Talk:HD DVD/Archive 4

HD-DVD is NOT dead.

Um, what's all this nonsense about HD-DVD being dead. New HD-DVDs are coming out EVERY WEEK. It's only dead in the US and the UK. Many ozens of Asian and European films are still coming out each week, and Many companies that are BluRay only in the US/UK are putting out films on both formats elsewhere. Just because the US/UK stop selling films on the format does not make a format dead. VCD is still alive and well across Asia as well, out-selling all three major HD formats 2:1 or 3:1 depending on where you read. Many Chinese magazines print that HVD outsells BluRay 6:1 or better, and HD-DVD to BluRay at 6:1 even. HD-DVD may have been pushed under the rug in the US/UK (though it will still have strong independent support from studios such as Maverick, Touch, and Indi), but all signs point to BluRay dieing out in other LARGE SPENDING swing countries such as Japan, China, and India. And whilst this is the US/UK version of the Wikipedia, there is no reason to ignore the reality of the rest of the world's influence. Lostinlodos (talk) 18:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Toshiba has said they will be stopping all production and development on HD-DVD. This seems to imply a worldwide shutdown. I've never read anything about this being a North American-only thing. (Or any continent for that matter.) [1] —Fumo7887 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

This is announced in Japan, not USA, implying it is worldwide. A separate press release in form of PDF has also been released for American market. VCD is still alive and well in Asia. I am Indonesian by nationality (living in UK) and I am well aware of it. In Japan, Blu-ray outsold HD DVD by 9:1. In Indonesia and other South-East Asian nation, some shops only carries Blu-ray, and that BD section is increased over time, similar to when DVD pushed VCD (now DVD is the dominant format, though VCD still does exist). Trust me. I am ASIAN, and I followed news from Asia, especially Indonesia, Singapore, Hong Kong and Japan--w_tanoto (talk) 20:34,e fees for the mandatory licensing, security, DRM and other anti-consumer requirements of BluRay. HD-DVD doesn't require all the extra DRM required in the BluRay format. Not only that, but BluRay requires (mandatory) security functions that violate state laws in many countries, including Australia, one of the top 5 movie purchasing nations (behind US, UK, Japan, and China). And while no one has brought the issue all the way through court yet, it's only a matter of time. And when the same laws in that country BAN the BD+ and region lock protections on those discs/players, that caused all the region-free, copy-forward legislation for DVDs; then what. My educated guess would be HD takes off, or BluRay dumps everything that makes Hollywood so happy about the format.

My comment also was in reference to the RAM, R/RW questions above as well as the continuing existence of the movie form. LG has manufactured tens-of-millions of burners that include the HD read and write functions. So has Toshiba, and Vendu and many others. Those computer drives and home players are already firmly planted on the insides of tens of millions of computers. There are many, many manufactures that produce multi-format discs now. The format is not going away, it's just going underground. Much like VCD did along side VHS. And compatibility will just become a two-part system, with multi-format players; much like the current DVD/VCD support. Lostinlodos (talk) 01:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

There is rarely obvious physical indication (i.e. shop) that HD DVD is dead outside the US. For example, my local HMV in UK, still sells HD DVD as usual (though in smaller quantity than BD). However, sales numbers from week-to-week are obvious. Toshiba made that decision to stop based on worldwide sales number (though the shop continues to carry them) and loss of support from companies, not because the shop stopped carrying HD DVD (with the exception of WalMart) - which can be considered physical indication. As far as I understand, Japanese stores continues to carry HD DVD, regardless of the sales ratio of 9:1. About studio support, American studios decision to drop HD DVD applies worldwide. You said that a Sony title available on HD DVD in Japan, that is because it is being distributed NOT by Sony, but by other companies. A Universal title, Bruce Almighty (HD DVD exclusive in US), available in UK and Europe as Blu-ray exclusive, because it is distributed by Buena Vista / Disney outside the US (meaning Buena Vista distribute its titles exclusively on BD worldwide). Title that is BD exclusive in US (and UK) - an example is Bridge to Terabithia, is distributed on HD DVD in Italy, because it is not distributed by Buena Vista. I would agree to add those you mentioned above to the article if you have a credible source (e.g. NHK, Nielsen, Nikkei, Gfk), NOT individual's original research (see Wikipedia's No Original Research policy). Regarding DRM, you predict a lot of things there. regarding anti-consumer things, that depends on the person. A person might regard DRM as anti-consumer, but some of us might not. See WP:NPOV. Also see here for Bruce Almighty's distribution rights: [2]. It stated that Buena Vista has the distribution right in UK, and they release the title exclusively on BD in UK (despite Buena Vista is an American studio). May I know what Sony titles are you referring to? --w_tanoto (talk) 03:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

We should be discussing references, not our opinions about HD-DVD. There are 100s of news articles that say HD-DVD is "dead" and "obsolete" (using those words). If someone thinks HD-DVD has a bright future, please provide some mainstream news references, otherwise it's not worth discussing.Lester 15:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

"because it is being distributed NOT by Sony".... That was exactly my point. We still have options for buying ScruRay, er, BluRay "exclusives" on HD-DVD. Anyone who's ever used amazon.xx or ebay.xxx.xx could easily find these legitimate releases. Often for less than the price of standard BluRay discs. Claiming that the format is dead is only furthering the fiction, and does nothing to help the companies who will continue to support HD-DVD. And there are really quite a few. I'd say look at various distributor's international web pages, but Wikipedia doesn't allow the a company to be it's own direct source. And buying BluRay discs is only paying to have your rights taken away, paying a usage license; you do NOT own a BluRay disc you "bought" at a store, you only have the right to use that disc for as long as the rights' holder chooses to let you keep it, much like most Microsoft Software. Notices were included in most player's documentation to that fact, either as part of the manual or as a supplement. When you buy a player, and subsequently media to play, you agree to a Terms Of Use agreement that includes a license for usage of the disc, and to accept updates to your player, and to allow the deactivation of your player at any partner's discretion. Lostinlodos (talk) 18:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Simply put, HD-DVD owners/users could still reverse the tide. If every "multi-format" player owner, and every HD-DVD player owner, bought one disc, and refused to buy BluRay at any price, HD-DVD could still come out on top. I'll simply leave the topic on this point and statement, as this is an extremely controversial issue, and anything beyond where we are at here could turn into a flame war.... As long as people continue to buy films on HD-DVD, and at least one company continues to publish on the format, and computers and their users continue to use the HD-DVD R/RW/RAM formats, the specification is NOT dead. The raw point was that there are still films coming out on the format each week, there are still players being sold and there are still brand new players being manufactured (be it now multi-format players). As such, the format can not for all intents be claimed to be "dead". Lostinlodos (talk) 18:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added "citation needed" tags next to the claims you make in your first message above, once you find reliable and credible sources which support your assertions (and do not rely upon original research), we can discuss this in a reasonable manner. For the moment, however, our sources tell us the format is dead/has died, and make no mention of support abroad. —Locke Cole • t • c 04:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

DO NOT edit other person's talk entries. It is a violation of the Talk page wiki rules. (And also poor netiquette.) ---- Theaveng (talk) 11:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

DO NOT EDIT OTHER PEOPLE'S POSTS!!!! That said, I'll respond anyway: Fact tags one and two, check Amazon.co.jp, amazon.co.uk, amazon.co.de, joyo.co.cn, amazon.cn.... or walk into any large shop in Asia, South America, Africa, Eastern and Central Europe, check google's product searches, go to eBay, to find all the new HD-DVD releases coming out each week. The sales ratios are pulled from various magazines in various languages/countries. Since non-US/UK publications all appear to be fighting with each other over what format is selling better, there's ample citations for both sides of that equation. Lostinlodos (talk) 13:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I did not edit your post, I merely added tags noting which statements needed verification and sources. You need sources and Amazon is not a source we can use (that would be original research). —Locke Cole • t • c 13:30, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

quote: "We still have options for buying ScruRay, er, BluRay "exclusives" on HD-DVD." That says it all about your bias. Although it said I am BD supporter in my Userpage, I never bring my BD loyalty to talk pages, except when somebody ask. Does that quote give me a license to mock HD DVD in this talk page? NO. Amazon said they will continue to stock HD DVD products as long as they are manufactured [3]. Wait until 2-3 months from the end of March (when toshiba planned to shut everything down). Ebay? are you joking? that is the place where former HD DVD owners dump their HD DVD products. Regarding HD DVD new releases, I think these say it all:

USA: [4]

Japan: [5] (if you never noticed this, the HD DVD to-be released number was about equal to BD (about 50). Now it drops to 10-20 (as I write this, it is 19).

