PDA

View Full Version : Blu-Ray Support at Macworld? Mac Pros Soon?




Pages : [1] 2

MacRumors
Jan 3, 2008, 09:23 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

American Technology Research analyst Shaw Wu cites sources (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/01/03/apple_set_to_ship_macs_with_blu_ray_support_report.html) who say that Apple will start shipping some of their computers with Blu-ray support as early as Macworld.

Appleinsider also corroborates the report with their own sources, expecting an overhaul to the Mac Pro in the 1st quarter of 2008 with Blu-ray support.

Mac Pro updates have been long overdue with the last major update almost 17 months ago. While some rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/05/mac-os-10-5-2-mac-pro-update-at-macworld/) have pegged the Mac Pro update at Macworld, there has been only minimal buzz about it in the final weeks before the expo.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/03/blu-ray-support-at-macworld-mac-pros-soon/)



tkidBOSTON
Jan 3, 2008, 09:25 AM
I wonder how much of an impact this will actually make in the "format wars" if it proves to be true.

MrT8064
Jan 3, 2008, 09:26 AM
I wonder how much of an impact this will actually make in the "format wars" if it proves to be true.

How many pro users will actually use the new MacPro systems?

JesterJJZ
Jan 3, 2008, 09:27 AM
I wonder how much of an impact this will actually make in the "format wars" if it proves to be true.

I think that will depend how much it costs. If it comes standard then it might play a role. However I don't see it having much affect if it's a $1000 BTO option or something.

ziwi
Jan 3, 2008, 09:30 AM
I for one just hope something shows up in a week and a half...

G4DP
Jan 3, 2008, 09:30 AM
However I don't see it having much affect if it's a $1000 BTO option or something.

Only $1000, I was thinking more along the lines of around $2500+. Given the amount they charge for RAM give Apple credit where credit is due.

wwooden
Jan 3, 2008, 09:31 AM
Maybe this is a stupid question....

but will the Blu-Ray Support be just a player or will it burn Blu-Ray as well?

bbplayer5
Jan 3, 2008, 09:31 AM
Its funny when you price out ram on apples BTO. Some ram is 600 bucks more expensive than on macsales.

koobcamuk
Jan 3, 2008, 09:32 AM
I wonder how much of an impact this will actually make in the "format wars" if it proves to be true.

About 5-7%

How many pro users will actually use the new MacPro systems?

Ones with enough money/need to upgrade. I know a lot have been waiting...

eastcoastsurfer
Jan 3, 2008, 09:32 AM
Unless it's iPhone related I wouldn't hold my breath on anything else being updated.

tkidBOSTON
Jan 3, 2008, 09:32 AM
Another question-- does "with Blu-ray support" mean that it will ship with a Blu-ray drive or just be able to handle an external Blu-ray drive? Can current Macs handle external next-gen drives?

CWallace
Jan 3, 2008, 09:34 AM
(W)ill the Blu-Ray Support be just a player or will it burn Blu-Ray as well?

I expect it will burn and play.

And considering Jobs is on Disney's board, which backs Blu-Ray, no real surprise they chose it over HD-DVD. ;) :D

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 09:34 AM
Maybe this is a stupid question....

but will the Blu-Ray Support be just a player or will it burn Blu-Ray as well?

its apple. it would be blu-ray authoring as well :D


THE FORMAT WAR IS OVER if this happens....blu-ray has been pretty much been dominating if you pay attention to the real numbers (didn't lose a single week in sales all of last year) and if it were any other way apple would do a combo drive.

RichP
Jan 3, 2008, 09:35 AM
I wonder how much of an impact this will actually make in the "format wars" if it proves to be true.

Who the hell even knows anymore. I am sick of it, and it has made me apathetic toward buying into either format, or even buying regular DVDs anymore. Now I don't buy anything. (Yes, I know there are dual format players, but I want one format that works in any HD player I come across and in my future computer devices)

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 09:35 AM
Another question-- does "with Blu-ray support" mean that it will ship with a Blu-ray drive or just be able to handle an external Blu-ray drive? Can current Macs handle external next-gen drives?

I have an external blu-ray burner, that works on my mac, but only for data at the moment.

Squonk
Jan 3, 2008, 09:35 AM
Seriously, you guys think a BluRay drive will be in excess of $1000 optional? NewEgg has internal drives starting at $200 for readers and $400 for writers. I'll admit that these are probably not the brands that Apple would sell, but still, $1,000 seems too steep.

What do you think Apple will call these drives?
SuperDrive = DVD/CD writer
??? = BluRay/DVD/CD writer

digitalfrog
Jan 3, 2008, 09:36 AM
are there hybrid blu-ray readers that can also write DVD-+R(W) ?

I don't see Apple dropping the the 'old' format, and having 2 drives (swapable or external) would be a pain.

megfilmworks
Jan 3, 2008, 09:36 AM
Too bad. HD-DVD looks like it may become the Betamax of HD. I own 2 Blu-Ray players and 2 HD-DVD players. When I can choose to buy or rent and have the ability to choose between the two I always choose the HD-DVD. It is just better.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 09:36 AM
Who the hell even knows anymore. I am sick of it, and it has made me apathetic toward buying into either format, or even buying regular DVDs anymore. Now I don't buy anything. (Yes, I know there are dual format players, but I want one format that works in any HD player I come across and in my future computer devices)

than buy blu-ray....microsoft wants you to be confused, thats their number one goal since they are losing badly, but the answer is clear....the future is blu

krye
Jan 3, 2008, 09:36 AM
I have been waiting exactly 1 year to buy a new Mac Pro. I waitied for iLife 08, then Leopard. I can't wait any longer! I want a new Mac Pro! I know as soon as I buy a new one, Apple will update the line with the new 3.2G procs. So I am forced to wait until the next revision.

Apple, please please please please please update the Mac Pro this month!

yoman
Jan 3, 2008, 09:37 AM
Blu ray in Mac Pros would likely be an add-on to the standard configuration. Thus this will have a limited impact on the format wars.

Even if the Blu-ray drive is standard...the market for Mac Pros is so small it would only cause a minimal impact.

However more options are always good.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 09:39 AM
Too bad. HD-DVD looks like it may become the Betamax of HD. I own 2 Blu-Ray players and 2 HD-DVD players. When I can choose to buy or rent and have the ability to choose between the two I always choose the HD-DVD. It is just better.

psssh....at what? warner titles are the same on both because they have to fit the master onto the crappy hd-dud disc. if they had more space to work with, MAYBE we would get a decent transfer from them.

watch close encounter of the third kind on blu and you can't say that anymore

TDM21
Jan 3, 2008, 09:39 AM
The main problem I have with this rumor is the fact in previous years Apple has never talked about the MacPro/PowerMacs at MacWorld. Updates to these systems have came a few weeks later with minor upgrades. MacWorld is usually were Apple talks about their consumer lineup with the iMacs, laptops and iPods. WWDC is typically were they do something to the pro-user desktop.

kingtj
Jan 3, 2008, 09:40 AM
The problem I'm starting to see (for Apple at least) is that the new iMacs are starting to look like awfully good alternatives to spending $3000+ for a Mac Pro tower.

The performance gap has been narrowing with new iMac refreshes and updates, while the Mac Pro has been completely stagnant.

I have a Mac Pro and one of the new 20" iMacs, and for most things I do, the speed difference is negligible, really. The Mac Pro can handle concurrent tasks without slowing down as much as the iMac. But in some situations, the iMac actually completes a given job FASTER than the Mac Pro does - when you're only running the one application on both machines.

Unless you spend most of your time in one of a few specialized "pro apps", or you tend to do a lot of background rendering/processing while expecting another app in the foreground to run as though nothing else was happening, the Mac Pro is hard to cost-justify right now. (Sure, I realize it has a bigger memory capacity, much more hard drive expandability, and you can pair it with whatever display(s) you like -- and it has the better video card options to make 3D gaming enjoyable. But ultimately, that amounts to paying a BIG premium for more slots and bays on the motherboard, you know?)

Blu-Ray included in some/all of the new Mac Pros is a good move for the future -- but it's strictly an "incremental change" in the grand scheme of things. The Mac Pro needs a new generation of motherboard/Xeon CPU inside it to be a "worthy upgrade", PLUS get some new video card offerings for the thing!


How many pro users will actually use the new MacPro systems?

statikcat
Jan 3, 2008, 09:40 AM
If the Mac Pro comes out later in Q1.. LOL

I wonder how much of an impact this will actually make in the "format wars" if it proves to be true.

BD is coming to Apple no question. Movie sales in the end are the main force that wins a format war..not burnable media. That comes in time.

Spades
Jan 3, 2008, 09:43 AM
The format wars may very well be over at MacWorld. And the loser could be both HD-DVD and Blu-ray. If Apple comes up with a model for digital distribution of movies that takes off, you can say goodbye to both physical formats.

Feverish Flux
Jan 3, 2008, 09:45 AM
I really don't think the Mac Pro is a MWSF item... never has been. Notebooks are Apple's big consumer thing and this is a consumer show...

Q1 yes, MWSF no.

Chupa Chupa
Jan 3, 2008, 09:45 AM
I wonder how much of an impact this will actually make in the "format wars" if it proves to be true.

That would depend on how it's implemented. If it just an expensive BTO for MPs then I doubt it would have much impact at all. But if Apple were to make BD-R part of a 10.5/iLife '08/FCS/FCE update and it would work w/ an external BD burner, that would be a game shifter and certainly put BD in the Red Zone.

mcarnes
Jan 3, 2008, 09:46 AM
Too bad. HD-DVD looks like it may become the Betamax of HD. I own 2 Blu-Ray players and 2 HD-DVD players. When I can choose to buy or rent and have the ability to choose between the two I always choose the HD-DVD. It is just better.

I own 3 of each. Blu-Ray is just better, so there. :D

Popeye206
Jan 3, 2008, 09:50 AM
Can we just fast forward to MacWorld???? I'm so tired of waiting!!!! So many new things are on the table.... possible video rentals, new Apple TV, new ultra portable, new MacPros, BlueRay options, iPhone updates!

I feel like Cartman waiting for the Wii to be released! :D

dashiel
Jan 3, 2008, 09:51 AM
i'm hoping for an appleTV 2, mac nano, or add-on unit for the current appleTV with full HDMI 1.3 support, for dolby true hd and dts-hd audio codecs.

it would be nice if apple used one of the LG hyrbid drives and we got hd-dvd and blu-ray... it would certainly align with their "it just works" philosophy. the vast majority of people i talk to either have no idea there is a format war, or have no idea which format is which.

nagromme
Jan 3, 2008, 09:52 AM
Only $1000, I was thinking more along the lines of around $2500+. Given the amount they charge for RAM give Apple credit where credit is due.

IIRC, When Apple added Superdrives (DVD/CD burners) to the PowerMac (the blue G3s), the entire Mac WITH Superdrive cost less than the current consumer price of a bare Superdrive alone. Apple clearly made the move when they were able to get favorable pricing. This could again be true.

Many PC makers charge more for RAM they install, than you would pay if you do the installation yourself. I don't think that has a bearing on Apple specifically, or on optical drives.

I have no opinion on timing, but when it happens (whether BD, HD, or combo) I expect it will be for a reasonable price, even if still high-end.

JFreak
Jan 3, 2008, 09:52 AM
Apple will start shipping some of their computers with Blu-ray support as early as Macworld.

Timing would be perfect!

The format wars may very well be over at MacWorld. And the loser could be both HD-DVD and Blu-ray. If Apple comes up with a model for digital distribution of movies that takes off, you can say goodbye to both physical formats.

Not gonna happen. Physical distribution is not going to die that easily.

its apple. it would be blu-ray authoring as well :D

Perhaps more like April (NAB) for authoring, but who knows.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 09:56 AM
psssh....at what? warner titles are the same on both because they have to fit the master onto the crappy hd-dud disc. if they had more space to work with, MAYBE we would get a decent transfer from them.

watch close encounter of the third kind on blu and you can't say that anymore
Do you actually own HD-DVD and Blurary software/hardware? Because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. HD-DVD has had stellar transfers from the start. 30GB is MORE than enough to fit HD media. Considering Bluray discs are maxing out at 50gb and there are 51GB HD-DVD discs, what is your argument? That the inefficient MPEG2 codec and uncompressed audio that Sony continues to push on everyone, requires immense amounts of space? Well then you'd be correct.

