[matt_p]

A couple of days ago, a colleague at work told me that she'd bought a LG HD Ready set from Currys () for £1200. She said that she was absolutely wowed by the clarity of the picture etc.

The next day, after she'd taken delivery, she talked to me about how she was disappointed with the picture as it was nowhere near as clear as the shop display. I explained that she wasn't feeding it any HD material and she looked at me blankly. I explained that she would need to get Sky HD and/or blu-ray/hd-dvd. Again, a blank look.

"But it will be high definition with Freeview, won't it?".... Errm, no.

Then she mentioned that she had an xbox 360. She said it looked really good, so that must be high definition. I asked how she had it connected:

"With the three cables into the scart thing"

Riiiight... That'll be composite then. I explained how to connect her 360 up via component and set it to 720p, and the basics behind HD in general.

After this, I got thinking. Is HD every really going to be anything more than a niche product? I think we're a bit blinkered here on these boards because we all generally know what we're talking about. But for Joe Public, anything more complicated than Scart plug 'n' play is too much information to want to be bothered with. Add to that some shocking mis-selling on the high street and I can't see HD taking off for a long long while yet. Just to illustrate that last point, my colleague (again, bless her) was very proud of the High Def DVD recorder she'd bought with her TV (on the recommendation of Currys sale staff of course).

Personally, I'm expecting the Sky HD launch to be a bit of a mess. There's too many non-50Hz "HDTV compatible" sets out there, and I think there'll be a lot of mad LCD and plasma owners who can't get their sets to work with their nice new Sky HD boxes. As soon as that gets into the press it could prove to be a bit of a nightmare for Sky. Likewise for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. Then of course, there's all the non-HDCP DVI issues, component inputs that don't go higer than 480p... Maybe I'm being pessimistic, but I can imagine nightmare scenarios all round, leading to poor sales. Poor sales = poor economies of scale = higher prices all round.

I'm probably just expecting the worst, but being an Arsenal fan I've been conditioned for that recently. What does everyone else reckon?

[Lin3ar]

I know that in America there are something like 16 million HD Ready homes.Of those, 49% of people are not getting HD even though they think they are.A lot of people over think that because they have a HD set and the program says HD at the beginning then they are OK.They didn't realise that they needed some sort of HD box to 'do the business'

[loz]

Originally Posted by matt_p

I'm probably just expecting the worst, but being an Arsenal fan I've been conditioned for that recently

You mean Sol Campbell went into hiding because it was to embarrased to admit he didn't know how to wire up his new HD Ready TV?

[Chris Muriel]

Originally Posted by Lin3ar

I know that in America there are something like 16 million HD Ready homes.
Of those, 49% of people are not getting HD even though they think they are.
A lot of people over think that because they have a HD set and the program says HD at the beginning then they are OK.
They didn't realise that they needed some sort of HD box to 'do the business'

Too true - see this story that I received yesterday :

Broadcasting and Cable via NewsEdge Corporation :
If you haven't shopped for HDTV yet, the first thing you'll encounter is confusion. You want LCD or DLP? Or LcoS? Flat-screen or rear-projection? Get ready to hear about pixels and resolution--"Sir, would you prefer 1,080 lines drawn on-screen in an odd/even or interlaced pattern, or 720p, 720 lines scanned in one sweep, or progressively? Plasma or cathode-ray tubes?"
There is so much to know about HDTV. A co-worker told me the story of his friend, who had just bought a big-screen HDTV and invited everyone over to watch the game. They stood around oooohing and aaaahing.
But my co-worker, who owns an HDTV, thought something was amiss. Turns out that, while the friend owned an HDTV, he didn't know that he also needed to upgrade his cable box to HDTV. (Research shows as many as half the consumers with HDTV sets aren't actually receiving it.)
I contacted a friend who had just bought an HDTV and had used Consumer Reports as his guide to help me sift through all the confusion. I determined that a 36-inch screen fit my family's needs perfectly. For that size, Consumer Reports says sets with cathode-ray tubes, although bulky and heavy, still offer the best picture quality and value.
The magazine recommended a Sony model selling for about $1,100. Circuit City had a floor model for sale for around $900. We were in the process of buying it when the salesman mentioned that the set he had in his house was better. (I bet he says that to all his customers.)
It was a Polaroid--yes, a Polaroid. He showed me a lightweight, plasma Polaroid. It was beautiful--just an inch or so deep, and I could lift it with one hand. Impulsively, I changed my mind. I took it home and turned on the football game. My son saw it and proclaimed, "Dad, it's all blurry." He was right. So I boxed it up, took it back and got the Sony.
The Sony picture was clear and clean, even before I had it hooked up to HDTV. Now I thought it would be a good time to try something really new. Rather than get my HDTV set-top box from a cable or satellite provider, I could use Verizon Fios. (We happen to live in Keller, Texas, the first area in the country to offer Verizon's new fiber-optic connection.)
We watched our first NFL playoff game in HDTV, and it was beautiful. When we watched an HDTV underwater special on the Discovery channel, we thought the fish would jump through the screen. Everything is beautiful. Letterman and Leno somehow seem funnier in HDTV.
As my son remarked, "Life should be in HDTV, Dad."
Indeed, son, indeed.

