Chiming in on HD-DVD v. Blu Ray. The "format wars" won't be "won" by the actions of anyone who really cares.

At the root, the only ones who care if there is actually an HD-DVD versus Blu Ray format war are those who've taken sides already and are really worried that they've made the wrong choice--or worse, feel the need to make others see that the choice they made for themselves is The Right Choice for everyone else. This is the bane of the early adopter. So in the first few months I can see their angst. Because an overwhelming tide (I'm thinking MS-DOS versus CP/M) will just crush the opposition and early capitulation before large capital investment is a likely reality.

But we're past that point in history now. The war, if you can characterize it as such, would have to be of type trench. As in "down in the trenches" or "an entrenched position". They're both in for the long fight. Both sides claim better numbers, in actual and in trends than the other. More units, by geo, in title sales, in number of committed studios providing content, by user rentals, etc., etc. To cut to the chase here, I strongly believe that both formats will be here for a while.
More about what "a while" is, below. But lets dig into the arguments in this "war". A little battlefield analysis, if you will.

Posts on Cnet Reviews makes me wonder if the Blockbuster Blu-Ray rental numbers are because people had PS3 w/players and realized, "Hey! I can play a movie on this, let's go rent one." Versus a person who buys a standalone player with the idea they'll be building a library. For Blockbuster it doesn't matter, they just need to stay on the trends and offer the right rentals for their customers, but for those who are trying to look into their crystal balls and figure out the future of Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, it does matter how PS/3s are counted. Which is to say, as long as (or if ever) game console owners buy a significant % of movies as standalone player buyers, then the whole "which is better" discussion for Xbox360 v. PS3, has to be a part of this one. I suppose what may eventually drive which standalone HD disk player I buy will be what game player I buy. If there's a game on the PS3 or on XBox360 I REALLY want to play (GT-5 or Halo-3?) I might pick up that console--and it doesn't make sense to get it without the highly-subsized HD disk player. But then, after having it, possesion will be a great reason to buy the other format in a standalone player! So PS3 sales might drive HD-DVD player sales! What a crazy world.

Another tack in the battlefield is to focus on the formats and relative merits of each. There's the size argument. Blu-Ray holds more--but riposte: HD-DVD 2 or 4-layer can hold more or both DVD and an HD version on the same disk. As for me, size doesn't matter (no jokes, please). I don't look at a movie title and see how much free space is left-over on the disk. The movie producers aren't going to edit their films for the theater with disk space in mind. And Lucas and Scorcese might care if their 7.1 had to be thunked down to mere 5.1, but few consumers will. What percentage of DVDs still play out of two speakers? VHS has had to deal with limited length, as does DVD, as will any capacity media. Pournelle's rule: Content grows to exceed capacity. Corners will be cut, compromises will be made, few will notice. Do I care if an HD disk also has DVD on it? Maybe, if my old DVD player will play that disk and I haven't bought an HD-DVD player yet, and there's some other compelling reason to get the HD version given that I don't have the player yet.

I do agree with some arguments made about 2nd disks and extra content. I agree in that they are valid observations: HD-DVDs will probably have to (for a while) bundle a second piece of media for extra features to not skimp on the sound and encoding possibilities for the main feature. But I disagree that that is a liability in the war. Already in the current DVD titles there are single disk movie-only versions and multi-disk special editions for a few $ more. Some of this has to do with Wal-Tar-Cost-mart wanting to keep that $15.99 price point. Some of it has to do with Blockbuster and Netflix shipping one disk or two. At some point in the future this won't be an issue, but I'll return to that later.

Quality is an issue to many early adopters, those who believe their purchases and opinions might sway the tide, but we're just climbing to the middle of the adoption curve and they and the long tail that follows is who the market will pay attention to. Look at DVD Superbit sales or other high-quality encodings. They don't outsell the other versions. I guess I'd pick the high quality version of a DVD if it were near the same price, but I wouldn't pay a lot more for the difference, because generally I don't notice the difference! You have to watch these versions side-by-side or look at screen captures to notice the differences. Ditto 5.1 v. 7.1 Dolby Tru-Dolby or 1.3HDMI SuperDooperDoolby-THX-whatever.

Perhaps a better comparison would be between Pan-Scan and widescreen editions (when on separate disks). Both are available at the same price. The choice by the discriminating consumer is always for the "higher quality" widescreen (fidelity to the original). But I bet many fullscreen titles still outsell widescreen because of perceived value. Parents want Bambi to fill the screen, and don't care about the director's vision for framing. Nor the audio quality, for that matter (portable, or in-car DVD players, anyone?). Early adopters of HD players will cringe, but they've already demonstrated their interest in the higher quality format, so they're not representative of The Great Unwashed Indiscriminate Viewer. A super-size fast food meal doesn't sell because it is better, after all.