Rodimus Prime
Jan 3, 2008, 09:57 AM
its apple. it would be blu-ray authoring as well :D


THE FORMAT WAR IS OVER if this happens....blu-ray has been pretty much been dominating if you pay attention to the real numbers (didn't lose a single week in sales all of last year) and if it were any other way apple would do a combo drive.

The formate war is far from over. No side has a huge lead over the other. The only reason apple is backing blu-ray is because it allied with Disney/Pixar.

The formate war is going to end the same way the DVD+R and DVD-R format war ended and that is with dual mode players.

ideapower
Jan 3, 2008, 09:59 AM
I really don't think the Mac Pro is a MWSF item... never has been. Notebooks are Apple's big consumer thing and this is a consumer show...

Q1 yes, MWSF no.

That may be true, but Apple's been putting off releasing new version of the Mac Pro for some reason. They're be out of their friggin minds to wait any longer, so most people are thinking they must be waiting for mwsf to launch it. MWSF may be a "consumer" show, but if they don't show of the "pro" product, they may doom themselves to being a "consumer" company!!

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 09:59 AM
The formate war is far from over. No side has a huge lead over the other. The only reason apple is backing blu-ray is because it allied with Disney/Pixar.

The formate war is going to end the same way the DVD+R and DVD-R format war ended and that is with dual mode players.
Ding ding ding. Someone with a brain on Macrumors forums. Finally.

pazzo83
Jan 3, 2008, 10:04 AM
Too bad. HD-DVD looks like it may become the Betamax of HD. I own 2 Blu-Ray players and 2 HD-DVD players. When I can choose to buy or rent and have the ability to choose between the two I always choose the HD-DVD. It is just better.

Are you serious?? Blu-ray is a much better resolution. Do you have a 1080p TV?

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 10:06 AM
Are you serious?? Blu-ray is a much better resolution. Do you have a 1080p TV?
Wtf are you talking about, the resolution of Blu-ray is EXACTLY the same as HD-DVD. 1920x1080p. This forum is seriously SO misguided in almost everything.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 10:11 AM
Do you actually own HD-DVD and Blurary software/hardware? Because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. HD-DVD has had stellar transfers from the start. 30GB is MORE than enough to fit HD media. Considering Bluray discs are maxing out at 50gb and there are 51GB HD-DVD discs, what is your argument? That the inefficient MPEG2 codec and uncompressed audio that Sony continues to push on everyone, requires immense amounts of space? Well then you'd be correct.

YES, I actually have a ps3 (46'' 1080p TV and 104'' 1080i projector) and blu-ray burner for my mac. I know what im talking about....

30 GB is sometimes enough to fit movies, look at transformers ,for example, couldn't meet requirements due to space. what transfers are you refering to? my argument is that the compression is deceided by the STUDIO (artist) and if the artist has a larger/better canvas to start with they typically can paint a more beautiful picture. the better question is, what is your argument? you say 30 GB is enough, but than immediately bring up the 51 GB disc that will never see a consumer, a little defensive about the subject?

there are 51 GB hd dvd discs in production. there are also 100 GB blu-ray discs in production. and if 30 GB is "more than enough" as you say, why would both sides be developing larger capacity? psssssh, wasting my time!

like I said, if you can somehow convince me that having an extra 10 GB per layer is a bad thing, I would be impressed....but thanks for your FUD.


The formate war is far from over. No side has a huge lead over the other. The only reason apple is backing blu-ray is because it allied with Disney/Pixar.

The formate war is going to end the same way the DVD+R and DVD-R format war ended and that is with dual mode players.

blu-ray has a significant advantage, and when warner goes blu-ray exlcusive will have 70% exclusive studio support...

please explain tome how hd-dvd will last....dvd+r and dvd-r are completely different, but nice try.

Spades
Jan 3, 2008, 10:12 AM
Not gonna happen. Physical distribution is not going to die that easily.

Is there any particular reason you say that? Notice that I am heavily qualifying my statement by saying it needs to be a model that takes off. Maybe rentals alone are enough, or maybe people care about quality enough that it needs to be HD too. If Apple does find the right formula, it makes sense that physical formats would start to decline. DVD has a long way to fall, but the HD formats have low market share right now. If they stall or start to decline now, they're dead.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 10:13 AM
Wtf are you talking about, the resolution of Blu-ray is EXACTLY the same as HD-DVD. 1920x1080p. This forum is seriously SO misguided in almost everything.

yes, they have the same resolution...but most of the standalone players (edit: in consumer hands) are only 1080i so he does have a point (although he wasn't trying to make it)

mrgreen4242
Jan 3, 2008, 10:14 AM
The format wars may very well be over at MacWorld. And the loser could be both HD-DVD and Blu-ray. If Apple comes up with a model for digital distribution of movies that takes off, you can say goodbye to both physical formats.

That's been MS's plan all along, I'm pretty sure. They give some support to HDDVD, not enough to effect their system sales but enough to help keep HDDVD viable. All the while they are pushing an HDDVD download service on the same hardware.

They want HD optical media to fumble for as long as possible while they get people more and more used to downloading their media.

i'm hoping for an appleTV 2, mac nano, or add-on unit for the current appleTV with full HDMI 1.3 support, for dolby true hd and dts-hd audio codecs.

it would be nice if apple used one of the LG hyrbid drives and we got hd-dvd and blu-ray... it would certainly align with their "it just works" philosophy. the vast majority of people i talk to either have no idea there is a format war, or have no idea which format is which.

I'd like an improved spec AppleTV that works with a USB BR drive that Apple releases for use with the ATV, as well as existing iMacs, MacBooks, and the new driveless subportable etc etc.

Wtf are you talking about, the resolution of Blu-ray is EXACTLY the same as HD-DVD. 1920x1080p. This forum is seriously SO misguided in almost everything.

I'm with you in my preference of HDDVD, and I understand what you are saying and agree with the facts. In the newb's defense, though, the misconception that HDDVD isn't 1080p is failry widespread and caused by two things; first, early HDDVD players wouldn't output 1080p, just 1080i and 720p downconverted from the 1080p file on the disc. Second was Sony's marketing which capitalized on this fact slamming "HDVD is not True HD" into people who can't be bothered to read beyond the headline's brain.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 10:14 AM
Is there any particular reason you say that? Notice that I am heavily qualifying my statement by saying it needs to be a model that takes off. Maybe rentals alone are enough, or maybe people care about quality enough that it needs to be HD too. If Apple does find the right formula, it makes sense that physical formats would start to decline. DVD has a long way to fall, but the HD formats have low market share right now. If they stall or start to decline now, they're dead.

it takes like 3 weeks and all of my bandwith to download a HD movie, thats why.

and I don't want crappy quality on my 1080p tv, so compression won't due.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 10:19 AM
YES, I actually have a ps3 (46'' 1080p TV and 104'' 1080i projector) and blu-ray burner for my mac. I know what im talking about....

30 GB is sometimes enough to fit movies, look at transformers ,for example, couldn't meet requirements due to space. what transfers are you refering to? my argument is that the compression is deceided by the STUDIO (artist) and if the artist has a larger/better canvas to start with they typically can paint a more beautiful picture. the better question is, what is your argument? you say 30 GB is enough, but than immediately bring up the 51 GB disc that will never see a consumer, a little defensive about the subject?

there are 51 GB hd dvd discs in production. there are also 100 GB blu-ray discs in production. and if 30 GB is "more than enough" as you say, why would both sides be developing larger capacity? psssssh, wasting my time!

like I said, if you can somehow convince me that having an extra 10 GB per layer is a bad thing, I would be impressed....but thanks for your FUD.




blu-ray has a significant advantage, and when warner goes blu-ray exlcusive will have 70% exclusive studio support...

please explain tome how hd-dvd will last....dvd+r and dvd-r are completely different, but nice try.
I have Transformers on HD-DVD, what "requirements" did it miss that you speak of? It was encoded at 1920x1080 and utilizes Dolby Digital Plus, am I missing something else that is "required"? It even has all of the interactive stuff that Sony has YET to implement with their Bluray Java nonsense. 51GB discs are being developed to quiet all of the people crying over Blu-Rays "superiority" based on disc space, and you know it. Both sides are in a space race, don't be so naive. It's just like any other product, look at the old MHZ race that clearly turned out to be pointless. If more space was needed, they would be using the 51GB discs. It's not reaching the consumer yet, because IT'S NOT NEEDED. The compression being used has to do entirely with Sony receiving royalties from their MPEG2 codec. Space/Bit rate comparisons between different codecs are like comparing apples to oranges. So stop it. Use your brain for 5 seconds and stop being so one sided.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 10:22 AM
yes, they have the same resolution...but most of the standalone players (edit: in consumer hands) are only 1080i so he does have a point (although he wasn't trying to make it)
No they are not, the first generation Toshiba were the only ones that had that "issue". An interlaced output provides the SAME EXACT image in the end on a progressive display. Which unless you have an old CRT, then you should have zero problems. Not to mention most displays do not even have 1080P input.

SHOlover
Jan 3, 2008, 10:22 AM
Not gonna happen. Physical distribution is not going to die that easily.

Agreed...The online download portion of Netflix has not done as well as expected, add this to the folding of walmart's downloadable rentals, and we see that the market may not be ready for "ether" rentals. I don't know how long people want to wait for a 1080p movie to download. Keep in mind how compact BluRay discs are for getting 50 gigs of data on there, so fast shipping times and large product volume is made easier by small Blu Discs.

I personally would rather have the disc shipped to me and have nice HD quality for an exciting viewing experience, than wait for the thing to download and have not-so-nice, more compressed quality.:rolleyes:

Maybe :apple: can bridge that gap.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 10:23 AM
Is there any particular reason you say that? Notice that I am heavily qualifying my statement by saying it needs to be a model that takes off. Maybe rentals alone are enough, or maybe people care about quality enough that it needs to be HD too. If Apple does find the right formula, it makes sense that physical formats would start to decline. DVD has a long way to fall, but the HD formats have low market share right now. If they stall or start to decline now, they're dead.
How about the fact that most of the population does not have an internet connection capable of streaming HD?

megfilmworks
Jan 3, 2008, 10:25 AM
psssh....at what? warner titles are the same on both because they have to fit the master onto the crappy hd-dud disc. if they had more space to work with, MAYBE we would get a decent transfer from them.

watch close encounter of the third kind on blu and you can't say that anymoreI don't care about space I care about quality. Blu-ray is just not as good. I have made direct comparisons in my dubbing stage and it is pretty obvious once you start looking at movies on referenced stages. Also the menus and features are better. That being said, I really don't care because both formats are DOA.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 10:25 AM
I'm with you in my preference of HDDVD, and I understand what you are saying and agree with the facts. In the newb's defense, though, the misconception that HDDVD isn't 1080p is failry widespread and caused by two things; first, early HDDVD players wouldn't output 1080p, just 1080i and 720p downconverted from the 1080p file on the disc. Second was Sony's marketing which capitalized on this fact slamming "HDVD is not True HD" into people who can't be bothered to read beyond the headline's brain.
You are correct, it's the same reason BOSE has somehow become known as a quality speaker manufacturer. The masses are dumb.

lazyrighteye
Jan 3, 2008, 10:25 AM
Shaw Wu... he's funny.

JFreak
Jan 3, 2008, 10:27 AM
Is there any particular reason you say that?

I cannot foresee a not-so-distant future where every household would have internet connection so fast they could download 30-50GB in 15 minutes. Because that's how long it takes to go rent a movie and start playing the physical media and if it takes hours to download (or god forbid, if the quality is sub-par to standard dvd), it's not going to fly.

diamond.g
Jan 3, 2008, 10:28 AM
So evey one here is excited about Apple having to implement PVP in 10.5 in order to play BD/HD DVD movies? Ready to replace your displays since full resolution images can only be delivered via HDMI(DVI) w/HDCP or VGA?