Chris Muriel, Manchester

[blakey1]

Originally Posted by matt_p

A couple of days ago, a colleague at work told me that she'd bought a LG HD Ready set from Currys () for £1200. She said that she was absolutely wowed by the clarity of the picture etc.

The next day, after she'd taken delivery, she talked to me about how she was disappointed with the picture as it was nowhere near as clear as the shop display. I explained that she wasn't feeding it any HD material and she looked at me blankly. I explained that she would need to get Sky HD and/or blu-ray/hd-dvd. Again, a blank look.

"But it will be high definition with Freeview, won't it?".... Errm, no.

Then she mentioned that she had an xbox 360. She said it looked really good, so that must be high definition. I asked how she had it connected:

"With the three cables into the scart thing"

Riiiight... That'll be composite then. I explained how to connect her 360 up via component and set it to 720p, and the basics behind HD in general.

After this, I got thinking. Is HD every really going to be anything more than a niche product? I think we're a bit blinkered here on these boards because we all generally know what we're talking about. But for Joe Public, anything more complicated than Scart plug 'n' play is too much information to want to be bothered with. Add to that some shocking mis-selling on the high street and I can't see HD taking off for a long long while yet. Just to illustrate that last point, my colleague (again, bless her) was very proud of the High Def DVD recorder she'd bought with her TV (on the recommendation of Currys sale staff of course).

Personally, I'm expecting the Sky HD launch to be a bit of a mess. There's too many non-50Hz "HDTV compatible" sets out there, and I think there'll be a lot of mad LCD and plasma owners who can't get their sets to work with their nice new Sky HD boxes. As soon as that gets into the press it could prove to be a bit of a nightmare for Sky. Likewise for HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. Then of course, there's all the non-HDCP DVI issues, component inputs that don't go higer than 480p... Maybe I'm being pessimistic, but I can imagine nightmare scenarios all round, leading to poor sales. Poor sales = poor economies of scale = higher prices all round.

I'm probably just expecting the worst, but being an Arsenal fan I've been conditioned for that recently. What does everyone else reckon?

Most of my friends, family and workmates have little idea what HD is. As far as they are concerned they are happy with the picture quality of their TV via composite. When I mentioned switching to RGB to a few they thought I was some sort of techno nerd.

None of them are interested in Sky HD as they are more than happy with Sky as it is. Theres no way anyone I know is willing to pay for it. Some who have bought HD sets have boasted about how the guy in the shop told them it was HD ready so they will be able to get this super HD picture via Freeview etc. When you mention no you wont and that a Sky HD box will be at least £200 they all change their mind and I didnt even get as far as the monthly sub!

Ive been saying for a while now that I would not be surprised if Sky HD, Blu Ray etc is a niche market to start off with. Its likely to take off when a HD freeview service becomes available and you can buy the box, Blu Ray etc at Tesco's

I was interested to hear that Asda sells 1in3 DVD Players. If thats the case cant even think how many Tesco's sell at least half?

Also I read yesterday that some Sets sold as HD ready may not work with Sky HD due to HDCP problems. Seems like theres no tests to show that TV are actually HDCP. So could be afew that are going to be disappointed when they find out their TV does not work with HDTV.

[Stephen Neal]

Not really surprising given how many people with 16:9 high-quality displays are still content feeding them with digital receivers (Sky/Freeview/Cable) fed via composite RF in mono, or composite SCART if you are lucky.

Amazing how many of them are surprised the improvement you get by setting their systems up for RGB, 16:9 and automatic widescreen switching...

Though also surprising how many would rather watch mangled stretched or cropped 4:3 so that it fills the screen, rather than seeing the full picture as intended...