Regarding walking to a store, and found HD DVD, that is still common in where I live because the announcement is still recent. In UK, Indonesia, and Singapore. All carries HD DVD, but with MUCH lower number than BD. If you still want to change your article, find something to counter my links above.--w_tanoto (talk) 17:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Adding the tags into my post on the TALK page is editing my post! Read the posting guidelines, that's not allowed. "That says it all about your bias"; simply put, BluRay REQUIRES publishers to use copy protection by mandate. That copy protection costs excessive amounts of money for licensing that smaller and independent releasers can not afford. The required copy protection also VIOLATES LAW in many countries. There is nothing else I have issue with, other than that! The mandated use of copyright and protection code screws not just the home user from taking part in copy/backup activities that are legal in most Eastern and European, South American, heck most everywhere besides the US and UK, but also charges the production companies putting out the films when they do not wish to or can not afford to use all the protections. Lostinlodos (talk) 15:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Linking to release pages doesn't help anyone's case, as I could easily link you to www.videoeta.com and point out that those lists from any source, including your two posted ones, are incomplete. The second link (Japan) shows more HD-DVD coming out well into next month despite it being incomplete. The best source is the private mailings from mass-distributors, and those links are often, if not always, closed to the public and require login, but they are also often complete and in total, about four weeks ahead of timeLostinlodos (talk) 15:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC).

CEPro magazine has three articles in the magazine that just came out last week/this week stating that installers and sales reps should suggest that people move to multi-format players, rather than BluRay standalone players as many HD-DVD exclusive companies are only switching to both formats, not leaving HD-DVD, and as noted above some of the harder early HD-DVD only supporters are staying with HD-DVD anyway. Lostinlodos (talk) 15:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not the article that I wish to change, just the "is dead" statements. It IS POV. A more in full sentence from those statements is "Western film companies have opted to use BluRay and not HD-DVD so it doesn't matter that films will still be released from dozens of small film companies in the US and UK, and from hundreds of foreign companies, and more than half the adult film industry, because Hollywood doesn't like the format, its dead". Users who use VCDs will cried POV from those statements on the VHS and VCD Wikipeida pages in the past, and I, among many others above, on the BluRay board, and in many blogs, forum, et al around the internet are crying the POV cry and fighting back against the death statements because it's simply not true. In reality, Hollywood has again chosen a format, and as many times in the past, HD-DVD will continue to carry on without their support. Lostinlodos (talk) 15:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Right, as you said, the list is incomplete, but it does reflect the number of HD DVD releases decrease. Now, it is best to ignore all of those numbers of release and go straight to the point. I have seen no statement in the article that said HD DVD is dead. I saw simply: Toshiba decided to discontinue production of HD DVD device by the end of March, and Warner still releasing HD DVD titles until the end of May 2008. not a single word that said "dead". There is a word "decline", though, which represent the current situation worldwide. In US, UK, Europe, Asia (Japan). As you noted yourself, that "incomplete" list that I provided to you have said it all. It does not represent all HD DVD and BD releases (because some BD and HD DVD titles are not listed), but it does still represent HD DVD decline (was about 50+ pending release at the end of 2007, now dropping to only 19, while scheduled BD release stayed about the same - you might want to see the history of this page to find out the Japanese number of HD DVD release prior to 2008). Also if you did not notice, they get the data from a retailer. So tell us, what sentence you wanted to change, and please straight to the point (nothing to do with Copy Protection, etc), without making any derogatory comments to the format you disliked (i.e. ScruRay... erm ....Blu-ray - you know, you can just easily press backspace button) You might also want to note[6]. I am not bringing any fanaticism of blu-ray to this discussion. I am just simply pointing out the truth. I might not reply to your post anymore if you did not make it straight to the point. Also, if you want to discuss about HD DVD will continue without the support of American studios, take it to the forum, not Wikipedia. VCD does still exist as you said, but declined rather quickly after the appearance of DVD (in most of SE Asian nation).--w_tanoto (talk) 17:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

"ending the high definition optical disc format war.". That's what had me up in arms at the beginning post. There's no end to this "format war" just as, as I and others keep pointing to, there was no end to the VCD vs DVD "format war". They simply lose the public spotlight on the "battle" and one becomes the Western (and in honesty in many other parts of the world) primary format and the other becomes the "Independent" and "underground" ... format. There may be LESS releases but enough companies have pledged to support both formats that there will still be releases. Lostinlodos (talk) 14:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

If format wars do not end, does that mean Betamax is, somewhere, still a viable format? ---- Theaveng (talk) 15:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Have you noted on Toshiba's PR: "Toshiba will begin to reduce shipments of HD DVD players and recorders to retail channels, aiming for cessation of these businesses by the end of March 2008. Toshiba also plans to end volume production of HD DVD disk drives for such applications as PCs and games in the same timeframe, yet will continue to make efforts to meet customer requirements" All of HD DVD optics are made by them. Other brands are simply rebranded Toshiba player. Samsung cancelled its dual format player, while LG will continue to support HD DVD. Toshiba is still providing the drives to them, but won't produce them anymore. Can you imagine a format still viable without player? NO. Regarding studio support, yes, there is still some releases, but not from major (American) studios, which hold the distribution right worldwide, except in certain countries (check imdb to check the distributor on certain movie in certain countries). Also, have you ever noticed in SE Asia and HK? Blu-ray is the dominant format, and it's not in the Western world. Some shops only sells Blu-ray as the only HD format. Simple example is Singapore and Indonesia. Their movies are distributed in the format that is being used in the western world (i.e. US). Indonesian (and Singapore) rating board has legalised Blu-ray releases in there, but I haven't seen HD DVD with label from them (not sure about Singapore, but in Indonesia, it's all US Import - Local distributor Dutamitra Tara has refused to distribute its titles that is released in US on HD DVD on HD DVD locally).--w_tanoto (talk) 16:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