If both formats use the same video codec you aren't going to have any difference in picture, and your only difference in sound is BD's use of PCM instead of DTSMA or DTHD.

And currently HD DVD offers better interactivity since the PS3 is the only shipped 1.1/2.0 compliant player available today.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 10:30 AM
I don't know about the rest of you, but I prefer having something physical in my hands when I purchase it. I like having a library of movies to look through, and I'm certainly not going to wait for an overly compressed remnant of a movie to be downloaded to my tv/box. It's going to be a LONG time before 30/50GB is downloaded in minutes.

rg3rbick
Jan 3, 2008, 10:31 AM
its truly sad that anyone would take sides in this format war that only hurts the consumer. cant you see because of their own greed and stupidity they are screwing you once again?

if anyone would actually want to learn some basic facts such as actual sales, technology, etc. read this nytimes article from a few days ago.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/business/31dvd.html

Bruizer
Jan 3, 2008, 10:32 AM
Do you actually own HD-DVD and Blurary software/hardware? ... That the inefficient MPEG2 codec and uncompressed audio that Sony continues to push on everyone, requires immense amounts of space? Well then you'd be correct.

Do you know what you are talking about? Both standards support the basically the same Codecs including MPEG-2 and H.264 (each support others as well). BD are the Betamax and HD-DVD (based on old existing DVD technology) is the VHS. BD has a MUCH MUCH higher potential capacity than HD-DVD ever dreamed about. Think... Growth.

Go HD-DVD and we will be doing this again in 5-8 years.

pazzo83
Jan 3, 2008, 10:34 AM
Wtf are you talking about, the resolution of Blu-ray is EXACTLY the same as HD-DVD. 1920x1080p. This forum is seriously SO misguided in almost everything.

OK even IF HD DVD is 1080p (which I didn't know seeing as how I haven't seen any player that outputs in that resolution), what say you about the fact that more studios are backing BD (as evidenced by a visit to the video section of an electronics store)? If HD DVD can support the same resolution as BD, why on EARTH didn't the manufacturers backing this have hardware ready to CONSUMERS to maximize the disc's resolution? Seems like extremely poor business-decisions have been made here.

krye
Jan 3, 2008, 10:35 AM
OK, this forum has turned into a Blu Ray vs HD-DVD flame war.

I thought we were supposed to be drooling over how cool it will be to finally burn a 50G backup ON A MAC!

Who cares about movies? Am I the only one that wants Blue Ray for 50G backups of data?

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 10:36 AM
Do you know what you are talking about? Both standards support the basically the same Codecs including MPEG-2 and H.264 (each support others as well). BD are the Betamax and HD-DVD (based on old existing DVD technology) is the VHS. BD has a MUCH MUCH higher potential capacity than HD-DVD ever dreamed about. Think... Growth.

Go HD-DVD and we will be doing this again in 5-8 years.
Yes thank you dear. They both support the same codecs, except Sony refuses to leave MPEG2, and thus needing 50GB of disc space. You understand yet?

There is no reason to think growth in the movie market, are movies getting longer? Current 3+ hour films fit just fine. For storage fine, but bluray is not needed in the entertainment sector.

HD-DVD is far cheaper to manufacturer and provides the same results. This isn't rocket science.

JFreak
Jan 3, 2008, 10:37 AM
I thought we were supposed to be drooling over how cool it will be to finally burn a 50G backup.

Yep, that'd be great once it's cheap enough. Currently I don't want to even buy dual-layered DVD's because they cost so much per gigabyte.

krye
Jan 3, 2008, 10:38 AM
Yes thank you dear. They both support the same codecs, except Sony refuses to leave MPEG2, and thus needing 50GB of disc space. You understand yet?

There is no reason to think growth in the movie market, are movies getting longer? Current 3+ hour films fit just fine. For storage fine, but bluray is not needed in the entertainment sector.

HD-DVD is far cheaper to manufacturer and provides the same results. This isn't rocket science.

Yes, Blu Ray for computers/data storage and HD-DVD for movies/TV. What's the problem?

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 10:39 AM
OK even IF HD DVD is 1080p (which I didn't know seeing as how I haven't seen any player that outputs in that resolution), what say you about the fact that more studios are backing BD (as evidenced by a visit to the video section of an electronics store)? If HD DVD can support the same resolution as BD, why on EARTH didn't the manufacturers backing this have hardware ready to CONSUMERS to maximize the disc's resolution? Seems like extremely poor business-decisions have been made here.
http://www.crutchfield.com/App/Product/Item/Main.aspx?search=a35&i=052HDA35
Boy that was tough, searching for 5 seconds. 1080P and will even do 24fps.

Because there is NO difference between and interlaced signal and a progressive one on a progressive display. At the time the players were released, I could literally count the number that offered 1080P input on one hand.

krye
Jan 3, 2008, 10:40 AM
Yep, that'd be great once it's cheap enough. Currently I don't want to even buy dual-layered DVD's because they cost so much per gigabyte.

Your quote, "What we do in life...."

Gladiator?

chelsel
Jan 3, 2008, 10:41 AM
I wonder how much of an impact this will actually make in the "format wars" if it proves to be true.

What format war? Blu-Ray is the only option :-)

Spades
Jan 3, 2008, 10:42 AM
HD video doesn't need to be 30 GB. Digital video doesn't need to be HD either. Resolution and compression quality are the two things that affect file size the most, and both are easily variable.

If there is a sweet spot that balances quality and file size in a way that people will buy, Apple just needs to find it.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 10:43 AM
OK even IF HD DVD is 1080p (which I didn't know seeing as how I haven't seen any player that outputs in that resolution), what say you about the fact that more studios are backing BD (as evidenced by a visit to the video section of an electronics store)? If HD DVD can support the same resolution as BD, why on EARTH didn't the manufacturers backing this have hardware ready to CONSUMERS to maximize the disc's resolution? Seems like extremely poor business-decisions have been made here.
The studio support argument is just getting pointless now. Paramount and Dreamworks went HD-DVD exclusive and the rest beyond Sony affiliates are both.

Basically that means unless you enjoy watching garbage like Pirates of the Carribean 7 and Spiderman 23, it doesn't matter.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 10:45 AM
HD video doesn't need to be 30 GB. Digital video doesn't need to be HD either. Resolution and compression quality are the two things that affect file size the most, and both are easily variable.

If there is a sweet spot that balances quality and file size in a way that people will buy, Apple just needs to find it.
Yeh it's called VC-1 and DD+/TrueHD.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 10:45 AM
I have Transformers on HD-DVD, what "requirements" did it miss that you speak of? It was encoded at 1920x1080 and utilizes Dolby Digital Plus, am I missing something else that is "required"? It even has all of the interactive stuff that Sony has YET to implement with their Bluray Java nonsense. 51GB discs are being developed to quiet all of the people crying over Blu-Rays "superiority" based on disc space, and you know it. Both sides are in a space race, don't be so naive. It's just like any other product, look at the old MHZ race that clearly turned out to be pointless. If more space was needed, they would be using the 51GB discs. It's not reaching the consumer yet, because IT'S NOT NEEDED. The compression being used has to do entirely with Sony receiving royalties from their MPEG2 codec. Space/Bit rate comparisons between different codecs are like comparing apples to oranges. So stop it. Use your brain for 5 seconds and stop being so one sided.

Yes, apparently you are "missing something"
qouted from the transformers review at high-defdigest.com:

"Indeed, I had the opportunity to attend a special 'Transformers' media event with Paramount late last week, and the question was asked almost immediately -- why no Dolby TrueHD or uncompressed PCM? The studio's answer was that due to space limitations on the disc, the decision was made to limit the audio to Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1 Surround only (here at 1.5mbps). Unfortunately, this confirms the long-held theory that the 30Gb capacity of an HD-30 dual-layer HD DVD disc has forced studios to choose between offering a robust supplements package (as they've done here) and the very best in audio quality."

I am not being naive, I just got done schooling you on your precious 51 GB disc, and you keep trying to justify it yet claiming 30 is plenty and if they needed more they would put it out on the 51 GB disc. alert: you are in need of more schooling: NONE OF THE HD-DVD PLAYERS ON THE MARKET CAN PLAY 4 LAYER DISCS.

once again I need to ask what your argument is, having an extra 10 GB per layer is a bad thing right?

warner movies that are on both formats (need to conform to hd-dvd) are MUCH WORSE than disney titles and other beautiful transfers from studios taking full advantage of blu-rays specs. the differences between the formats are very little indeed on titles being shared.


No they are not, the first generation Toshiba were the only ones that had that "issue". An interlaced output provides the SAME EXACT image in the end on a progressive display. Which unless you have an old CRT, then you should have zero problems. Not to mention most displays do not even have 1080P input.

all of the sub $200 players that MOST consumers picked up during the fire sale were 1080i.

correction: most displays at kmart do not have 1080p inputs. any good tv nowaday does.

I don't care about space I care about quality. Blu-ray is just not as good. I have made direct comparisons in my dubbing stage and it is pretty obvious once you start looking at movies on referenced stages. Also the menus and features are better. That being said, I really don't care because both formats are DOA.

i care about quality as well when watching movies. I also care about space when I'm burning data DVDs.

blu-ray is just not as good? what movies are you refering to in the dubbing stage?

I trust myself more than you, and in my experience blu-ray is sometimes noticeably better, and other times the difference is neglible.

I also trust Michael Bay (director of transformers) more than you, and he has clearly stated that after working with both, Blu-ray is the superior product and provides the highest quality.

BUT, im sure you have more experience them him :eek: ;)

pazzo83
Jan 3, 2008, 10:46 AM
The studio support argument is just getting pointless now. Paramount and Dreamworks went HD-DVD exclusive and the rest beyond Sony affiliates are both.

Basically that means unless you enjoy watching garbage like Pirates of the Carribean 7 and Spiderman 23, it doesn't matter.

Your bias is crystal clear here. It's pretty obvious that one cannot have a reasoned discussion on the issue with you. Either way, you didn't respond to my last point.

JFreak
Jan 3, 2008, 10:46 AM
The studio support argument is just getting pointless now.

No, it's not. I don't think movie rentals are moving from SD-DVD to high definition until there is only one clear winner. They don't want to be supporting two formats because their non-educated sales personnel would have to support their customers and whatnot. I believe they need one format that they can fully support, but maybe that's just me...

pazzo83
Jan 3, 2008, 10:48 AM
http://www.crutchfield.com/App/Product/Item/Main.aspx?search=a35&i=052HDA35
Boy that was tough, searching for 5 seconds. 1080P and will even do 24fps.

Because there is NO difference between and interlaced signal and a progressive one on a progressive display. At the time the players were released, I could literally count the number that offered 1080P input on one hand.

OK and this product has been around for how long? Just saying they should have had 1080p players ready the moment the format was released (which were the players that you could "count on one hand"?)

diamond.g
Jan 3, 2008, 10:48 AM
OK even IF HD DVD is 1080p (which I didn't know seeing as how I haven't seen any player that outputs in that resolution), what say you about the fact that more studios are backing BD (as evidenced by a visit to the video section of an electronics store)? If HD DVD can support the same resolution as BD, why on EARTH didn't the manufacturers backing this have hardware ready to CONSUMERS to maximize the disc's resolution? Seems like extremely poor business-decisions have been made here. One word as to why the studio's are backing BD over HD DVD -> PS3.... Supposedly Sony claimed there would be 10 million units (all potential BD players) out by some time. The studio's more or less brought into that idea. So basically the PS3 is the only real reason why BD is still alive. HD DVD actually sells more standalones (supposedly) than BD does.

Do you know what you are talking about? Both standards support the basically the same Codecs including MPEG-2 and H.264 (each support others as well). BD are the Betamax and HD-DVD (based on old existing DVD technology) is the VHS. BD has a MUCH MUCH higher potential capacity than HD-DVD ever dreamed about. Think... Growth.