[ianmarrey]

Black and White TV was a niche market.

Colour TV was a niche market.

Digital Watches were a niche market.

VHS/Betamax were niche markets.

CD was a niche market.

DVD was a niche market.

Most (all?) new technology is a niche market. Everyone else wants what they think everyone else has got (or wants) and before long everyone else has got it.

SKY HD will be a niche product for a few months. First there will be the hadcore, then after the first price drop/promotion a few more - then as the few becomes the many the others won't want to be the few or the any and end up becoming one of the many.

Some won't understand what the fuss is about, they say. They will understand the fuss but they don't want to admit they don't get it like everyone else gets it. Before, the few were nerds - now the few without are nerds.

Do you know the person who still watches black and white TVs -nerds.

Do you know the person who prefers vinyl (not yer DJ) - nerd.

Do you know the person who still watches their Betamax collection of Bergerac - nerd.

Bring it on. I want to be one of the few, one of the many. I want to be a nerd, then part of the crowd. Then I want the nxt new thing.

I want a digital watch.

[blakey1]

Originally Posted by ianmarrey

Black and White TV was a niche market.

Colour TV was a niche market.

Digital Watches were a niche market.

VHS/Betamax were niche markets.

CD was a niche market.

DVD was a niche market.

Most (all?) new technology is a niche market. Everyone else wants what they think everyone else has got (or wants) and before long everyone else has got it.

SKY HD will be a niche product for a few months. First there will be the hadcore, then after the first price drop/promotion a few more - then as the few becomes the many the others won't want to be the few or the any and end up becoming one of the many.

Some won't understand what the fuss is about, they say. They will understand the fuss but they don't want to admit they don't get it like everyone else gets it. Before, the few were nerds - now the few without are nerds.

Do you know the person who still watches black and white TVs -nerds.

Do you know the person who prefers vinyl (not yer DJ) - nerd.

Do you know the person who still watches their Betamax collection of Bergerac - nerd.

Bring it on. I want to be one of the few, one of the many. I want to be a nerd, then part of the crowd. Then I want the nxt new thing.

I want a digital watch.

Sky HD will be a niche market for a lot longer than a few months, a few years more likely. The problem is SKY HD offers little over the things you talk about above.

CD's offered ease of use plus being more robust. Not sure if anyone other than kids wear digital watches. DVD's offered extra footage scences etc over VHS and didnt really become popular until you could buy one in the supermarket. How many of the general public paid more than £100 for a DVD player.

The problems for HD is the vast costs and limited reward for most . From what I have there will be limited benefit for those who have a TV under 42inches and as the average size set in the UK is a 28 inch CRT then I'm not sure what the benefits are. HD will cost the average person at least £2000 if you want to make any use of it over the next few years and thats not a price many want to pay. Just look at the US. Only about 10% of the country has a HD set and only about 50% are making any use of it.

Rmember not everything takes off. What happen to Laser discs etc.? 3G How much did the likes of Vodafone etc pay? Mini Discs? I'm sure there are lot more. Even widescreen, Dolby Pro Logic. How many actually care. I know many who still buy 4:3 for the bedroom and would buy a 4:3 for the main room if they could due to the amount of stuff not in widescreen. How many people have surround sound set ups in their houses. Not many Ive been too. How many people own proggresive scan TV's or DVD player? Even those who do how many have them connected up to anything other than by a scart lead running composite?

Once you can buy your Blu Ray player in the Supermarket and there is a HD freeview it will take off but until then it will be nothing more than a niche market in my opinion and even then people will still connect with a scart lead as they know no better. I hope for the many on here I'm wrong.

[Stephen Neal]

Originally Posted by blakey1

The problems for HD is the vast costs and limited reward for most . From what I have there will be limited benefit for those who have a TV under 42inches and as the average size set in the UK is a 28 inch CRT then I'm not sure what the benefits are. HD will cost the average person at least £2000 if you want to make any use of it over the next few years and thats not a price many want to pay. Just look at the US. Only about 10% of the country has a HD set and only about 50% are making any use of it.

Yep - I'm in two minds about Joe Public.

Picture quality was certainly an aspect of DVD's popularity over VHS - but this was probably at least partially because VHS had all sorts of problems, like tracking and tape damage. Random access and extras, smaller size and greater robustness were probably as important, if not more so, than picture quality.

