movie. But you can also interrupt and pick up a download on Live, so you don't need to do it all at once.

I also agree with the others that the 720p HD trailers don't look that much different than a properly mastered DVD.

Right now you can actually rent movies through the 360 and the Media Center Extender function. It's pretty cool. Only 3 to 4 bucks a title and they look as good as DVDs.

[Balthasar]

Call me ridiculous, but I am in no hurry to replace my DVD collection. I dont see how significantly better they would look anyway. Its not like HD is going to somehow ADD resolution to the movies. I honestly dont see why I - nor most of the American public -should care. Someone explain to me what the big excitement is here. PLEASE!

HD wouldn't add resolution, you're absolutely right. What it would do is bring you a step closer to seeing your movies as they are supposed to look. DVDs do not present movies at their maximum resolution. It was mentioned in a different thread, but the ceiling for film resolution is much higher than that of any HDTVs we will see on the market for many years to come. That is what the big excitement is about. If HD-TV is going to replace the current standard, then you need a format that takes advantage of the increased viewing capability.

[Balthasar]

It is the speed that matters, not the size. And BlueRay..... just wait till you realize how painfully slow they are. (hint... slower than DVD).

You mean, the player is slower. Which is not surprising for first generation hardware.

[Gamewatcher]

If its not 100% fact I prefer not to read most of the list.

Why do you think UMDs are ridiculous? I slightly agree with you only because I dont travel. If I did however, Id own a ton of UMD movies.

I've gone back and marked the formally announced titles as Confirmed in the Notes field now, so you can see what's for sure, and what's speculative or based on old information that may no longer be true. You can import the list back into Excel and sort it anyway you like.

It's important to note that I did not create this list specifically to make any kind of call as to who is the "winner" in the format wars. My goal was to help prevent myself from unknowingly double-dipping (or triple- or quadruple-dipping, since I also collected laserdiscs back in the day, and have already replaced many of those titles once or twice on DVD).

In the past year, it's served me well: I cut my DVD purchases down by a third - that said, I still bought or received as gifts about 100 titles, but made sure most of them were ones I couldn't wait on, or were TV-grade and wouldn't benefit from the HD formats except maybe on quantity of extras. I held off on Batman Begins, but went ahead and picked up Serenity because I wanted to do my part in sending Universal the message that we want more Firefly action!

I do hope the early reports of hybrid players are true, so if these companies insist on battling things out, we can have a player that handles everything and make our own decisions about which format we want when there's a choice.

Oh, and why is UMD a ridiculous format? I've ranted and blogged on this extensively, but the short of it is:


Price - cost is typically at or nearly the same as the DVD version
Reduced quality - lacks the 5.1+ sound or video resolution for a home theater
Effect on battery life - the spinning disc eats your battery fast; good luck watching a long movie in one sitting
The screen door effect - get close enough to the screen to appreciate the details, and you'll see the pixels. Back away enough that it looks sharp, and you miss out on the cinematic experience


That said, I do like to sometimes watch TV shows and movies from my DVD collection on my PSP. I just rip them and take them with me on 1GB memory cards. It's great for extending where I can enjoy my DVDs, but at the end of the day I can pop the disc into my home theater and appreciate it in all of its glory. At least until the HD movie revolution hits, and I'm still on the fence about when and how I'll adopt. Stay tuned!

[Balthasar]

But I don't see how EITHER of these formats is going to take off anytime soon. They may have the support of the industry, and they may have the hardcore videophile nerds on board (yeah nerds), but it's the consumers who really decide. I just don't see a lot of incentive here for normal *consumers*. At least not in the next 5-6 years.

Extremely naive. Unless you're proposing that consumers will refuse to buy movies at all, if the industry wants you to buy BR, that's what you're going to buy. All they have to do is stop producing movies on DVDs. As I've said before, that remains the main reason VHS is not still dominant in the market. If they kept releasing VHS side by side with DVD, DVD would have suffered the same fate as LaserDisc.

I think that Bill is right about this. I think that these formats are a bump on the road to HD-IPTV. I also think that HD-DVD is actually just a temporary distraction/bet hedging to slow down Blue-Ray just enough so that it never quite catches on before HD downloadable content on demand becomes reality. My guess is that they have about 4 years max to get blue-ray into consumer hands before time is up.

Perhaps if movie industry execs wake up one day and say, "hey, I don't feel so paranoid about pirating anymore, I want everyone to buy our movies in whatever format is most convenient for them, viva la revolution!"

I mean, really guys, come on. Have you seen them make any moves at all that indicate they are in any way comfortable with this sort of thing? I'm sure it will happen eventually, but it a long way down the road.