Go HD-DVD and we will be doing this again in 5-8 years.
eh, with the way the profiles are working out now, if you got a Gen 1 BD player (not a PS3) you will probably need to upgrade to be able to take advantage of stuff HD DVD was doing (technically) Day 1.

notjustjay
Jan 3, 2008, 10:52 AM
all of the sub $200 players that MOST consumers picked up during the fire sale were 1080i.

correction: most displays at kmart do not have 1080p inputs. any good tv nowaday does.

Let's say this again. Assuming a decent 1920x1200 display, there will be NO VISIBLE DIFFERENCE when you play a movie through 1080i or 1080p.

The TV's going to be smart enough to piece it all together the same way in the end, and there's some additional logic to do with the 3:2 pulldown used for playback of 24fps material.

I don't own either format yet (despite the Toshiba HD-A3 being offered at $99 during Boxing Week, complete with 7 free HD movies), and this is precisely why. My only concern with BluRay has more to do with the DRM associated with it (region coding, contection protection).

JFreak
Jan 3, 2008, 10:56 AM
I don't care about space I care about quality. Blu-ray is just not as good.

The digital side of things is equal between the two, so you're comparing something that's outside specs. Analog stage, for example, varies considerably. If you have suffered from bad player it doesn't mean the tech itself is bad.

For example, my SD-DVD component video goes completely out of sync if I connect any other video output to the thing. Having only component outputs connected, the picture is great. Don't know what they did wrong with it, but luckily I don't have to have multiple video outputs active simultaneously.

Point being these are the 1st generation high definition players. They're not as good as it gets.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 10:57 AM
Yes, apparently you are "missing something"
qouted from the transformers review at high-defdigest.com:

"Indeed, I had the opportunity to attend a special 'Transformers' media event with Paramount late last week, and the question was asked almost immediately -- why no Dolby TrueHD or uncompressed PCM? The studio's answer was that due to space limitations on the disc, the decision was made to limit the audio to Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1 Surround only (here at 1.5mbps). Unfortunately, this confirms the long-held theory that the 30Gb capacity of an HD-30 dual-layer HD DVD disc has forced studios to choose between offering a robust supplements package (as they've done here) and the very best in audio quality."

I am not being naive, I just got done schooling you on your precious 51 GB disc, and you keep trying to justify it yet claiming 30 is plenty and if they needed more they would put it out on the 51 GB disc. alert: you are in need of more schooling: NONE OF THE HD-DVD PLAYERS ON THE MARKET CAN PLAY 4 LAYER DISCS.

once again I need to ask what your argument is, having an extra 10 GB per layer is a bad thing right?

warner movies that are on both formats (need to conform to hd-dvd) are MUCH WORSE than disney titles and other beautiful transfers from studios taking full advantage of blu-rays specs. the differences between the formats are very little indeed on titles being shared.




all of the sub $200 players that MOST consumers picked up during the fire sale were 1080i.

correction: most displays at kmart do not have 1080p inputs. any good tv nowaday does.



i care about quality as well when watching movies. I also care about space when I'm burning data DVDs.

blu-ray is just not as good? what movies are you refering to in the dubbing stage?

I trust myself more than you, and in my experience blu-ray is sometimes noticeably better, and other times the difference is neglible.

I also trust Michael Bay (director of transformers) more than you, and he has clearly stated that after working with both, Blu-ray is the superior product and provides the highest quality.

BUT, im sure you have more experience them him :eek: ;)
Since when is TrueHD or Uncompressed PCM REQUIRED ?!? The difference between DD+ and TrueHD is absolutely negligible, if any. All of my audio is processed through an Anthem Statement D2 processor, Simaudio I-5 and Sim Audio Aurora ampfliers, driving Totem Acoustics Forest mains, Totem Acoustics singnature center one and an SVS subwoofer. My display is a 60" Sony SXRD Grand Wega that has been ISF calibrated. I'm pretty sure I'm qualified to do side by side comparisons. I'm sure you are as well, playing progressive signals on your 1080i projector.

51GB IS THREE LAYERS, AND CAN PLAY ON ALL HD-DVD PLAYERS RELEASED. The NEC drives play it just fine.

Please show me comparisons between the Warner titles. I'd love to see it, considering they use the same IDENTICAL transfers on both discs.

G4DP
Jan 3, 2008, 10:57 AM
Seriously, you guys think a BluRay drive will be in excess of $1000 optional? NewEgg has internal drives starting at $200 for readers and $400 for writers. I'll admit that these are probably not the brands that Apple would sell, but still, $1,000 seems too steep.

What do you think Apple will call these drives?
SuperDrive = DVD/CD writer
??? = BluRay/DVD/CD writer

We were being sarcastic.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 11:01 AM
Let's say this again. Assuming a decent 1920x1200 display, there will be NO VISIBLE DIFFERENCE when you play a movie through 1080i or 1080p.

The TV's going to be smart enough to piece it all together the same way in the end, and there's some additional logic to do with the 3:2 pulldown used for playback of 24fps material.

I don't own either format yet (despite the Toshiba HD-A3 being offered at $99 during Boxing Week, complete with 7 free HD movies), and this is precisely why. My only concern with BluRay has more to do with the DRM associated with it (region coding, contection protection).

I never said there was a difference....and I agree that on most titles the difference between formats is neglible. BUT titles from disney show to me that blu-ray can provide a better canvas for studios.

think about it, 7 free movies and a hd player for $99? im not saying its a bad deal, its just one of those things that is in fact to good to be true. I knew when I saw those prices the format war was over, and so did Onkyo when they stopped production of hd-dvd players after the firesale...ever seen a non toshiba hd-dvd player?

Region coding and content protection has been approved for hd-dvd since last year, they just won't implement it because it is not the next generation format.

JesterJJZ
Jan 3, 2008, 11:03 AM
Are you serious?? Blu-ray is a much better resolution. Do you have a 1080p TV?

They are both the same. Same resolutions, same codecs used, same laser wavelength. Only differences are physical disc and file structures, which play part in storage capacity. When it all comes down to it, bluray just has more capacity, that's it.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 11:04 AM
Your bias is crystal clear here. It's pretty obvious that one cannot have a reasoned discussion on the issue with you. Either way, you didn't respond to my last point.

If you want to get into why on earth did HD-DVD not bring machines ready for the consumers. Let me remind you about the first gen Bluray player fiasco. The ones with the faulty noise reduction circuits in the Genesis chip, causing horrendous image quality issues and without the ability to do any of the BD Java stuff they touted.

Mike Teezie
Jan 3, 2008, 11:04 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

American Technology Research analyst Shaw Wu cites sources (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/01/03/apple_set_to_ship_macs_with_blu_ray_support_report.html) who say that Apple will start shipping some of their computers with Blu-ray support as early as Macworld.

Appleinsider also corroborates the report with their own sources, expecting an overhaul to the Mac Pro in the 1st quarter of 2008 with Blu-ray support.

Mac Pro updates have been long overdue with the last major update almost 17 months ago. While some rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/05/mac-os-10-5-2-mac-pro-update-at-macworld/) have pegged the Mac Pro update at Macworld, there has been only minimal buzz about it in the final weeks before the expo.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/03/blu-ray-support-at-macworld-mac-pros-soon/)


Worst news........ever?

How many pro users will actually use the new MacPro systems?

I need a new MacPro badly, and will be buying one with two new 23" Apple displays literally as soon as they are available.

I needed to buy before the year was out for tax reasons. I held out for new machines, and now I'm worried that might have been a really, really bad move.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 11:05 AM
Since when is TrueHD or Uncompressed PCM REQUIRED ?!? The difference between DD+ and TrueHD is absolutely negligible, if any. All of my audio is processed through an Anthem Statement D2 processor, Simaudio I-5 and Sim Audio Aurora ampfliers, driving Totem Acoustics Forest mains, Totem Acoustics singnature center one and an SVS subwoofer. My display is a 60" Sony SXRD Grand Wega that has been ISF calibrated. I'm pretty sure I'm qualified to do side by side comparisons. I'm sure you are as well, playing progressive signals on your 1080i projector.

51GB IS THREE LAYERS, AND CAN PLAY ON ALL HD-DVD PLAYERS RELEASED. The NEC drives play it just fine.

Please show me comparisons between the Warner titles. I'd love to see it, considering they use the same IDENTICAL transfers on both discs.

wow, your a waste of time....the 51 GB discs are not playabe on current players...

please show you the comparisons of warner titles? what do you want to come over to my house or something? warner has ****** transfers because they need to conform to hd-dud discs. pick up a blu-ray player and a disney title and you will see..

and oh yeah, go read some more :D


don't be mad at me because TrueHD sound is required for HD-DVD

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 11:07 AM
I never said there was a difference....and I agree that on most titles the difference between formats is neglible. BUT titles from disney show to me that blu-ray can provide a better canvas for studios.

think about it, 7 free movies and a hd player for $99? im not saying its a bad deal, its just one of those things that is in fact to good to be true. I knew when I saw those prices the format war was over, and so did Onkyo when they stopped production of hd-dvd players after the firesale...ever seen a non toshiba hd-dvd player?

Region coding and content protection has been approved for hd-dvd since last year, they just won't implement it because it is not the next generation format.
You're comparing computer generated video titles, to film titles. Have you ever seen Pixar movies on standard DVD. They are always fantastic. It's just not the same thing, so stop comparing them. Look at two film titles both on HD-DVD and Bluray and there is NO difference. Except that I paid more for the Bluray player and media.

JesterJJZ
Jan 3, 2008, 11:07 AM
I don't know about the rest of you, but I prefer having something physical in my hands when I purchase it. I like having a library of movies to look through, and I'm certainly not going to wait for an overly compressed remnant of a movie to be downloaded to my tv/box. It's going to be a LONG time before 30/50GB is downloaded in minutes.

AMEN...I don't even use the ITMS unless I have to. Amazon is your friend.

Mydel
Jan 3, 2008, 11:08 AM
I can see few issues here. For now neither HDDVD nor Blu-Ray media are cheap enough for general use. Also Its much cheaper and practical at least from my stand point to use portable HD or Jump drives than buy, burn...etc any kind of discs.
Also burner speeds for now are pathetic.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 11:09 AM
wow, your a waste of time....the 51 GB discs are not playabe on current players...

please show you the comparisons of warner titles? what do you want to come over to my house or something? warner has ****** transfers because they need to conform to hd-dud discs. pick up a blu-ray player and a disney title and you will see..

and oh yeah, go read some more :D


don't be mad at me because TrueHD sound is required for HD-DVD
"You're" not "your". Clearly, I can see I'm a waste of time, with all that you've invested in arguing with me.

TrueHD is NOT required. Please show me where this is stated that it is REQUIRED.

Clive At Five
Jan 3, 2008, 11:14 AM
American Technology Research analyst Shaw Wu cites sources (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/01/03/apple_set_to_ship_macs_with_blu_ray_support_report.html) who say that Apple will start shipping some of their computers with Blu-ray support as early as Macworld.

Ugh, this guy pisses me off.

Any idiot would know that there's about a 95% chance that Apple will EVENTUALLY adopt BluRay.
Any idiot would also know that there's a 99% chance that Apple won't release any new hardware until MWSF.
It therefore follows, logically, that there is a 94% chance that Apple will start shipping units with BluRay as early as MWSF.

Leave it to Shaw Wu to offer his clients a fail-safe statement to make himself look good.

Honestly, it's like saying "some indefinite amount of time into the future, Apple will update the MacPro." Honestly why are we listening to these guys?

-Clive

notjustjay
Jan 3, 2008, 11:14 AM
SMART ENOUGH!?!? You do realize how long we've been deinterlacing signals right. It isn't exactly a process found in only highend electronics. Deinterlacing an interlaced signal is perfected on even the cheapest garbage.

Uh, yeah.. that was my point. Since all modern TV's can do perfect deinterlacing, the argument that "it doesn't support 1080p output!" is moot.

think about it, 7 free movies and a hd player for $99? im not saying its a bad deal, its just one of those things that is in fact to good to be true.