LG also markets their own players, and have been making all of the multi-disc players that others are re-branding. As far as SE Asia goes; it all depends on where you go. In much of China HVD is doing far better than either BR or HD, probably because it's a fraction of the cost and looks the same to most people on most high-def and high-res monitors. HD-DVD is still popular, again probably because of price. Since every major publication has listed China as the largest/fastest growing economy that leaves room for swing. The format is behind, equal, or ahead of BluRay in Japan but that depends on what you read, as it does for every region of the world. Toshiba has also noted in their press releases that they will continue to manufacture computer drives capable of HD-DVD read/write. With the growing move to MPC setups worldwide, it's enough with that alone to keep the format viable; albeit again in a VCD-style underground capacity. And LG has begun to ship new SuperMulti players across Asia that are BR/HDDVD/HVD compatible, along with the standard DVD/VCD/SVCD/XviD/DivX.... It's not BluRay I'm fighting against here, as I own all three HD formats and a single player that plays them all, it's the death calls about an end to a war that is only in it's earliest stages. Rather than my continued fighting here; how about something more along the lines of "ending the first round" and/or "leaving it marginalized to Indy and foreign" or something a little softer than an outright declaration of and end. Without getting into another debate NR to this page, claiming and "end" to this war is about the same as the US presidential declaration to the end of the Iraq war. Simply put, this "war" will go on for many more months, if not years. Holographic discs are just being finalized now, and being displayed at electronics and media shows around the world in working demos now. HVD, the format some western magazines including Film Today have said was another CVD, has done exactly the opposite of what everyone said it would do; rather than quietly go away, it's picked up and taken off in China, and now Hong Kong, Korea, and Japan! The computer end of the HD-DVD format partnership, including Microsoft, have been discussing working variations to the format including triple layer and dual-layer-double-sided discs. Those would allow distributors to include film and software or games on the discs. It's still early, and all formats are all still young. No two sources are putting out the same numbers and ratios. Before we say the war is over, let's let it actually get started. Lostinlodos (talk) 13:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

LG does make its own player, but the lense come from toshiba. If you read the bold letter on toshiba PR, HD DVD drives is to be discontinued. While I believe HD DVD is popular in China (always having their own standard), other places such as Japan, Blu-ray is definitely ahead with more than 9:1 ratio[7]. As you said no two sources stated the same number, because the number is published covering different time (e.g. 2006 = 96% BD, 2007 = 90+, etc). but the average is 9:1 for Japan. The link stated if from GFk, which do the research in Japan, Europe and Australia, and it's for the end of 2007. Regarding the statement that you argue, there are a lot of articles produced not in English, and not from USA/UK that indicates or even stated the end of the format war, such as this: [8] (Japan), [9] (Indonesian). It is widely believed that it is the end of the format war with Blu-ray as victor. The HD DVD article said: the format war is ending, not the format war ended. It is still in the process of ending the format war. A few observation: I owned HD DVD drive as well, and have no difficulties (yet) to find a HD DVD titles if I wanted to, but the sales number is the real indicator, not shops (whether it's online or offline)--w_tanoto (talk) 14:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Also I disagree with your edit "ending the latest round", but I'll leave the others to decide. They might, or might not revert it--w_tanoto (talk) 14:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

For LG, the fact that Toshiba has said it will continue to manufacture computer-based drives keeps the lens in production! And there's no reason they couldn't support their own production line if even that went away. And while most sources put BluRay ahead of HD-DVD in most countries (China and India being exceptions to the norm), HD-DVD is still well engrained at this point. Playing off of the comment above, the VHS vs BetaMax war had an ending. BetaMax died. Production stopped and releases dried up 100%. People claimed an end to the DVD vs VCD war would come, but it never did. They exist side by side with new releases on both formats internationally every week. Similar claims were made about LD, but no end ever came from that "war" either, as LD still has spotty releases as well; 'Though that format could honestly be considered "near" dead, hanging by a thread as there are less than 10 films released on LD world-wide each month, often re-releases and fan-backed presses. The "war" was/is more about the dominant format this time as well. BluRay will probably be the dominant format of these two choices; but by no means does that end the life of HD-DVD. I again am taking issue with the "end" "winner" "looser" type rhetoric. Lostinlodos (talk) 18:10, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

If "this round" is not liked, how about a "solidifying BluRay as the dominant format in the hd battle"? Lostinlodos (talk) 18:10, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Given the number of sources we have which say this format war is over, it would be inappropriate to use our own research to suggest otherwise in the article. —Locke Cole • t • c 19:21, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

HD-DVD installation %s (Number of players sold against BluRay) taken from CEPi 17 Mar 2008 Supplemental and Technology World Weekly (International Version) Vol 2008 Service Month 3 Week 2, respectively: China - Hong Kong) 74% 79% Russia 56% 54% Iran 54% 48% India 52% 47% Korea XX% 45% USA 36% 44% Japan 39% 38% Pakistan 31% XX% Hong Kong 24% 17%Lostinlodos (talk) 17:17, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Again no two sources are saying the same thing as far as what has sold, how much has sold, and where it is sold; but the bottom line is that the format is well embedded already, partly thanks to the X-Box add-on, partially thanks to the Chinese "restriction free" mentality. Just the same way as the most sources point to the largest driving force behind BluRay is the PlayStation 3. Most US independent film companies have pledged to support HD-DVD indefinitely, with many more staying with HD-DVD only, as opposed to going to dual format, primarily because of licensing fees associated with the format. In India and China (the first and third largest film industries), those who have felt the pinch, have gone to making semi-compliant BluRay discs written on BD-R media without the fee-requiring fees, protections, and restrictions (a popular film example being the Chinese original release of Black Scorpion). Maverick, the largest independent group in the USA, has done the same. The adult film industry in the USA (the world's largest in that genre) has refused to make a total switch, and many have refused to put out BluRay at all. HD-DVD is simply not going away. At worst, for the format, it's going to step aside regulated to the secondary market of independent, niche, and genre films much like VCD did. If in the far-off end of this "war" we see a comparative VHS-BetaMax ending (with the superior format dieing there as well) as opposed to the DVD-VCD ending, chances are that the big victory still won't be for the support group as the companies who can't afford the fees still are not going to go to the medium, and chose instead to put out films on writable media, as many smaller companies currently do in the "Big-3" industries already for DVD media, and HD-DVD being regulated (again not totally disappearing) to truly underground scenes the way LD went. To this day while companies such as Sony And Warner put out a new copy protection every few weeks for their DVDs, most smaller companies still do not even CSS/Macrovision protect their DVD releases to save from the licensing fees required. A year from now, how many companies will consider switching back to save money when they realize their spending so much for protection agreements, and not seeing a reward for sticking with the format? A recent news-letter from HD-Today, a daily email eNews magazine that covers the following day's HD releases in 80 countries and the EU, on BluRay and HD-DVD, as well as most of the other secondary formats including HVD, CHD, WM-HD and Java-Disc, 'has said that the death-bell for any of the various formats would be at less-than 20% engrained one year from now'. Java-Disc has already died, though most of the other formats still exist at-least in their originating countries. This war has a long way to go. And there is still the possibility that neither HD-DVD nor BluRay will be the ultimate winner. Lostinlodos (talk) 17:17, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Frankly, I'm a bit surprised that the above discussion is even necessary. I was rooting for HD DVD, but it clearly lost the format war. Even if it lingers in the distant background for a while, it's still the losing format, and nothing can realistically change that at this point. —David Levy 20:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

This discussion has gone nowhere, because those proposing that HD-DVD has a glorious future have provided no reliable references. The argument that HD-DVD is like VCD in Asia is a Straw man argument. Both VCD and Betamax both achieved widespread usage at one time or another. HD-DVD never gained a huge following, and never had profitable success to begin with. To infer that HD-DVD may have a future is misleading the readers of Wikipedia. Those proposing a future for HD-DVD should not post more talk on the subject (or insert it into the article) until multiple reliable news references have been found. I say multiple, because there are hundreds of news articles using the words "dead" and "obsolete" to describe HD-DVD. Even the HD-DVD recordable drives are finished, and Toshiba announced it is stockpiling blank disks, as the supply would otherwise dry up. The HD-DVD format is an obsolete format because it never gained a critical mass to continue, and its market has now collapsed.Lester 20:07, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Considering that Celestial just released 16 VCDs (including some Shaw Brothers films) last week, one could hardly say VCD is dead. Lostinlodos (talk) 02:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Opening paragraph should reflect format's demise