Consider the generally mediocre quality of digital music. The biggest seller (via iTunes) isn't the best quality. Mediocre digital music sells because of price and availability, irrespective of the rants of cognescenti who'd only listen to a ripped CD if it was in lossless .wav format (only to be trumped by vinyl-draggers and tube amplifier snobs).

So if, and I think we can all agree on this, volume will ultimately be the self-reinforcing feedback in the market, then it won't be number of disks or features or two more channels of sound or lossless versus lossy. It will come down to price and availability. Availability of the players, and Cost-Wal-Tar-co are going to have a lot to do with that. And availability of the titles. So far, I'm seeing that the titles I would replace in my DVD collection are on HD-DVD, but that's just my past tastes showing. Of the new titles coming out, it is a pretty even split, and that's too bad for me. Because after all, all said and done, its really about the movies you want to watch and having something to watch them on.

My gut is that neither of these formats is going to go away. Seems to be plenty of room for three game consoles. Seems to be plenty of room for iMacs and PCs to be in the market. Cell phone technologies, iTunes and MP3s. The world is big enough and there are enough consumers now that it doesn't have to boil down to one standard. One may grow to be bigger (due to price and availability, not specifications), but the other will still be around. Uh, unless Sony quits altogether, that is. Hmmm... where would we be if they had just stuck it out on the Betamax thing?

And to further put the idea that the format "wars" are going to result in a winner, consider what happens if both get supplanted? Does anyone really think that either of these formats will last a "long time"? Certainly not as long as DVD, nor even VHS. Because we all know that network capacity is growing and magnetic disk prices are falling much faster than the optical disk formats can change. Sony and MS both know this. As does Comcast and AT&T. Media questions will drop out of the picture in a few years and then we really can have a debate about encoding and compression and quality as effect delivery times. Watch it realtime, starting Right Now, in LowDef, or let it start streaming to store and your cell phone will ring when you can start watching it. Or you can call your microwave back and tell it to go ahead and start the popcorn.

So the prescription is to buy one or the other for The Now, or at some price, to get some specific content, or features, or quality, or fewer disks, or whatever floats your boat, and enjoy! Because just like my 8-track player, and my VHS deck, and my SNES, they'll all be relegated to the recycler (or to the grandkids room) well before their usefulness has run out to make room for The Next Big Deal.

How many online forum group members does it take to change a lightbulb?

Compliments of joke-of-the-day.com :

How many online forum group members does it take to change a lightbulb?

1 to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been changed.

14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb could have been changed differently.

7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs.

27 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs.

53 to flame the spell checkers.

41 to correct spelling/grammar flames.

6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb"...another 6 to condemn those 6 as anal-retentive

2 industry professionals to inform the group that the proper term is "lamp".

15 know-it-alls who claim *they* were in the industry, and that "light bulb" is perfectly correct.

156 to email the participant's ISPs complaining that they are in violation of their "acceptable use policy".

109 to post that this group is not about light bulbs and to please take this discussion to a lightbulb group

203 to demand that cross posting to hardware forum, off-topic forum, and lightbulb group about changing light bulbs be stopped.

111 to defend the posting to this group saying that we all use light bulbs and therefore the posts *are* relevant to this group.

306 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique, and what brands are faulty.

27 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs.

14 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the corrected URL's.

3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group.

33 to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including all headers and signatures, and add "Me too".

12 to post to the group that they will no longer post because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy.

19 to quote the "Me too's" to say "Me three".

4 to suggest that posters request the light bulb FAQ.

44 to ask what is a "FAQ".

4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"

143 to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions about light bulbs".

1 forum lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now and start it all over again....

Bluetooth Stereo Headsets

My new phone, a Motorola V3xx, purchased a week before all this iPhone mania, supports A2DP for stereo listening over Bluetooth, so I went shopping for some stereo headphones. There is additional opportunity for techie satisfaction here as I've been pondering for months--if not years--the prospect of wireless headphones for my home theater. I often like to watch old movies late into the night, or just catch John Stewart before turning in. In either case, the television is on much later that everyone else in the house's bedtimes. So not only would I need a Bluetooth headset for pairing with the music-phone, but also a transceiver to act as a base for the home theater receiver output.

I started with Fry's, to get a sense of what was out there, to be able to look at the size of the thing and some instant comparison pricing. My list of features is essentially what I named above, but of course it would be great to also have phone answering features. Now I don't get a lot of calls, fewer if everyone who ever calls me is within the house, and fewer still if they're asleep. But I occasionally work at home, forwarding my office phone to my cell. Working at home is a great time to listen to music, streamed from the home theater or from the laptop. Being able to hear an incoming call is pretty important in that situation.