You're probably right about the motivation for this deal, but like I said, this is exactly why I'm staying away from BOTH formats... for now.

Bruizer
Jan 3, 2008, 11:20 AM
Yes thank you dear.

Do you really??


They both support the same codecs, except Sony refuses to leave MPEG2, and thus needing 50GB of disc space. You understand yet?


The substantially more capacity allows the use of MPEG-2 on BD where it simply won't work as well on the lower capacity HD-DVD. They both MANDATE MPEG-2. They both MANDATE VC-1. The both MANDATE H.264 among others.

BTW. To date, much less than half of the BD moview are shipped using MPEG-2.

Do YOU understand yet?


There is no reason to think growth in the movie market, are movies getting longer? Current 3+ hour films fit just fine. For storage fine, but bluray is not needed in the entertainment sector.


So you don't see any need ever in the future to have more data on the disk.... Ever... WOW. Forward looking you are.


HD-DVD is far cheaper to manufacturer and provides the same results. This isn't rocket science.

But it is in-adequate (compared to BD) for other uses such as storage. The price difference is basically because HD-DVD is based on the older DVD tech. As volume for BD goes up (and it is at a much faster rate than HD-DVD), the costs will come down and will match HD-DVD within a year or so.

In the very near future,BD has the potential to be CHEAPER than HD-DVD simply because a single layer disk may be used in many cases instead of a slight more costly 2 layer HD-DVD.

You don't want two different standards out there. The superior Betamax lost out last time to VHS. It looks like history will not repeat itself here and BD will be the winner (currently about 2-1. That is a substantial lead IMO).

You're right, it is not rocket science. Let HD-DVD die while it is still dignified. We will have dual formats for a short time but it won't last for long.

gotohamish
Jan 3, 2008, 11:20 AM
I really don't think the Mac Pro is a MWSF item... never has been. Notebooks are Apple's big consumer thing and this is a consumer show...

Q1 yes, MWSF no.

Agreed. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple doesn't release these before the MacWorld keynote, perhaps even on Tuesday. That way Steve can touch on it in the speech but keep on with the consumer stuff. Plus, the news-wire press the MacPros—and perhaps Apple choosing a format—will generate pre-MacWorld buzz too. They've done it before.

tgildred
Jan 3, 2008, 11:22 AM
Can we just fast forward to MacWorld???? I'm so tired of waiting!!!! So many new things are on the table.... possible video rentals, new Apple TV, new ultra portable, new MacPros, BlueRay options, iPhone updates!

I feel like Cartman waiting for the Wii to be released! :D

It's pretty cold out here on the East Coast. I'm pretty sure we could freeze you until Macworld. I promise I'll thaw you out in time.

Random Ping
Jan 3, 2008, 11:24 AM
but will the Blu-Ray Support be just a player or will it burn Blu-Ray as well?

Probably:

Play Blu Ray movies
Record Blue Ray movies
Record data (e.g., for backups)

To back this up, Apple Insider says that Apple will announce something "secret" at the Final Cut Pro user groups meeting the day after the Keynote. My guess is that Final Cut Pro will have an update to support burning movies to the new Blue Ray discs.

Also, several years ago (before the HD formats actually shipped) Apple announced (as well as several computer makers) their support for Blu Ray. Apparently Blu Ray (as the specs were defined back then) looked to be a better format than HD DVD for storing data. I don't know if changes to their specs since then has changed this equation.

mdntcallr
Jan 3, 2008, 11:24 AM
The problem I'm starting to see (for Apple at least) is that the new iMacs are starting to look like awfully good alternatives to spending $3000+ for a Mac Pro tower.

The performance gap has been narrowing with new iMac refreshes and updates, while the Mac Pro has been completely stagnant.

I have a Mac Pro and one of the new 20" iMacs, and for most things I do, the speed difference is negligible, really. The Mac Pro can handle concurrent tasks without slowing down as much as the iMac. But in some situations, the iMac actually completes a given job FASTER than the Mac Pro does - when you're only running the one application on both machines.

Unless you spend most of your time in one of a few specialized "pro apps", or you tend to do a lot of background rendering/processing while expecting another app in the foreground to run as though nothing else was happening, the Mac Pro is hard to cost-justify right now. (Sure, I realize it has a bigger memory capacity, much more hard drive expandability, and you can pair it with whatever display(s) you like -- and it has the better video card options to make 3D gaming enjoyable. But ultimately, that amounts to paying a BIG premium for more slots and bays on the motherboard, you know?)

Blu-Ray included in some/all of the new Mac Pros is a good move for the future -- but it's strictly an "incremental change" in the grand scheme of things. The Mac Pro needs a new generation of motherboard/Xeon CPU inside it to be a "worthy upgrade", PLUS get some new video card offerings for the thing!

Umm, there are new cpu's Intel has that are perfect for Mac Pro's, hence the new models now. this is widespread knowledge. they came out in dec.

Andrmgic
Jan 3, 2008, 11:25 AM
Is there any particular reason you say that? Notice that I am heavily qualifying my statement by saying it needs to be a model that takes off. Maybe rentals alone are enough, or maybe people care about quality enough that it needs to be HD too. If Apple does find the right formula, it makes sense that physical formats would start to decline. DVD has a long way to fall, but the HD formats have low market share right now. If they stall or start to decline now, they're dead.

People who buy hd formats care about visual quality. If they didn't, they wouldn't have purchased a (potentially) expensive HDTV and a hd player of some kind.

Apple doesn't even offer HD content for stuff that is HD on network television and they charge $9.99 minimum for SD movies, I hate to think how much they would charge for HD content and how long it would take to download several GB of data from their servers.

Physical formats are here to stay, at least until services like FiOS that offer 30mbps to consumers are widely available.

MacFan782040
Jan 3, 2008, 11:25 AM
I don't care about space I care about quality. Blu-ray is just not as good. I have made direct comparisons in my dubbing stage and it is pretty obvious once you start looking at movies on referenced stages. Also the menus and features are better. That being said, I really don't care because both formats are DOA.

Yea but remember, Betamax was a better quality too and it lost the battle to VHS. How many pornos are on Blu-ray/HD-DVD? We'll know who will win by that haha

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 11:26 AM
You're comparing computer generated video titles, to film titles. Have you ever seen Pixar movies on standard DVD. They are always fantastic. It's just not the same thing, so stop comparing them. Look at two film titles both on HD-DVD and Bluray and there is NO difference. Except that I paid more for the Bluray player and media.

I just said a disney title, not all disneys are computer generated, but since you assumed that I do agree you can't compare that.

Pick up 'Close Encounters of the third kind" or 'Lost Season 3' on blu....the transfers will blow you away, I promise. Nothing that I have ever seen on hd-dvd even compares.

"You're" not "your". Clearly, I can see I'm a waste of time, with all that you've invested in arguing with me.

TrueHD is NOT required. Please show me where this is stated that it is REQUIRED.

sorry, I make that mistake when typing fast and angered.

even sometimes the teacher learns from his students :D

"Dolby®TrueHD delivers true high-definition sound, while providing up to 7.1 channels of lossless audio that is bit-for-bit identical to the studio master. This may be considered as Dolby's version of its DTS counterpart, namely DTS-HD Master Audio.

This Dolby sound format has been developed for high-definition disc-based media such as HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc players, to deliver audio that matches the stunning high definition pictures created by these devices.

Dolby® TrueHD has been selected as a mandatory format for HD DVD and as an optional format for Blu-ray Disc.

It is also fully backward compatible with A/V receivers and HTIB (home-theaters-in-a-box) solutions supporting multi-channel Dolby Digital surround sound."

there ya go, transformers did not meet its own formats requirements....if you had VISION, you would see that this format has no chance.

and since im already wasting my time proving my points for you....

"The snag, of course, is that today's HD DVD players will be incapable of reading the new disc, which is something of a problem for early adopters, who will presumably have to buy new kit. Toshiba last week positioned the new disc as an "extended capacity, high-end option".


Now that ive proved myself, you are the one who needs to go find proof for your off-base claims.

mdntcallr
Jan 3, 2008, 11:26 AM
I really don't think the Mac Pro is a MWSF item... never has been. Notebooks are Apple's big consumer thing and this is a consumer show...

Q1 yes, MWSF no.

oh how wrong you will be. The Mac Pro is way overdue. So are new Apple cinema displays.

My bet is apple will do displays with hdmi inputs and possibly a model with speakers integrated.

the displays would be needed for Blu-Ray content with HDCP in it

gotohamish
Jan 3, 2008, 11:27 AM
I'm curious, just which Disney movies are people getting so freakin' excited about? :confused:

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 11:28 AM
Uh, yeah.. that was my point. Since all modern TV's can do perfect deinterlacing, the argument that "it doesn't support 1080p output!" is moot.



You're probably right about the motivation for this deal, but like I said, this is exactly why I'm staying away from BOTH formats... for now.
Misread, my apologies!

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 11:31 AM
I just said a disney title, not all disneys are computer generated, but since you assumed that I do agree you can't compare that.

Pick up 'Close Encounters of the third kind" or 'Lost Season 3' on blu....the transfers will blow you away, I promise. Nothing that I have ever seen on hd-dvd even compares.



sorry, I make that mistake when typing fast and angered.

even sometimes the teacher learns from his students :D

"Dolby®TrueHD delivers true high-definition sound, while providing up to 7.1 channels of lossless audio that is bit-for-bit identical to the studio master. This may be considered as Dolby's version of its DTS counterpart, namely DTS-HD Master Audio.

This Dolby sound format has been developed for high-definition disc-based media such as HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc players, to deliver audio that matches the stunning high definition pictures created by these devices.

Dolby® TrueHD has been selected as a mandatory format for HD DVD and as an optional format for Blu-ray Disc.

It is also fully backward compatible with A/V receivers and HTIB (home-theaters-in-a-box) solutions supporting multi-channel Dolby Digital surround sound."

there ya go, transformers did not meet its own formats requirements....if you had VISION, you would see that this format has no chance.

and since im already wasting my time proving my points for you....

"The snag, of course, is that today's HD DVD players will be incapable of reading the new disc, which is something of a problem for early adopters, who will presumably have to buy new kit. Toshiba last week positioned the new disc as an "extended capacity, high-end option".


Now that ive proved myself, you are the one who needs to go find proof for your off-base claims.
Holy crap, it's mandatory that the player must SUPPORT it. It says nothing that it's REQUIRED. The software and player must have the capability to use it. It's NOT REQUIRED.

By your backwards logic every single disc bluray or hddvd must have every single audio/video codec available ON THE DISC. That would mean Sony violates the Dolby audio clause every time they use uncompressed PCM.

hjelmn
Jan 3, 2008, 11:34 AM
Yes thank you dear. They both support the same codecs, except Sony refuses to leave MPEG2, and thus needing 50GB of disc space. You understand yet?

There is no reason to think growth in the movie market, are movies getting longer? Current 3+ hour films fit just fine. For storage fine, but bluray is not needed in the entertainment sector.

HD-DVD is far cheaper to manufacturer and provides the same results. This isn't rocket science.

Here are just a couple of problems with your post:
1. Sony no longer uses MPEG-2 as their primary video encoder. They have been primarily using AVC (which VC-1 is a knock-off of) for almost a year.
2. There is nothing wrong with MPEG-2 with the exception that more bits are needed to encode with the same quality as VC-1 and AVC. MPEG-2 with 50 GB can produce a perfect HD picture.
3. No, 3 hour movies do not fit "just fine" on 30 GB. In fact they have to seriously cripple either the encode or the extras to fit the movie on 30 GB.
4. There is no difference in cost for authoring an HD DVD vs a BD and BD discs are actually cheaper (per GB) to produce. The costs to produce both with drop considerably over the next year so your point is moot to begin with.

jpine
Jan 3, 2008, 11:35 AM
How many pro users will actually use the new MacPro systems?