The opening paragraph should reflect the perilous state of the HD DVD format. This information is vitally important, and should be in the first paragraph of the article. At the very least, the first paragraph should say that HD DVD's principal backer, Toshiba, has abandoned the format. At the very least. Or, we should follow what the news media says about HD DVD, such as the New York Times today, which described the format has having "gone belly up", and is now "defunct". Obsolete is a better word. If you had to summarize in 2 sentences what the situation is with HD DVD, that is what the opening paragraph should contain. Lester 01:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Because the format has not gone "belly up". This is not a death, see above, in BetaMax terms, it's a move away from the mainstream in VCD terms. LG has pledged support, both in home multi-format players and in computer burners, indefinitely. Toshiba has pledged to continue to support the computer end of the format as well, though someone keeps removing that note and recent reference to that effect. Taiyo Yuden and Verbatim have pledged to continue to support the writeable format. There are hundreds of studios in India and China (world's largest and third largest film industries). There are dozens of "smaller" independent film studios in the US that will continue to produce films on the format, some exclusively. No matter how much the Sony fans want to run off with the victor's banner, it's just not going to happen, at the least not any time soon. Lostinlodos (talk) 16:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

And don't get me wrong, I'm not pledging my support for HD in my comments here or above, as I'm not really that big of a fan of either preferring the equal quality and far lower cost of HVD personally. Lostinlodos (talk) 16:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lostinlodos. We have been through that discussion before, about the supposed glorious future of HD DVD. You say that Verbatim is going big on HD DVD media, but the reality is that Verbatim is switching its attention to Blu Ray, anticipating the "absence of HD DVD". There is currently a fire sale of HD DVD hardware going on, and there will surely be some stores that would prefer customers believe HD DVD will continue into the future, as they want to sell their obsolete stock. However, Toshiba says supplies of dedicated HD DVD players will dry up by the end of the month. I will make the changes to the opening sentence as stated in my previous post in this section. Regards, Lester 21:37, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Removal of CH-DVD subsection

I have deleted the following subsection from the article, regarding CH-DVD (see diff). The deleted text said:

"While HD DVD has been discontinued, Toshiba has found minimal success in the form of CH-DVD. CH-DVD has been accepted as China's official high definition disc format, and is nearly identical to HD DVD. The largest differences between the two standards are support for more advanced encryption in CH-DVD (to solve China's piracy concerns with the standard), and removal of HD DVD's online functionality."

My reasons for deleting it are:

• I dispute the facts of the text
• It's unreferenced
• CH-DVD is a different standard to HD-DVD, entirely incompatible formats, with different codecs used.
• CH-DVD is not a subset of HD DVD
• It hasn't been established what royalties (if any) Toshiba will gain from CH-DVD.
• How can we say "Toshiba has found minimal success" when CH-DVD hasn't been released yet?
• With the demise of HD DVD, there is a possibility that CH-DVD will not be released.

Maybe a Wikilink to CH-DVD can be added to the 'See also' section, but it definitely does not belong in the main article for HD DVD. Regards, Lester 00:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Re-added the section, with a wording change. I also placed it in a better location under variants. The fact is that it is a variant of HD-DVD, and the CH-DVD players will play HD-DVD discs, and with a firmware update or some related authorized modification, HD-DVD players will play CH-DVD discs. BTW, CH-DVD is NOT a future product, as it's currently being rolled out. It's a just starting project. You're relatively recent to this page, I ask that you please refrain from inserting disputed notions that have been reviewed elsewhere. Let others make the decisions for a moment, or allow them a chance to discuss it further prior to simply reverting and removing et al. In line with good faith policy, simply adding in the links (and moving it) was a better idea than striking it. Lostinlodos (talk) 17:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and removed it again. It already has its own article; any relevant information belongs over there, not here. —Locke Cole • t • c 23:52, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

How about on leaving just a link under variant such as what they did for DVD-R and DVD-RW and CD-R pages? Lostinlodos (talk) 19:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I placed a link under "See also" (I believe) when I removed the sections. I don't believe it is a "variant" in the sense that section gives. —Locke Cole • t • c 19:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Toshiba begs to differ, that alone deserves the subsection since they have dominance in both technologies. If you want to dispute the correlation, then we should note the dispute in the subsection. But simply arguing that the "sense" of them being too close warrants removal is not appropriate. I haven't heard any argument that the subsection was factually incorrect. 24.7.179.226 (talk)

Based upon the CH-DVD article there appears to be no valid reason to include it as a "variant" of HD DVD. I'll say it again: there is a CH-DVD article, if you wish to include more information about it (sourced, verifiable, and presented with a neutral point of view) do it there, not here. —Locke Cole • t • c 08:44, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with user:Locke Cole that CH-DVD information should remain in the CH-DVD article. CH-DVD is a proposed future product that has not been finalized, let alone released to the public. It is original research to say that CH-DVD is part of the HD-DVD specification. As stated before, CH-DVD uses a different encoding method, which is owned by the Chinese government to avoid paying royalties to electronics companies from other countries. They specifically want to avoid using the proprietary codecs from other countries, and are avoiding the codecs from the HD-DVD spec. The two formats may have some similarities, but they are totally incompatible with each other.Lester 11:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

HD DVD-R

I've proposed merging HD DVD-R into this article since it seems highly unlikely there will be much new content for that article with the format now dead. Thoughts? —Locke Cole • t • c 23:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and also proposed HD DVD-RW and HD DVD-RAM also be merged. Since it was a short stub whose information was already available in this article, I redirected HD DVD-ROM to this article. —Locke Cole • t • c 00:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Made sense, have merged them. SynergyBlades (talk) 00:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Agree. Lester 12:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Agree. There's only going to be limited support for the format from now on, so it's probably a good time to merge them. Beyond LGs forthcoming 4x Mega Multi burner, I haven't seen anything big on the market watches for the future.Lostinlodos (talk) 19:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The dual-format drives, such as that LG one (there are also a couple of others), were all designed prior to Toshiba's exit from the format. They are still useful because users can record data with the machines' Blu-ray capability. The supply of media (disks) for HD DVD-R is going to dry up once Toshiba's stockpile runs out. I would support a re-write of the HD DVD-R article's information, to bring it up to date, as it migrates to the HD DVD page. Lester 19:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Factually 'though that statement is POV at the moment. Toshiba was not the only manufacturer involved. And you can not neutrally discuss the format's supply drying up at this point. At this point it's purely speculation. Lostinlodos (talk) 00:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

"World view"

I'll say this as nicely as I can: HD DVD is dead. There is no "world view" that changes that singular fact. CH-DVD is irrelevant (it's not HD DVD, so there's no "world view" concerns regarding China). Whatever Indian studios said they were doing prior to HD DVDs collapse is irrelevant (have they made any announcements stating they intend to continue releasing HD DVDs despite there being no hardware support or replication support? Do you have sources for these statements?). HD DVD is dead worldwide, that's the world view that matters the most as far as I'm concerned. —Locke Cole • t • c 02:29, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Prove support has been dropped, not that it continues