However - I think that the argument about screensize is slightly flawed in some cases - as that is comparing good SD with good HD. At the moment we have very little good SD.

I have a 28" 16:9 CRT set at home - and the majority of SD is pretty poor these days - with horrible levels of compression artefacts, manifesting themselves as blocking, HF noise or overly soft pictures. (Interesting to compare BBC Two England on DSat carrying Winter Olympics coverage, with the same events being carried on a BBCi satellite stream. The BBCi stuff is significantly cleaner and less artefacty - BBC Two looks pretty bad...)

If good HD is broadcast, and we continue to have bad SD, then the difference will not just be resolution and sharpness, it will be clearer, cleaner pictures - which will be apparent on smaller displays than would be the case if we had high quality SD broadcasts. (It is true that good HD only starts really being obvious when compared to good SD at screen sizes above 28" at average viewing distances, however good HD, whether displayed in HD or downconverted to SD will look better than bad SD on smaller screensizes than this)

HOWEVER - Joe Public seems happy to watch and listen to RF linked, overly saturated, sat up or crushed, stretched/cropped, 4:3 noisy, mono feeds of 16:9 RGB Stereo sources... So picture quality can't be that important to many...

[Lin3ar]

Originally Posted by Stephen Neal

Yep - I'm in two minds about Joe Public.

Picture quality was certainly an aspect of DVD's popularity over VHS - but this was probably at least partially because VHS had all sorts of problems, like tracking and tape damage. Random access and extras, smaller size and greater robustness were probably as important, if not more so, than picture quality.

However - I think that the argument about screensize is slightly flawed in some cases - as that is comparing good SD with good HD. At the moment we have very little good SD.

I have a 28" 16:9 CRT set at home - and the majority of SD is pretty poor these days - with horrible levels of compression artefacts, manifesting themselves as blocking, HF noise or overly soft pictures. (Interesting to compare BBC Two England on DSat carrying Winter Olympics coverage, with the same events being carried on a BBCi satellite stream. The BBCi stuff is significantly cleaner and less artefacty - BBC Two looks pretty bad...)

If good HD is broadcast, and we continue to have bad SD, then the difference will not just be resolution and sharpness, it will be clearer, cleaner pictures - which will be apparent on smaller displays than would be the case if we had high quality SD broadcasts. (It is true that good HD only starts really being obvious when compared to good SD at screen sizes above 28" at average viewing distances, however good HD, whether displayed in HD or downconverted to SD will look better than bad SD on smaller screensizes than this)

HOWEVER - Joe Public seems happy to watch and listen to RF linked, overly saturated, sat up or crushed, stretched/cropped, 4:3 noisy, mono feeds of 16:9 RGB Stereo sources... So picture quality can't be that important to many...

It's the same with audio cds.Much better quality (SACD and DVD-A) has been around for ages but nobody is interested.

[Stephen Neal]

Originally Posted by Lin3ar

It's the same with audio cds.Much better quality (SACD and DVD-A) has been around for ages but nobody is interested.

Yep - though with DVD-A there is also the issue of the ludicrous limitations on carrying the audio digitally (i.e. you can't?) to your amp.

[cerebros]

Originally Posted by Stephen Neal

Yep - though with DVD-A there is also the issue of the ludicrous limitations on carrying the audio digitally (i.e. you can't?) to your amp.

Plus the fact that neither format has ever really been given a big advertising push, and that it's hard to sell a premium audio format when the big thing in audio is low-quality downloads for portable players...

[pjskel]

Wasn't the advertising that kept the super audio formats down - it was lack of material that was of interest to the gen pub.
Most mainstream music is compressed as far as dynamics are concerned, and it's only well recorded music that extolls the virtues of what SACD (DVD-A never was a real rival) could/can do.
So, compared with the CD, SACD differences were mostly unheard.

As has already been said above, HD will appeal to a much larger audience if the cost of entry is reasonable and the quality high - not high enough, which seems to be the attitude with SD transmissions, although it's nice to see some exceptions.

[Welwynnick]

Originally Posted by Stephen Neal

Yep - though with DVD-A there is also the issue of the ludicrous limitations on carrying the audio digitally (i.e. you can't?) to your amp.

Hi Stephen, It is now possible to carry DVD-A audio to an amp with a digital connection. There have been the same copy-protection issues as with HD video, but it's now sorted (and is very worthwhile!) It can be carried with i-Link or HDMI V1.1, but somehow I don't think it's ever going to be a mass-market feature.

Nick