Me for one. But only when DVDSP5 is a reality. I would expect BD support what has been holding up the next release of DVDSP. It has been a very, very long time.:(

mdriftmeyer
Jan 3, 2008, 11:35 AM
Do you actually own HD-DVD and Blurary software/hardware? Because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. HD-DVD has had stellar transfers from the start. 30GB is MORE than enough to fit HD media. Considering Bluray discs are maxing out at 50gb and there are 51GB HD-DVD discs, what is your argument? That the inefficient MPEG2 codec and uncompressed audio that Sony continues to push on everyone, requires immense amounts of space? Well then you'd be correct.
100 GB BD discs are hitting the market this year.

dAlen
Jan 3, 2008, 11:35 AM
#1 - The disk with the most space and less layers preferable.
I see everytime a layer transition happens - so if HD-DVD is boasting more space, but on 3-5 layers (i.e.), then I dont want it.

#2 - Again, more space. Check out www.red.com
Nice 4k camera, and when you compress that material down you will need space and something that can help that medium shine. (But the medium may not be what we think...see below)

#3 - The way of the future is through downloads.
Disc will be a storage medium, so then it wont really matter who wins the format war, in this case both can win...and digital downloads will happen. Technology isnt going to stop.

#4 - We are all going to be projecting 4k material shot on the likes of the red camera (link above), on our own screens at home.

#5 - One day we will put on some special glasses and be part of the movie, doing away with this archaic technology.

Point is, yes, the larger the space the better.
Fact is, BAck when Blue Ray was announced, there was another company who had a disk that would hold like 1Terrabyte of space. Of course the big name companies push to the consumer something a bit lower spec, but higher than what they are used to. And they milk them for what it is worth.

So for the time, Blue Ray seems to have more space with less intrusive layers to have to sit through in a movie. (yes, you may say its seemless...great, Im happy for you...I havent seen it.)

Peace

dAlen

V.K.
Jan 3, 2008, 11:39 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

American Technology Research analyst Shaw Wu cites sources (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/01/03/apple_set_to_ship_macs_with_blu_ray_support_report.html) who say that Apple will start shipping some of their computers with Blu-ray support as early as Macworld.

Appleinsider also corroborates the report with their own sources, expecting an overhaul to the Mac Pro in the 1st quarter of 2008 with Blu-ray support.

Mac Pro updates have been long overdue with the last major update almost 17 months ago. While some rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/12/05/mac-os-10-5-2-mac-pro-update-at-macworld/) have pegged the Mac Pro update at Macworld, there has been only minimal buzz about it in the final weeks before the expo.

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/01/03/blu-ray-support-at-macworld-mac-pros-soon/)

Minimal buzz? Try no buzz at all. Except for that one hardmac story a month ago there have been exactly zero rumors predicting a mac pro update at macworld.
I can only hope Q1 doesn't mean march 31st. I want a new Mac Pro yesterday!

twoodcc
Jan 3, 2008, 11:40 AM
i really hope it's true. i think apple needs to have hi-def support

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 11:42 AM
Here are just a couple of problems with your post:
1. Sony no longer uses MPEG-2 as their primary video encoder. They have been using primarily AVC (which VC-1 is a knock-off of) for almost a year.
2. There is nothing wrong with MPEG-2 with the exception that more bits are needed to encode at the same quality as VC-1 and AVC. MPEG-2 with 50 GB can produce a perfect HD picture.
3. No, 3 hour movies do not fit "just fine" on 30 GB. In fact they have to seriously cripple either the encode or the extras to fit the movie on 30 GB.
4. There is no difference in cost for authoring an HD DVD vs a BD. BD discs are actually cheaper (per GB) to produce. The costs to produce both with drop considerably over the next year so your point is moot to begin with.

haha, he doesn't listen...but yes, hit him with a dose of the truth.

yes, I love that he is still defending that the amount of space is plenty when its actually not. None of the extras will be in HD, or the audio will be ******, or there will be 3 discs....pick your poison, its not enough space for the next generation format.

in any case, more space is better.

100 GB BD discs are hitting the market this year.

I already told him that, and I will just go ahead and say they will play on current players....if he wants to disprove me he can try, but I did read the 100 GB discs will only take a firmware update for players to read.

JFreak
Jan 3, 2008, 11:43 AM
One day we will put on some special glasses and be part of the movie, doing away with this archaic technology.

Skip the glasses, that's as archaic as it gets (optics-wise). One day movies are encoded in such a way it directly interacts with our nerves which would interpret it in 3D. Then we wonder why our pets don't like to be in the living room while we watch movies...

donlphi
Jan 3, 2008, 11:44 AM
How many pro users will actually use the new MacPro systems?

I have a 933 Mhz Quicksilver G4 that is on it's last legs. I have about $4000 saved up burning a hole in my pocket and it's going to go towards a new Mac Pro (as soon as they upgrade). I think the performance gap is starting to get smaller between the Mac Pro and iMac, but I like the expandability of a tower vs. an all-in-one solution.

The fact that my Quicksilver is still kicking with 1TB of HD space, running Leopard, wireless N (thanks to Quickertek), while connected to a huge beautiful Apple monitor (thanks to a graphics card update) is reason enough to go with the Mac Pro when the time is right.

The problem with the iMac is no expandability. Try swapping out a hard drive in an old iMac. It's like breaking into Fort Knox. You can't add any pci cards when your USB 1.1 (or name any other port) goes out of date. Maybe the new iMacs are a bit easier to deal with. The biggest problem I could imagine is going without a computer for 2 weeks while Apple replaces the screen in my iMac.

Maybe I'm way off here... I should probably take a hard look at the new iMacs.

mixel
Jan 3, 2008, 11:44 AM
Go Blu-Ray! 50GB backups yay! (and potentially bigger down the road)

Burning things to run on the PS3 would be nice too. The PS3 supports DivX playback now.. Think how good that would be or EyeTV+PS3 users. :D

I thought current HD-DVD player didn't support the in-production 3-layered discs? wouldn't splitting an already un-establised format into two types be a really bad idea? (applies to BD too..)

Wikipedia "Hitachi has recently showcased 100 GB Blu-ray Disc, which consists of four layers containing 25 GB each. Unlike TDK and Panasonic's 100 GB disc, this disc is readable on standard Blu-ray drives" - So, that's good.

Combinaion (THD) BD/HD-DVD drives would/will be best.. The formats aren't different enough to warrent all the hate between the two camps.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 11:47 AM
Here are just a couple of problems with your post:
1. Sony no longer uses MPEG-2 as their primary video encoder. They have been primarily using AVC (which VC-1 is a knock-off of) for almost a year.
2. There is nothing wrong with MPEG-2 with the exception that more bits are needed to encode with the same quality as VC-1 and AVC. MPEG-2 with 50 GB can produce a perfect HD picture.
3. No, 3 hour movies do not fit "just fine" on 30 GB. In fact they have to seriously cripple either the encode or the extras to fit the movie on 30 GB.
4. There is no difference in cost for authoring an HD DVD vs a BD and BD discs are actually cheaper (per GB) to produce. The costs to produce both with drop considerably over the next year so your point is moot to begin with.
1. Ok, so what? Why are 50GB "needed" then?
2. I didn't say there was anything wrong, I was merely pointing out the fact that it was highly inefficient and that was the reason for such high disk space requirements. And the reason why everyone Blu-Ray argues it.
3. Encodes are not seriously crippled on any 3 hour movie. King Kong received rave reviews on both Audio and Video. Who gives a **** about extras? You can throw them on a separate disc.
4. For a period of time, it was at least double to manufacture a physical Blu-Ray disc. You may be right in the long term, but that goes for everything. THe players are still significantly cheaper in HD-DVD camp.

SheriffParker
Jan 3, 2008, 11:47 AM
Finally another Mac Pro rumor! I really hope there's a good update at macworld. I might be interested in buying one...

JFreak
Jan 3, 2008, 11:51 AM
For a period of time, it was at least double to manufacture a physical Blu-Ray disc. You may be right in the long term, but that goes for everything. THe players are still significantly cheaper in HD-DVD camp.

In Finland they sell HD-DVD players for 249 and cheapest Blu-Ray players go for 400 euros. I've been waiting for a price drop but so far no luck.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 11:52 AM
haha, he doesn't listen...but yes, hit him with a dose of the truth.

yes, I love that he is still defending that the amount of space is plenty when its actually not. None of the extras will be in HD, or the audio will be ******, or there will be 3 discs....pick your poison, its not enough space for the next generation format.

in any case, more space is better.



I already told him that, and I will just go ahead and say they will play on current players....if he wants to disprove me he can try, but I did read the 100 GB discs will only take a firmware update for players to read.
I really must know the setup you are doing your critical listening and viewing on. Because it's been said time and time again, that the difference between "crappy" DD+ and TrueHD/Uncompressed is almost nonexistent. Transformers was the big one that everyone was up in arms about. Here is an excerpt from DVD Talk regarding this release. If no one can tell the difference, what is the difference. Especially considering the fact the ratio of people with displays capable of viewing HD properly, is astronomically higher than people with audio setups capable of hearing the nuances in lossless audio. Look what happened to DVD Audio and Super Audio. The majority of the population just does not care, or does not have the capability to deal with highend audio. Even on my respectable system, I can not tell the difference A/B switching the tracks. Audio is, sadly, just not important. I think it's pretty clear by the proliferation of BOSE and widespread MP3 usage.

The Audio:
Although Paramount has used lossless audio on a few of their other releases, the space of everything they wanted to include in this set meant that instead of including a Dolby True HD or a DTS-HD MA track, they went for a Dolby Digital Plus track encoded at 1.5 mbps. There's been a lot of buzz about the difference between 1.5 mbps DD+ and Dolby True HD, with many knowledgeable people saying that there is no audible difference even on professional equipment, while others claim to be able to hear the difference right in their own homes. I was very vocal about my outrage that Transformers, which aims to be a benchmark HD DVD, does not feature a lossless track of any kind. But now, having heard the audio for myself, I can understand why professional film mixers, HD DVD technical directors, and more claim that the difference is negligible.

Put simply, this 5.1 Dolby Digital Plus track rocks hard. The level of aural detail is most impressive. I could hear every click and whine of the transforming parts, the grinding of metal when the robots fought, and even the startup sound of the 360 when it comes alive. During big action sequences, the surrounds were often used to assault the senses, but I noticed that the mixers would often use the rears for isolated sounds that they wanted to highlight, such as Frenzy's gibbering when he's on Air Force One. The bass has to be felt to be believed. At times it was so thunderous that I thought it might actually affect my bowels. Everything about this track just screams "REFERENCE!" and it holds up easily to the best PCM and True HD mixes that I have heard. Call me a doubter no more.

zetsurin
Jan 3, 2008, 11:53 AM
Do you actually own HD-DVD and Blurary software/hardware? Because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. HD-DVD has had stellar transfers from the start. 30GB is MORE than enough to fit HD media. Considering Bluray discs are maxing out at 50gb and there are 51GB HD-DVD discs, what is your argument? That the inefficient MPEG2 codec and uncompressed audio that Sony continues to push on everyone, requires immense amounts of space? Well then you'd be correct.

Yeah, because we all know that compressed audio must be better than uncompressed audio. WTH? I'd take the bigger format and get as much uncompressed/compressed lower as possible. Less loss! As for MPEG2, well all the blu-rays I have are H264. I don't give two hoots who had what from the start, I'm buying titles for the now.

You want the format with the highest compression? Stick with VCDs!

JFreak
Jan 3, 2008, 11:57 AM
Uncompressed is always better than lossy compression. Always! Even if 90% would not care, there is always that 10% who care. Too bad majority rules (that's why US has idiot as a leader).

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 11:57 AM
Yeah, because we all know that compressed audio must be better than uncompressed audio. WTH? I'd take the bigger format and get as much uncompressed/compressed lower as possible. Less loss! As for MPEG2, well all the blu-rays I have are H264. I don't give two hoots who had what from the start, I'm buying titles for the now.