Locke Cole: You can not simply remove the tag without the proper discussion. I need not prove that the support continues. YOU, must prove that the support has been dropped. There is NO major (non-western) print or major on-line source that states that these (non-western) HD DVD only groups have dropped the HD format to go to Blu Ray. Common sense dictates that once something has received support, that it continues until further notice. Not in India, not in Iran, not in South Korea, Russia; none have stated they were scrapping their support for HD DVD. And despite your statements against it (and for Blu Ray), CH-DVD IS and will forever be a form of HD-DVD. No different than SVCD IS and will forever be a form of VCD, also equally wholly compatible with the VCD format. I was not the one who posted the CH-DVD references here or on the CH-DVD page. But I did read through the listings, and they have also been independently verified by an Admin. The format is real, it is now starting to become available, and it is a very-slight modification of the HD DVD format. That gives the country with the world's largest population (and second or third largest film industry DOS), a direct hand in the continued use of the HD DVD format; both as CH-DVD and as HD DVD. You, nor any western group, can not simply wish away something. And stating that a group has dropped support, implicitly or implied by lack of context, is factually FALSE, and still violates NPOV. Until these major film industries state that they are dropping support for HD DVD, the fact is that they have not dropped support. Lostinlodos (talk) 02:42, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

That is NOT the way Wikipedia works. I invite you to read Verifiability and No original research. There is no current news or information that says studios are still supporting HD DVD beyond what we already have (Warner supporting it through the end of May, and one other minor studio supporting it in to August with a single title). If you have sources stating that other studios (international) have recently announced continued support, by all means, add it. But until that time, claiming the article doesn't represent a "world view" is original research on your part that is unverifiable (where are the sources supporting your claims?). As for CH-DVD, I invite you to argue at that article, not here on the HD DVD article (where such matters are irrelevant!).

Again, please find sources supporting your claims that international studios are still supporting HD DVD or please stop insisting the article doesn't provide a world view. Your imagination is not a valid source for this article. —Locke Cole • t • c 03:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I support user:Locke Cole reverting the article to remove the 'non-world viewpoint' tags and other information that was unreferenced. HD-DVD is dead, as the references say. It's an unusual argument to say that HD-DVD may possibly be revived again. It won't. The proposed Chinese disk format, CH-DVD, has some similarities with HD-DVD in that the plastic of the discs will be a similar size and make-up, however the compression codecs of the two formats are completely different, making them incompatible. A CH-DVD disk will not play in a HD-DVD player, so to say they are the same format is incorrect. For example, I can record a Quicktime movie onto a CD-ROM, but that doesn't make it the same format as VCD, even though the disks are similar, the formats are incompatible. CH-DVD is incompatible with HD-DVD. Besides, CH-DVD has not been released yet, and may never be. Let's stop edit warring over this information.Lester 04:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I support Locke Cole. US Announcement: [10], non-US/UK announcement [11]. I don't add anything unsourced to the article (i.e. situation in South-East Asia) and neither should you. Prove that those Indian distributor support HD DVD before adding it (BTW, if you did some research, then why aren't you posting the link here?). Argue about CH-DVD in its own article. Enough said. I'm outta here. w_tanoto (talk) 09:51, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Agree with all of the above. SynergyBlades (talk) 12:55, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

HD DVD:

Short cuts from the policy located at wikiprogect_countering_systemic_bias "The Wikipedia project suffers systemic bias that naturally grows from its contributors' demographic groups, manifesting as imbalanced coverage of a subject." "...this project concentrates upon remedying omissions (entire topics, or particular sub-topics in extant articles) rather than on either (1) protesting inappropriate inclusions, or (2) trying to remedy issues of how material is presented." "Once identified, the bias is noticeable throughout Wikipedia...(2) perspective bias (notably geographic) in articles on universal subjects."Lostinlodos (talk) 13:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Such obvious bias is unmissable in this article in it's reference to Hollywood, and the general western misunderstanding of Hollywood's supposed (current political) influence in other parts of the world. Hollywood's decisions to, or not to, do something, et to, accept or disregard a specific technology has no bearing on the rest of the world. Nay, despite the vast coverage in western media, Toshiba is not the only manufacture of HD DVD products, INCLUDING the lenses. Beyond that, Toshiba is one of multiple companies producing, albeit with a different title and internal service and parts numbers, the identical lens for CH DVD guaranteeing a vast supply of the lens for HD DVD players for companies such as LG and Video_International_Products for the Western consumers' HD DVD players, with both those two consumer level companies stating their continued support in/to various trade magazines, including CEPro, CustomTec, and Power MPC. Beyond that, major manufactures (and their suppliers) have stated in the aforementioned publications and others that they will continue to supply players/readers for the third-tier (custom design) market until (varyingly) not earlier than 2010 and 2012 ; such companies including Niveus, Arcam (via Audiophile), Media 1, and Wallis Computing (supplying LG HD DVD drives in Media Server units). Beyond that, the CH DVD has been not only finalized (and as previously stated by myself and others, fully compatible with HD DVD, and cross-compatible CH-DVD -> HD DVD with the same update system available, but not utilized, on current HD DVD media of updating internal firmware from the disc. The same method of updating has been (rumoured?) to be used to crack the locks and blocks on current HD DVD players) but the first two releases were made available along with three (previously unknown) newly-branded CH-DVD players, on 23, April. The two first films being a fully cleaned and restored version of WU DI XIAO ZI HUO YUAN JAI and a remade version of Zu Warriors 3 (Zu Warriors On Magic Mountain/From Five Elements Mountain), Zu Dan Chai. Celestial, currently the largest single distributor and production broadcast company for South East and East Asia, had previously stated on their primary (Chinese) web site that up to 25% of the currently released (and all future releases) of their film back-library will be made available on fully cross-compatible HD DVD/CH-DVD by the end of 2008. They have also, not rescinded or altered their original statement of intention to not utilize the Blu Ray format; a serious blow for Blu Ray adoption across Asia (- Japan) as their (Celestial) releasing clout are the Asian equivalent of the whole of Hollywood. Beyond that, the Russian distributor OU, which releases the bulk of Western and European films in ultra-localized versions across Eastern Europe and Northern Asia, and to a lesser extent the USA, has stated in World Film (April/May 2008), an Indian trade publication, that while the Western "failure" of HD DVD has lead them to drop future releases on the format, they will not switch to Blu Ray; noting licensing fees for releasing on the format and strict agreements they were not willing to adhere to; rather choosing to return to the stronghold formats of DVD and VCD, which they have been releasing on for close to a decade. Lostinlodos (talk) 13:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Simply put, while in the regional pov of North America and Far-Western Europe, there was a single format war between HD DVD and Blu Ray, with Blu Ray being the "winner" in the relevant territories; the World View shows a very different scene. There is currently a large, continuing format war for HD content released for "home viewing", with the battle between HD DVD/CH-DVD and Blu Ray not yet finished, or even in some countries (such as India), with HD DVD being the winner. Along side of that there are other (less know in the West) formats that are equally fighting for market share, not the least of which is HVD. There are also formats still in R&D or initial phases of consumer testing including HoloDisc (Holographic, formerly also used the HVD acronym), PCD (protein coated disc), 3D-VD, (an American technology for 3D HR TV video that also uses 3D recording), and many dozens more. And beyond all other statements, DVD still has a strong international presence outselling all the various HD and HR formats. And as mentioned in an above topic, and topics on related talk pages, VCD still has a very strong and current presence in South America, Western Europe, Asia, and Africa. In whole, this article is totally biased in the Western point of view. My view for the article would be to regionalize out the entire article by geographical subsections; representing how each locale has had different results with the format. As per policy, rather than just ripping away the tags, we need to further discussion, and after some time given to that, possibly an up-or-down vote to figure out how to deal with the regional bias issue. Lostinlodos (talk) 13:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Point to a single article (from a local ie non-western-biased) site or newspaper or magazine that states that formerly and currently HD dominant industries, that being most notably India (the worlds largest film industry), China, Russia, and Iran, have stated they will switch to Blu Ray. The reason you are putting the burden of proof on myself is because there is no information re-stating what those regions of the world accept at face value. There is no announcement of continued support for the majority of the large non-Western film industries because the largest of the non-Western film industries have primarily backed HD DVD all along. Blu Ray has comparatively little prescience to begin with in those countries, so the collapse of HD DVD support in the United States and the United Kingdom, and to an extent Japan, has no effect; as things will go on 'business as usual' there, with releases on DVD and HD DVD. I have consistently pointed to the same countries, and the same links and mirrors are repeatedly given in response. As per most of Wikipedia's approach to long-standing content and/or information; when no evidence to counter the facts in evidence exist, one should stay with what is widely the pre-existing situation. A statement by a few companies elsewhere that has no effect regionally does not require a statement that "what is and has been will continue to be". Claiming that just because the US and the UK's major studios have dropped the format does not in itself mean every other country in the world will also drop the format. Nor does the US/UK dropping the format require releasers in HD-DVD dominant countries to immediately release statements that they will continue to support the primary and in many cases only HD format they were releasing on. Asking for such links proves regional bias. "We changed so you need to say you didn't". Lostinlodos (talk) 13:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