There were a few interesting models of stereo bluetooth headsets with microphones on the shelves at Fry's.
One was Plantronics Pulsar 590A: enabling anything with a 3.5mm jack (iPod, home theater headphone jack). The price was $90 less than that shown on the Plantronics site. This comes with a bluetooth "hockey puck" transeiver, for plugging into line-out devices, a Bluetooth bridge, as it were.

There's also a little confusion over the downline model for Plantronics, the Pulsar 590E. It isn't clear if it is the same

headset as the 590A, but simply without the transceiver. As it is going for $77, that appears to be a big discount.

On the other hand, the Motorola Data Sheet describes the "590 Line" and the only call-out is that the "E" doesn't

come with the transceiver. So I'm inclined to believe that "E" is for economy--no transceiver.

It appears the hockey puck is battery powered, the data sheet says nothing specific about charging the hockey puck or a power supply for same. I couldn't find in the data sheet if the transceiver has recharge capability, or if it just holds batteries. Without a plug-in solution, it wouldn't be good for home theater. I also wonder about having to re-pair with the puck. If it is battery-powered then it probably has a temporary pairing profile.

The Plantronics one looked like it had the best phone support as it had an extendable boom mike to put the microphone right at your lips rather than a bud hanging lower.

And then there's the Motorola HT820, which was considerably cheaper, $90, but again no transceiver. Motorola does have one, the DC800, which goes for about $65. This puts the two together above the Plantronics bundle.

I almost got--but then didn't get--the Motorola, because Fry's didn't have the "Home Stereo Adapter", DC800.

This is the combo that I want, so I can use my bluetooth headset for watching TV at night in silence.

I've confirmed that the DC800 has a power supply, so it is good for the home theater.

I found a bundle on Amazon that makes the pair $133, which is about $15 more than the Plantronics 590A bundle.

What I couldn't tell at the store (and I haven't read the data at the links above) is if you can use these headsets for "chat" mode on a PC, that is, does the bluetooth headset shim both the Windows microphone driver as well as the headphone driver.

I also read a review on Amazon of the Motorola set that there is a delay if used during gaming or watching

video (0.5 sec is a lot). I don't know if that applies to all Bluetooth headsets, but this would be a deal-killer for me

I'd go insane if lip-sync were out on all television/movies I watch.

Naturally this all assumes your PC has bluetooth. Or you'll need yet another dongle, maybe the PC850 by Motorola.

Others that I saw at Frys:

This Jabra model, for $110, or $40 less than the Plantronics 590A, but no transeiver.

There was a Creative Labs CB8100, but it was headphones only with no voice/call support and pretty pricey.

The MOTOROKR S9 was also available, about the same price as the other call-enabled headsets, but it has

this behind-the-head+earbud design that I'm not sure I could hang with. Hard to tell where the microphone would

be, but there isn't anything forward of the ear, so it can't be that good. I think it also has worse battery life. If you

like in-ear buds rather than over-ear cups, this might be better.

Another very-lightweight, on-ear, behind-head configuration was the Nokia BH-501:

This uses the standard Nokia AC3 charger--I must have 1/2 dozen of those for various phones over the years.

Then there was one Motorola (model I forgot) which looked like a typical 1-ear "borg" Bluetooth earpiece, but then it

had another one, smaller, in the same box. I assume it xmitted wirelessly between the two halves. The obvious

benefit here is that you could use the one-earpiece for driving or when the headset would be inapropriate. What

wasn't obvious was: recharging, delay between units, battery life. These may be old stock (and therefore not A2DP)

because they're not even listed on Motorola's site. They're kind of like this Jabra set. But I'm pretty sure there was no wire between the units (or some damn clever and intentionally deceptive packaging). Though this one looks like the second plugs into the first, so you can still have that one-ear configuration.

Going even smaller, there are lanyard+earbud models from a couple of manufacturers. Sony Ericsson has these.

Jabra has this one, the BT320s. Very interesting, you can use your own earbuds (probably wouldn't power bigger drivers) with it. So if you like the feel of your in-ear Shures or other $100 earbuds, you can keep them. You'd pair it with this transceiver. And here's one that pairs with your phone, but plugs directly into your music source (and has longer battery life). Okay, that last one was a bit off-topic, because it isn't really a wireless headset anymore, just a phone set inlined with some wired earbuds.

So it seems there are lots of choices; this would be an area where it would be great to be able to try them out

for sound quality, latency, and fit/feel. I'll probably start with the Motorolas as the sweet spot in features (transceiver

station, durable design) and price.