You want the format with the highest compression? Stick with VCDs!
Ever heard of Lossless compression before?

diamond.g
Jan 3, 2008, 12:03 PM
Why is the argument over hd dvd and bd? So Apple includes BD support in FCP. If they don't have displays that support HDCP (external) or PVP (protected video path) then it is all a moot point as you wont get full rez anyways. Do we as Mac users want a Vista-slow machine?

hjelmn
Jan 3, 2008, 12:03 PM
1. Ok, so what? Why are 50GB "needed" then?
2. I didn't say there was anything wrong, I was merely pointing out the fact that it was highly inefficient and that was the reason for such high disk space requirements. And the reason why everyone Blu-Ray argues it.
3. Encodes are not seriously crippled on any 3 hour movie. King Kong received rave reviews on both Audio and Video. Who gives a **** about extras? You can throw them on a separate disc.
4. For a period of time, it was at least double to manufacture a physical Blu-Ray disc. You may be right in the long term, but that goes for everything. THe players are still significantly cheaper in HD-DVD camp.

Bigger discs are not needed for every release but it is nice that studios can fit 5 episodes of a 1-hour 1080p tv show on a 50 GB disc where a 30 GB disc can only hold 3. Or better yet with a 50 GB disc a a whole season of an SD tv show can fit on one disc. Why should the consumer settle for less space?

I don't really care about the extras either but many HD DVD supporters talk about superior extra yet they are all in SD because they ran out of disc space.

As for HD DVD players being cheaper. They aren't much cheaper anymore in the US. The price difference has fallen to $250 (1080p BD player) vs $200 (1080i HD DVD player). The movies cost about the same so what advantage does HD DVD really have anymore?

It will be great if Apple adds a BD drive option. That option is about the only thing that would convince me to upgrade from my power pc based mac.

sjobs@mac.com
Jan 3, 2008, 12:05 PM
Do you actually own HD-DVD and Blurary software/hardware? Because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. HD-DVD has had stellar transfers from the start. 30GB is MORE than enough to fit HD media. Considering Bluray discs are maxing out at 50gb and there are 51GB HD-DVD discs, what is your argument? That the inefficient MPEG2 codec and uncompressed audio that Sony continues to push on everyone, requires immense amounts of space? Well then you'd be correct.

EDIT: I guess I was late to the party. All my points have been addressed.

CWallace
Jan 3, 2008, 12:07 PM
The formate war is going to end the same way the DVD+R and DVD-R format war ended and that is with dual mode players.

HP just released a BluRay+HD-DVD playing (not recording) Lightscribe unit on one of their Windows Media Center PCs and Samsung, I think, released one for the home.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 12:15 PM
1. Ok, so what? Why are 50GB "needed" then?
2. I didn't say there was anything wrong, I was merely pointing out the fact that it was highly inefficient and that was the reason for such high disk space requirements. And the reason why everyone Blu-Ray argues it.
3. Encodes are not seriously crippled on any 3 hour movie. King Kong received rave reviews on both Audio and Video. Who gives a **** about extras? You can throw them on a separate disc.
4. For a period of time, it was at least double to manufacture a physical Blu-Ray disc. You may be right in the long term, but that goes for everything. THe players are still significantly cheaper in HD-DVD camp.

and cost is a technical advantage? its not the long term, its NOW...per GB blu ray is cheaper than HD-DUD.

HA, i knew it would all eventually boil down to "but hd-dvd is cheaper"

there is a reason macs are expensive, they are better....there is a reason blu-ray players are more expensive,they are better

not to mention when you are sitting in the driver seat you don't need to make desperation price cuts

EDIT: I guess I was late to the party. All my points have been addressed.

edit: edit: me and steve are on the same page :D

there ya go, steve jobs himself has weighed in and he knows the future is blu.

hjelmn
Jan 3, 2008, 12:15 PM
Why is the argument over hd dvd and bd? So Apple includes BD support in FCP. If they don't have displays that support HDCP (external) or PVP (protected video path) then it is all a moot point as you wont get full rez anyways. Do we as Mac users want a Vista-slow machine?

I totally agree.

I find it strange that the macbook pro apparently already has an HDCP compliant screen and video card but the high end 30" display still doesn't support HDCP. Maybe Apple will also announce HDCP compliant studio displays?

mdriftmeyer
Jan 3, 2008, 12:20 PM
I have a 933 Mhz Quicksilver G4 that is on it's last legs. I have about $4000 saved up burning a hole in my pocket and it's going to go towards a new Mac Pro (as soon as they upgrade). I think the performance gap is starting to get smaller between the Mac Pro and iMac, but I like the expandability of a tower vs. an all-in-one solution.

The fact that my Quicksilver is still kicking with 1TB of HD space, running Leopard, wireless N (thanks to Quickertek), while connected to a huge beautiful Apple monitor (thanks to a graphics card update) is reason enough to go with the Mac Pro when the time is right.

The problem with the iMac is no expandability. Try swapping out a hard drive in an old iMac. It's like breaking into Fort Knox. You can't add any pci cards when your USB 1.1 (or name any other port) goes out of date. Maybe the new iMacs are a bit easier to deal with. The biggest problem I could imagine is going without a computer for 2 weeks while Apple replaces the screen in my iMac.

Maybe I'm way off here... I should probably take a hard look at the new iMacs.

The gap will expand greatly when EFI standard cards from nVidia and AMD/ATi are released first half of 2008.

The wait has been on Microsoft and SP1 for Vista which now has EFI throughout.

http://www.istartedsomething.com/20071208/vista-sp1-changelog/


Hardware Ecosystem Support and Enhancements Adds support for new UEFI (Unified Extensible Firmware Interface) industry standard PC firmware for 64-bit systems with functional parity with legacy BIOS firmware, which allows Windows Vista SP1 to install to GPT format disks, boot and resume from hibernate using UEFI firmware.
Adds support for x64 EFI network boot.
Adds support for the 64-bit version of MSDASQL, which acts as a “bridge” from OLEDB to a variety of ODBC drivers thus simplifying application migration from 32-bit platforms to 64-bit Windows Vista.
Adds support for Direct3D® 10.1, an update to Direct3D 10 that extends the API to support new hardware features, enabling 3D application and game developers to make more complete and efficient use of the upcoming generations of graphics hardware.
Adds support for exFAT, a new file system supporting larger overall capacity and larger files, which will be used in Flash memory storage and consumer devices.
Adds support for SD Advanced DMA (ADMA) on compliant SD standard host controllers. This new transfer mechanism, which is expected to be supported in SD controllers soon, will improve transfer performance and decrease CPU utilization.
Adds support for creating a single DVD media that boots on PCs with either BIOS or EFI.
Enhances support for high density drives by adding new icons and labels that will identify HD-DVD and Blu-ray Drives as high density drives.
Adds support to enable new types of Windows Media Center Extenders, such as digital televisions and networked DVD players, to connect to Windows Media Center PCs.
Enhances the MPEG-2 decoder to support content protection across a user accessible bus on Media Center systems configured with Digital Cable Tuner hardware. This also effectively enables higher levels of hardware decoder acceleration for commercial DVD playback on some hardware.
Enhances Netproj.exe to temporarily resize the desktop to accommodate custom projector resolutions when connecting to Windows Network Projectors.


The Video Card manufacturers have been forced to wait on Microsoft before moving forward, across the board, with UEFI.

This is the year Apple's Mac Pro line will finally be able to see dual and quad GPU offerings with OpenGL 2.1 optimized performance and something many engineering fields, applied physics, gaming and more can finally justify using a Mac Pro to model non-linear dynamic systems with solid performance.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 12:21 PM
and cost is a technical advantage? its not the long term, its NOW...per GB blu ray is cheaper than HD-DUD.

HA, i knew it would all eventually boil down to "but hd-dvd is cheaper"

there is a reason macs are expensive, they are better....there is a reason blu-ray players are more expensive,they are better

not to mention when you are sitting in the driver seat you don't need to make desperation price cuts



edit: edit: me and steve are on the same page :D

there ya go, steve jobs himself has weighed in and he knows the future is blu.
For the last time, I am not arguing the validity of more storage space in computing. But it is not an argument in entertainment. "Better" is totally subjective. I think FreeBSD is "better" for my development needs and it's free and runs on old hardware I have laying around.

zetsurin
Jan 3, 2008, 12:26 PM
Ever heard of Lossless compression before?

Yes, I use FLAC myself thanks. However I am not buying the less is more argument. 50GB > 30GB, end of story. Both formats can use (and now pretty much both do use) efficient codecs. I'll take the 50GB format, which is incidentally the one with the far greater sales.

And for those arguing for the format that is priced cheaper, what the hell are you doing with a Mac anyway? A commodity Windows PC will always be cheaper.

armhol
Jan 3, 2008, 12:29 PM
I have been waiting exactly 1 year to buy a new Mac Pro. I waitied for iLife 08, then Leopard. I can't wait any longer! I want a new Mac Pro! I know as soon as I buy a new one, Apple will update the line with the new 3.2G procs. So I am forced to wait until the next revision.

Apple, please please please please please update the Mac Pro this month!

Same here!

JGowan
Jan 3, 2008, 12:32 PM
I pray this is true - I've been holding out for a new system for a long time (currently using a Dual 1Ghz G4 from Feb 2002) and I need something better for my work. Also, work has been so good lately that I need a hefty deduction to push me back out of the bigger bracket my last quarter put me in.

TMay
Jan 3, 2008, 12:33 PM
More capacity (100GB today, possibly 200GB later), and higher bandwidth (54mbps Blu Ray to 36.55mbps HD-DVD) will be able to support Higher resolutions than HD-DVD including 4k (4096 x 2160), and yes, Sony does make a 4k projector and RED makes a fairly inexpensive 4k camera. AVC and AVC-Intra for tapeless consumer cameras is also a format supported by many of the Blu-Ray hardware manufacturers including Sony, Panasonic and Samsung plus Canon, and is included in both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD playback specs. I would give the content creation advantage to the Blu-Ray Camp

Blu-Ray on 51 GB dual layer content generally includes HD extras, while HD-DVD tends to only support SD extras, albeit the availability of 45 GB three layer HD-DVD discs will mitigate this. HD-DVD + DVD combo disks to date have been expensive and problematic to produce, and will probably be dropped by most studios. Production of Blu-Ray dual layer discs is near parity with HD-DVD multilayer costs, and is no longer considered an issue.

Disk sales are 65% Blu-Ray to 35% HD-DVD and the trend seems to be slowly increasing to a Blu-Ray advantage.

HD-DVD does hold a current advantage for Picture in Picture with only Panasonics DMP-BD30K and PS3 supporting that feature, and with only the PS3 currently supporting internet connection. I would give this as a temporary and minor advantage to the HD-DVD camp. Look for many more Blu-Ray updates in 2008 to close that gap.

My prediction is that a switch to the Blu-Ray exclusive camp by Warner (as rumored) would pretty much kill HD-DVD chances, and Apple's BTO of Blu-Ray burners would become the defacto media standard for Pro-App users. Otherwise, I see HD-DVD slowly sliding back to an acknowledged secondary status, which would doom it as a standard, but otherwise, HD-DVD's might survive indefinitely.

That's all I have to say about that.

Shin-Ra
Jan 3, 2008, 12:43 PM
'overcast' is intentionally spreading misinformation here.

Sony Pictures releases now use (have done for a long time in fact) high bitrate MPEG-4 AVC on 50GB Blu-ray Discs. They also include lossless English soundtracks in either or both LPCM and Dolby True HD.

VC-1 and MPEG-4 AVC are modern, more efficient codecs than MPEG-2 so they achieve the same picture quality at lower bitrates. Or better picture quality at the same or higher bitrates of course.

Maximum Bitrate (Audio+Video)

Blu-ray: 48 Mbit/s
HDDVD: 30.24 Mbit/s

Maximum Bitrate (Video)

Blu-ray: 40 Mbit/s
HD DVD: 29.4 Mbit/s

Capacity

Blu-ray: 50GB (25GB per layer)
HD DVD: 30GB (15GB per layer)

This is what allows Blu-ray exclusive studios to produce higher quality encodes with higher bitrate video and lossless audio. The max HD DVD audio+video bitrate isn't much higher than the max video bitrate so if video quality is nearly maxed out it doesn't leave enough bandwidth for lossless audio. Video can be maxed out on Blu-ray with plenty of bandwidth to spare for lossless audio. The extra disk capacity Blu-ray has allows this higher bitrate video and lossless audio to be stored along with high def rather than standard def extra features.