This seems like a relevant source: [12] which would indicate HD DVD support isn't there for Bollywood which is part of, as you indicated, the world's largest film industry. SynergyBlades (talk) 13:37, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Sources please

Lengthy responses mean little or nothing unless and until you provide sources to back up your claims. Sources please? —Locke Cole • t • c 13:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Here is a source, but I am afraid it's completely opposite. Mumbai, 7 March 2008. [13]

Quote: The good news in India is that no film has really been created and sold in the High Definition format, at least that I know of. So, we have the advantage of starting from scratch, so to speak. The problem on the horizon is something else.
If you have another source, please tell. --w_tanoto (talk) 13:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed

My three points, addressing your three points:

• A lot of interesting information, but none of it sourced, and this would be considered original research in the article. Feel free to find some references so we can put something together for the article.
• You seem to be using CH DVD/HD DVD interchangeably. Any arguments for CH DVD vs. Blu-Ray should go in the CH DVD article. The other formats you mention are also not suitable for the HD DVD article and should go in their respective articles.
• We still need more sources for your assertion that these companies have "backed HD DVD all along". Less talking, more sources, otherwise it's simply original research, unlike the article as it is, which is very well referenced. SynergyBlades (talk) 13:32, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Request_for_Third_Party

I will for the time being, until I can find a direct link other than a shopping link, based on the link posted, withdraw my use of India (who's industry has releases on non-western HD-DVD (coded for the inclusion of India), but not non-western Blu Ray discs. I have requested a third neutral opinion to come in as this has been a debate between the same group of editors. The opined statement at hand, does the lack of "continuation" or "non-withdrawal" statements from countries' industries in and solely of itself (in lacking) specifically translate to the "band-wagon" approach, that by not stating that they will continue to support the format conclude that they will not. In simple terms, no link to an ONLINE source states that there will be future releases so there will not be future releases? My argument being, that the only links posted by other related editors have all linked to the same pages (of western countries or country-based groups that I have freely admitted will not continue to carry on), or mirrors/rewording of those pages have simply pointed out that the widely-known western withdrawal is taking place, and no reference (aside from India, which I dispute but can not at the time support with a link) has pointed out that countries I have stated have joined in the withdrawal of support. My view of policy and standards; that until the top 5 regional film groups; and the two single largest supporters, have released respective reliable industry-based (that being from a movie studio/distributor themselves, not from an opinion such as ZD of Microsoft Tech) press/media announcements, and those links are verified here, that the "death" "end" "failure" "downfall "decline" and related statements in regard to both the format, and the Western perception of the two single-competitors in a larger international multi-format format war, be held off. I argue that equating a lack of statement of support from countries already utilized the HD DVD format to an actual ..., rather than a regionalized POV on how one, or a group of editors feel the industry or related works, is itself POV, and both a violation of NPOV, and representation of regional bias. Those being at the very least for compromise, China using both HD DVD and CH-DVD (who's CH-DVD format, despite the stated editors lack of understanding of the format {and its limited relevance here} is fully cross-compatible with HD DVD) along with HVD), Korea, Russia, Iran; who's industries are comparatively huge, and regionally dominating. I cede that the US has withdrawn from HD-DVD in terms of Hollywood, but no statements of discontinuation of support has been posted from the non-Hollywood and that a side matter could show that even the US has not fully withdrawn from the HD DVD format. Nor is there any statement from international adult film industries posted here or in the article itself. Germany and England having two of the three largest AFI have as recently as this current week (27-3 Ap/May 2008) released films on HD DVD. No source to online or print statement has been posted stating a termination of support from those large industries either. Nor has any such pulling of support notice been posted in either Adult Film Magazine (the largest international English print AFI magazine) or Adult Video News (AVN), the largest American AFI magazine. My concluding statement simply: there is no evidence that the pulling of support by some related American and Japanese industries is in any way shaping the remainder of the world's industries.Lostinlodos (talk) 14:24, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Crikey - ever heard of paragraphs? I just can't be bothered to read all that text. Bazonka (talk) 17:04, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

There's four people who disagree with you on this: we're past the point of needing a third opinion, you're simply being unreasonable now. —Locke Cole • t • c 17:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Wow. I just read it. My take: For the past month or so, user:Lostinlodos has repeatedly tried to insert material into the article that suggests HD-DVD has a glorious future. User:Lostinlodos is entitled to that opinion, but without reliable references, those opinions get deleted from the article, as per Wikipedia guidelines. A Google search of news coverage shows articles describing the "demise" of HD DVD, often using the word "dead" to describe the format. If user:Lostinlodos wants to claim otherwise, then references must be produced. Even this discussion is pointless unless reliable references are presented. Regards, Lester 21:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

There is very little in the article about the supposed "non-western" support for HD DVD. You will at least need some references that show non-western support in the first place so that your argument about continued support can begin to hold water. Once you have these, you will still - despite your protestations - need some sort of references on your part detailing that support continues. This is because the major references and sources in the article have - whether you like it or not - declared the entire format dead. You will need verifiable sources to say otherwise before your arguments will have any sway here. SynergyBlades (talk) 21:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion: Admittedly, giving a third opinion is excessive since there's at least five active editors here. But here's the take from an outsider: find some sources to back up your view. You're right, there may not be any online sources, and we have to WP:AGF if you're going to cite something from a magazine or something. But in this case, I'm pretty sure that HD-DVD is dead, given that the company that created it has abandoned the project. CH DVD is a separate issue and can be dealt with on its own page. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

External links

Can someone explain how those links are valid? Per WP:LINKSTOAVOID #10, "Links to... chat or discussion forums/groups" are not valid, and www.dvdforum.org is a forum. The other link, www.emedialive.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=11629, is just an FAQ and makes no claims of verifiability. The links aren't even formed correctly. Both links violate WP:EL. If you like, we can take this issue to WP:3O. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 21:35, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The link to the "authoritative" (according to whom?) HD DVD FAQ is indeed link spam. However, the dvdforum link IS not link spam and is somewhat relevant in this article. Contrary to the implication of being called the DVD Forum, it's not an actual internet forum in the traditional sense: instead the DVD Forum is the standards body behind both the DVD standard as well as the now defunct HD DVD standard. Thinking about it though, I don't think we even need a link to the DVD Forum except for an article link under See also (if one isn't already there). I'm sure that article has a link to their web page. —Locke Cole • t • c 00:47, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, that's fine. A See also for DVD Forum is okay by me. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 02:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Quote: chat or discussion forums/groups" are not valid. I've always stood by this. What if today an apple fell and hit Newton on the head and he posted on a news group that he was hit on the head and discovered gravity. That would not be valid!? But if someone reading the news group worked for a newspaper or TV show, and called him, and did an interview; and he repeated his exact same statements for the news or TV interview, that interview would be valid!? I know I'm being extreme in that theory, but it makes sense in the concept of new or newer (espicially electronic and scientific) technology. Really, discussions forums are quite valid. The fact that we are discussing this right now proves that there is some measure of value to them. Wikipedia also has the policy that if beneficial to the article or the reader of the article, rules should be ignored! Lostinlodos (talk) 19:48, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

If you've got a problem with that rule, then go take it up at WT:EL. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 19:55, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't saying it was a permanent fix, but it makes a useful stop:gap until the "general" "respected" or "insert term here" media get around to covering something. OR, as in this case, until we, the wiki users can dig through such posted references to find the source links that they used, and back track from there. A temporary reference that is non-compliant is more helpful to the reader than no reference. Lostinlodos (talk) 20:18, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Take a read of Wikipedia:Reliable sources. We have to stick by the rules. Wikipedia is not a news site, in that it doesn't need to be the first with information. So if information appears only on a forum, then it is not worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. You have to wait until that information is picked up by other organizations. --Lester 21:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Use of "defunct", past tense, etc.

Okay, look. The use of "defunct" is inappropriate, as is changing "HD DVD is" to "was" and that sort of thing. Other similar articles like Betamax don't do that, and neither should this page. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 04:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree, it will always be a format because there will always be equipment and discs - even if only as collector's items. Hence was is not really appropriate. Defunct could really do with a couple of references if you're going to insist on calling it that, but I think the fact that it's no longer in use is adequately explained in the intro to the article. ^Synergy/_{Blades (Talk)} 15:58, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. The format has ceased development, hence, it is a defunct format. Use of past tense is not inappropriate. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 15:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

But you wouldn't disagree that it is, and will always be, an actual format, regardless of whether it is no longer produced or not? Then you'll see that changing "is" to "was" in the opening sentence would actually be incorrect, because that would be saying that the HD DVD (for some reason) no longer actually stores data. The format does still store data and high-definition video, so that stays as "is". If anything were to be changed to "was", it would be the fact that film distributors used to store their films in the format, and that the discs on which the format is based used to be distributed. We can then expand on why it is no longer in use, using past tense as appropriate. ^Synergy/_{Blades (Talk)} 16:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree "defunct" here is unnecessary and inconsistent with other articles (eg Betamax, VCD, SVCD, even Capacitance Electronic Disc though the latter does use past tense.) The term "defunct" was added as an attempt to placate those who kept changing the tense of the article from "is" to "was" - but that "compromise" ignored the fact those doing so were actually fairly blatantly trolling.

It's also worth noting that Channel 4 still intends to distribute two more movies in the format, Trainspotting and Shallow Grave. LG still makes and sells the BH200 and BH100 combination HD DVD/Blu-ray players according to their website. There's obviously not going to be some big come-back for the format, but it's incorrect to suggest it's defunct. If people are still releasing the odd disk in the format, and people are still making players, then it's not defunct. Niche, yes. Dying, perhaps. Defunct, no, not really. --208.152.231.254 (talk) 18:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Enough people have inserted "defunct", IMO, that it seems to have a de facto consensus. I do agree that using "was" is inappropriate, mostly because we don't use that sort of language in other articles. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:21, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but enough people have taken it away as well - there's clearly no consensus either way, which is why it really needs discussion first. ^Synergy/_{Blades (Talk)} 01:23, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Disclosure; most (here) know I a more than a fan of the format. However, along with the Channel 4 comment (which I don't know anything of), BBC has items listed as forthcoming, on both BBC World and Amazon.de and Joyo.co.cn on the "HD-DVD" format. Celestial has stated, and restated in their e-mail newsletters that the films that were upgraded to HD format for release will still be released on the originally reported schedule on "on HD-DVD, CH-DVD, BluRay"; as of 2 August. Though I side with HelloAnnyong/SynergyBlades on the consistency issue with other formats. Even if it WAS agreed upon to use the terms, which the changes state clearly there was not, it is still to early. There are still releases pending, and have been a few dozen releases since April, in the US alone, and more in China and Korea. Mazda USA still offers some new (2008) models with the choice of an HD-DVD video disc over DVD, VHS, and Blu-Ray, for the instruction/demo video, if requested. Lostinlodos (talk) 19:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Lead section

I would direct everyones attention here:

The lead section, lead, or introduction of a Wikipedia article is the section before the first heading. The lead serves both as an introduction to the article below and as a short, independent summary of the important aspects of the article's topic.

— Lead section (Wikipedia Style Guideline) (emphasis mine)

Quite simply, this is an important aspect of the articles topic. The format is no longer supported by the consumer electronic industry at large, and various hardware manufacturers have pulled their product from the shelves. Further, we have sources that proclaim the format as "dead", and while I'd never use that kind of language in the lead for an article (it smacks of point-of-view pushing), I do believe "defunct" is reasonable in this instance as it's both accurate and sourced. —Locke Cole • t • c 23:45, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I do see your point. Playing devil's advocate here - as has been noted above, we don't use defunct for Laserdisc or Betamax, so wouldn't using "defunct" be recentism against HD DVD in the sense that neither of the past formats have this use so prominently at the start of their introductions? ^Synergy/_{Blades (Talk)} 01:02, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Then that's something that should be considered for those articles. LaserDisc though, in particular, was never really unsuccessful. It was more of a high-end videophile item, but it was never abandoned outright due to competition from another format (just a successor format: DVD). I would agree that Betamax would likely be considered "defunct". —Locke Cole • t • c 04:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd question whether going from mainstream to minority format qualifies as defunct. The sources declaring it "dead" are, objectively, wrong. It's limping along, it stands no chance of becoming a mainstream format, but while there are publishers putting out disks and hardware manufacturers making players, it's a niche format, not a "defunct" or "dead" one. As SynergyBlades says, we don't have these tags for Betamax or Laserdisc. The only reason this is even being discussed is because of a particularly vicious war between HD DVD and Blu-ray, one in which people, for reasons that make little sense to be, became absurdly partisan on the subject and with advocates for the format whose major backers didn't withdraw (yet) basically trolling the HD DVD users. Leave it be, it's present tense and it's not defunct. --66.149.58.8 (talk) 02:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Whether the sources are wrong or not isn't relevant: see No original research. We base our articles on the published data available, and our data says (without any doubt or hesitation) that HD DVD is dead. Not that it's defunct, or some other touchy-feely adjective, but "dead". Now in the interests of being encyclopedic I think "defunct" is a better choice of words. I also think "was" is inappropriate as the format and discs in that format still exist and will reasonably exist for years if not decades to come. This doesn't change the fact that the format is "defunct" according to our sources. —Locke Cole • t • c 04:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree with user:Locke Cole's reasoning for changing the status. I think "obsolete" is a better word than "defunct" (less colloquial). I have seen countless tech magazines that use the word "dead". HD DVD is obsolete, because it never attained the critical mass of users that Betamax and Laserdisc attained. With Betamax and Laserdisc you could still purchase both media and new players post year 2000 - more than 20 years after the formats began. This is never going to happen with HD DVD.--Lester 04:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I think I could get behind the use of "obsolete." — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 04:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Obsolete would work for me as well. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

If it has to be anything in the first sentence, which I'm still unsure about, then yes, obsolete is better than defunct. I would suggest you also add it to Betamax, since you have indicated that that article needs it as well (recentism or double standards would be a bad thing with it only being in the HD DVD article). SynergyBlades (talk) 02:41, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Along both 66.149.58.8, Lester, and HA, Obsolete is "supportable"; however wouldn't "no longer supported by primary..." or "secondary" be better fitting?Lostinlodos (talk) 01:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I've changed the word to obsolete, as per above. The "No Original Research" reasoning behind "defunct" is wrong for a variety of reasons. First, the format is generally described as "dead" by its detractors, the word "defunct" seems to be limited to Wikipedia. More importantly though is that any link that shows an HD DVD release is pending or an HD DVD player is still being made clearly has more weight than a blog or news article referring to it as "Defunct". The latter are secondary sources, the announcements by Channel 4, LG, etc, are primary. I shouldn't need to point out that primary sources outweigh secondary sources. I'm comfortable with "Obsolete", it implies a deprecated format, not a one that's unsupported. --208.152.231.254 (talk) 13:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Actually, in so far as primary vs. secondary sources goes, you're wrong. We prefer secondary sources here, not primary sources. See WP:PRIMARY:

Wikipedia articles should rely on reliable, published secondary sources. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.

— WP:PRIMARY (emphasis mine)

At any rate, we seem to have reached an agreement on this. Glad we got it sorted. =) —Locke Cole • t • c 01:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Lostinlodos decided to change it again, but I'm fairly sure we reached a consensus on this. Please discuss your change before implementing it. SynergyBlades (talk) 17:12, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Changed Opening

I believe that's about the most neutral way we're going to get it, not stating that it is totally dead (like LD, still having films coming out, Star Wars III, HP OOTP), but has become a niche, or secondary format with no mainstream support in most countries. Lostinlodos (talk) 17:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's what obsolete means, really. Nobody stated it was "totally dead". SynergyBlades (talk) 17:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Also note Locke Cole's argument above re: LaserDisc and obsolescence: LaserDisc though, in particular, was never really unsuccessful. It was more of a high-end videophile item, but it was never abandoned outright due to competition from another format (just a successor format: DVD). SynergyBlades (talk) 17:20, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

RE: "Consensus was reached via talk page, please check and reply there. It's quite obvious that people did not reach a consensus, as it keeps changing still....
Here is the exact way I re-wrote it.

HD DVD or High-Definition/Density Digital Versatile Disc is a principally abandoned high-density optical disc format for storing data and high-definition video.[1] HD DVD was designed principally by Toshiba, and was envisaged to be the successor to the standard DVD format. However, in February 2008, Toshiba abandoned the format, announcing it would no longer develop or manufacture HD DVD players or drives, with most major manufactures and film distributors following shortly there-after. [1].
Does that work for everyone who does not like the current one?Lostinlodos (talk) 22:27, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, consensus was reached by those involved in the discussion. Those editing it back out again are anons/IPs that haven't read the discussion here, so we revert to what was reached in the original consensus. SynergyBlades (talk) 22:39, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that the word "obsolete" is appropriate. The word just means it is now been generally replaced with something else. It doesn't mean the format was bad, and it doesn't even mean the format is disused. "Principally abandoned" says the same thing, but less elegantly and less accurately. Some great things that were once ahead of their time are now obsolete, in that people are mostly now using something else. From now on, people will generally be using other formats. That's what obsolete means.--Lester 23:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I just figured that principally abandoned states well enough that some companies are still intent to release on the format, to end the constant edits and reverts, without the possible negative understanding some appear to get with "obsolete". Scroll up; I "went along" with obsolete too, but it's clear that not everyone does. Like all collectives, the only way to stop reverts and changes is to find what works. OB does not; and a quick glance over at this, http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/obsolete, shows why. Lostinlodos (talk) 02:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Just a thought - would the word discontinued be more accurate? Have a look at this: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/discontinuedJason270773 (talk) 19:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Again, our sources say "dead" (they also use discontinued, but I don't think that gives quite the same meaning as "obsolete" or "dead"; for example, even successful formats/things are "discontinued", while this technology was clearly unsuccessful in the marketplace). —Locke Cole • t • c 21:29, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I acknowledge that, compared to the rival format Blu ray Disc, it was not as succesful, but there are still many users of HD DVD worldwide and there are still HD DVDs available to buy. The word obsolete doesn't imply that the format was unpopular, or at least not as popular as it could have been. I think the word 'dead' is too emotive and possibly not encyclopedic. I think that 'discontinued' accurately captures the reality - that the format exists, is in use, but is no longer produced or developed by the principle manufacturer.Jason270773 (talk) 17:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Discontinued I can fully get behind! The format is not dead (BETA is dead, VCD/LD/HD-DVD are not), nor is it "truly" "obsolete" as it was not replaced by a successor, rather pushed aside by the sister format by the (vast) majority (VHS is "obsolete", VCD was pushed aside by DVD). Again, HD vs BD is not BETA vs VHS, not even remotely, nor is LD a good example. HD vs BD is/was DVD vs VCD. VCDs to this day are still being made/released, in very small quantities for specific users (fans/loyalists/[insert term here], for niche films. Infact, HD-DVD's life to this point is proving to be almost exactly parallel to VCD.
Though with "discontinued" I still would like to see the modifier principally or primarily to define the situation, and the same term applied in both the VCD and LD articles. Lostinlodos (talk) 13:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Discontinued

I have changed the first part of the article from obsolete to discontinued. Toshiba doesn't manufacture new HDDVD players but you can still find the HDDVD players in stores, so I think that it's more appropriate.Juancdg (talk) 02:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Please, let's not reopen this can of worms. Somehow we've managed to get by with the wording as-is, so if you want to change it, I suggest discussing it here. I've reverted you in the meantime, as the consensus was pretty clear on "obsolete" (while it's non-existent for "discontinued"). —Locke Cole • t • c 03:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, but what about removing the "obsolete" word and leaving as is. In the second sentence explains that this is now a defunct format. Many other articles about video and audio formats that aren't in use practically, describe their function as "is".Juancdg (talk) 15:17, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how the second sentence does that. "Obsolete" was a compromise for "dead" (which many of our sources say); removing it wouldn't really work either as it would make the article inaccurate. —Locke Cole • t • c 00:16, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Think of obsolete like a Model-T Ford. Fascinating machine. Worth a lot of money now, if you have one. They still exist, as there are still a few around. But it's obsolete, which means that other things have generally replaced it.--Lester 03:05, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

This is just my opinion. Firstly, I am a die-hard blu-ray supporter (beginning by my support for walt disney and playstation console). I understand that every format eventually got "discontinued", but I think "obsolete" is not the right word for this article. I own HD DVD drive (which comes with my laptop - which I replaced it immediately with BD drive I get from ebay), and 5 HD DVD discs, but they don't become obsolete (read: can't be played anymore), do they? Dead is also not the right word for the article. I think discontinued is still the best word, but I'll go with the majority. w_tanoto (talk) 17:06, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Obsolete doesn't mean it stops working. Obsolete simply means it's not supported/produced/developed. 8-track tapes are obsolete but you can still find them and play them just fine. —Locke Cole • t • c 18:05, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Discontinued and Obsolescence

Since any other article remarks the word "obsolete" such as a Betamax, VHS or even the old telegraph, I removed it; only this one has this word that causes the war of editions.Juancdg (talk) 22:03, 20 November 2008 (UTC)