It hasn't been proven than existing players can play 100GB 4 layer Blu-ray Discs or TL51 triple layer 51GB HD DVD's. The bitrate specs for both formats would be unaffected by these new capacity disks should existing players be able to read them.

vixapphire
Jan 3, 2008, 12:47 PM
Is there any particular reason you say that? Notice that I am heavily qualifying my statement by saying it needs to be a model that takes off. Maybe rentals alone are enough, or maybe people care about quality enough that it needs to be HD too. If Apple does find the right formula, it makes sense that physical formats would start to decline. DVD has a long way to fall, but the HD formats have low market share right now. If they stall or start to decline now, they're dead.

yes. watch a program like "the super nanny" or "jerry springer", and ask yourself how many of those people have macs or PCs with itunes connected to their apple tv's or otherwise to a living-room viewing environment.

next, ask yourself how many more of those people are out there than there are people like yourself.

bingo: the format war will not end just because steve made a deal to put movie rentals on a personal computer.

it may be a death-knell of sorts, but sound travels much slower than enlightenment.:-)

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 01:03 PM
More capacity (100GB today, possibly 200GB later), and higher bandwidth (54mbps Blu Ray to 36.55mbps HD-DVD) will be able to support Higher resolutions than HD-DVD including 4k (4096 x 2160), and yes, Sony does make a 4k projector and RED makes a fairly inexpensive 4k camera. AVC and AVC-Intra for tapeless consumer cameras is also a format supported by many of the Blu-Ray hardware manufacturers including Sony, Panasonic and Samsung plus Canon, and is included in both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD playback specs. I would give the content creation advantage to the Blu-Ray Camp

Blu-Ray on 51 GB dual layer content generally includes HD extras, while HD-DVD tends to only support SD extras, albeit the availability of 45 GB three layer HD-DVD discs will mitigate this. HD-DVD + DVD combo disks to date have been expensive and problematic to produce, and will probably be dropped by most studios. Production of Blu-Ray dual layer discs is near parity with HD-DVD multilayer costs, and is no longer considered an issue.

Disk sales are 65% Blu-Ray to 35% HD-DVD and the trend seems to be slowly increasing to a Blu-Ray advantage.

HD-DVD does hold a current advantage for Picture in Picture with only Panasonics DMP-BD30K and PS3 supporting that feature, and with only the PS3 currently supporting internet connection. I would give this as a temporary and minor advantage to the HD-DVD camp. Look for many more Blu-Ray updates in 2008 to close that gap.

My prediction is that a switch to the Blu-Ray exclusive camp by Warner (as rumored) would pretty much kill HD-DVD chances, and Apple's BTO of Blu-Ray burners would become the defacto media standard for Pro-App users. Otherwise, I see HD-DVD slowly sliding back to an acknowledged secondary status, which would doom it as a standard, but otherwise, HD-DVD's might survive indefinitely.

That's all I have to say about that.

good analysis.

'overcast' is intentionally spreading misinformation here.

Sony Pictures releases now use (have done for a long time in fact) high bitrate MPEG-4 AVC on 50GB Blu-ray Discs. They also include lossless English soundtracks in either or both LPCM and Dolby True HD.

VC-1 and MPEG-4 AVC are modern, more efficient codecs than MPEG-2 so they achieve the same picture quality at lower bitrates. Or better picture quality at the same or higher bitrates of course.

Maximum Bitrate (Audio+Video)

Blu-ray: 48 Mbit/s
HDDVD: 30.24 Mbit/s

Maximum Bitrate (Video)

Blu-ray: 40 Mbit/s
HD DVD: 29.4 Mbit/s

Capacity

Blu-ray: 50GB (25GB per layer)
HD DVD: 30GB (15GB per layer)

This is what allows Blu-ray exclusive studios to produce higher quality encodes with higher bitrate video and lossless audio. The max HD DVD audio+video bitrate isn't much higher than the max video bitrate so if video quality is nearly maxed out it doesn't leave enough bandwidth for lossless audio. Video can be maxed out on Blu-ray with plenty of bandwidth to spare for lossless audio. The extra disk capacity Blu-ray has allows this higher bitrate video and lossless audio to be stored along with high def rather than standard def extra features.

It hasn't been proven than existing players can play 100GB 4 layer Blu-ray Discs or TL51 triple layer 51GB HD DVD's. The bitrate specs for both formats would be unaffected by these new capacity disks should existing players be able to read them.

YES...thanks, another good analysis. maybe overcast will listen to someone who calmly explains the facts...he was just pissing me off to much with his FUD.

guzhogi
Jan 3, 2008, 01:07 PM
Anyone know if Apple's displays handle HDCP copy protection? Wouldn't be much use if we can't even watch movies w/ it.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 01:12 PM
Anyone know if Apple's displays handle HDCP copy protection? Wouldn't be much use if we can't even watch movies w/ it.

1) I don't think they do..but we all don't use apples displays :-)

2) coincidence the displays are due for a refresh as well?

Spades
Jan 3, 2008, 01:14 PM
yes. watch a program like "the super nanny" or "jerry springer", and ask yourself how many of those people have macs or PCs with itunes connected to their apple tv's or otherwise to a living-room viewing environment.

next, ask yourself how many more of those people are out there than there are people like yourself.

bingo: the format war will not end just because steve made a deal to put movie rentals on a personal computer.

it may be a death-knell of sorts, but sound travels much slower than enlightenment.:-)

How many people have an HD player hooked up to their TV either? So maybe the competition becomes HD-DVD vs. Blu-ray vs. AppleTV (vs. this new NetFlix thing). Then it breaks out like this:

HD-DVD/Blu-ray:
Higher quality
Physical medium
Devices will become cheaper
Limited formats

AppleTV:
Lower quality
Digital distribution
Device pretty much guaranteed to cost more
Music and podcasts in addition to video
TV shows available earlier
All files also play on iPods

TMay
Jan 3, 2008, 01:15 PM
Anyone know if Apple's displays handle HDCP copy protection? Wouldn't be much use if we can't even watch movies w/ it.

Not yet. I would expect that the next generation displays would have to have it, as any Blu-Ray player would require it.

What I'm waiting for: 45nm, HDMI 1.3 I/O, Blu-Ray burner plus the new cinema displays.

jonweinraub
Jan 3, 2008, 01:17 PM
I am currently allocating funds for a top-of-the-line 24" iMac. Would you think if this Blu-Ray drive does materialise for the Mac Pro, would this be a possibility for the iMac? Would it be "user-replaceable" if I were to buy the iMac now?

notjustjay
Jan 3, 2008, 01:22 PM
I am currently allocating funds for a top-of-the-line 24" iMac. Would you think if this Blu-Ray drive does materialise for the Mac Pro, would this be a possibility for the iMac? Would it be "user-replaceable" if I were to buy the iMac now?

What's wrong with an external BD drive in a USB or Firewire enclosure box?

Amigori
Jan 3, 2008, 01:22 PM
Even though this entire thread should now be voted Off-Topic as it has little to do with new MacPros, here's some links about Blu-ray and HD-DVD to read, if you are so inclined after this pissing match between monkeytap and overcast. I take no position as I don't have HDTV, HD-DVD, or Blu-ray; just stating some facts and links.

The authoring of the movie/menus/extras/interactive content makes more of a difference than the format of the disc. Lack of QA/QC hurts both formats; they've both had compatibility issues while rushing to release titles. Here's (http://www.highdefdigest.com/tags/show/Technical_Glitches) a nice big list of glitches for reference.

Anecdotally, I've seen more models of Blu-ray players available, only seen Toshiba HD-DVD players, more titles in Blu-ray, and some lousy demonstrations in the stores. Most of the salesmen in $BigBoxElectronicsStore don't know anything except one plays in one type of player and the other in the other player and maroon case v. blue case.

Notable facts:
-DRM: AACS on Both; BD+, ROM-Mark optional on Blu-ray
-Larger aperture on Blu-ray, allowing for the higher capacity
-3 layer HD-DVD is v2.0 spec, 3 x 17GB = 51GB, currently unknown compatibility
-Max bitrates (total, audio, video) are higher on Blu-ray
-DD+ and Dolby TrueHD are mandatory on HD-DVD, optional on Blu-ray
-HD-DVD is region free; Blu-ray has 3 regions
-Microsoft's HDi in HD-DVD vs. Sun's BD-J in Blu-ray
-Stand-alone component manufacturers: HD-DVD: 5; Blu-ray: 5
-LG has a player that supports both discs but is expensive
-Blu-ray discs are hard-coated

Blu-ray industry membership:
Apple; Dell Inc.; Hewlett Packard Company*; Hitachi, Ltd.; LG Electronics inc.; Mitsubishi Electric Corporation; Panasonic (Matsushita Electric); Pioneer Corporation; Royal Philips Electronics; Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Sharp Corporation; Sony Corporation; Sun Microsystems; TDK Corporation; Thomson; Twentieth Century Fox; and Walt Disney Pictures and Television, Warner Bros*

HD-DVD industry membership:
Toshiba, NEC*, Sanyo, Microsoft, RCA, Kenwood, Intel, Venturer Electronics, Hewlett Packard Company*, Memory-Tech Corporation, Universal, Paramount, The Weinstein Company, Warner Bros.*

*Supporting both formats

Links:
Basic Comparison chart (kinda old)
http://www.dv.com/dv/magazine/2006/August/DV0608NHDVDSpecs-compared.jpg

Wikipedia articles:
Comparison of HD optical formats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_high_definition_optical_disc_formats)
Blu-ray (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray)
HD-DVD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD_DVD)

Shin-Ra
Jan 3, 2008, 01:23 PM
I've been waiting a long time for new Cinema Displays too, higher DPI monitors would be heavenly but my expectations are more realistic.

diamond.g
Jan 3, 2008, 01:23 PM
I am currently allocating funds for a top-of-the-line 24" iMac. Would you think if this Blu-Ray drive does materialise for the Mac Pro, would this be a possibility for the iMac? Would it be "user-replaceable" if I were to buy the iMac now?

The only thing user replaceable in the iMac (AFAIK) is the RAM and HDD. If you were to install a BD drive it would be at your own risk (read: void warranty). Even if Apple were to add is as a BTO option.

liv4Mac
Jan 3, 2008, 01:24 PM
I would assume that this means that the new Mac Pros will have HDMI ports.

....and how come apple have not reduced the current Mac Pros prices?
Does it mean the new Mac Pro are far from being released?
or are the prices on the new Mac Pro going to be more expensive than the current prices now?

diamond.g
Jan 3, 2008, 01:30 PM
I would assume that this means that the new Mac Pros will have HDMI ports. Maybe

....and how come apple have not reduced the current Mac Pros prices? Has Apple ever reduced the price of a Mac before the replacement came out?
Does it mean the new Mac Pro are far from being released? Not necasarily
or are the prices on the new Mac Pro going to be more expensive than the current prices now? may very well be the same prices

Reply in RED.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 01:31 PM
The authoring of the movie/menus/extras/interactive content makes more of a difference than the format of the disc. Lack of QA/QC hurts both formats; they've both had compatibility issues while rushing to release titles. Here's (http://www.highdefdigest.com/tags/show/Technical_Glitches) a nice big list of glitches for reference.

It's interesting to note, that entire page of glitches is all Blu-Ray authoring issues. There is only one HD-DVD issue and it was for a typographical error on the packaging.

Anyhow, I apologize to everyone for making a mess of the topic. Time to upgrade to AIX 6.1 on the new boxes! Laters.

adamwc
Jan 3, 2008, 01:31 PM
It's worth it to me to pay a little more for blu-ray media to have the convenience and reliability of optical media backups that take up so little room. As a video editor, this would be a real boon to me in my work.

re: the HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray format war, I'm a movie lover first and foremost, so I went "purple" with excellent players from Toshiba and Panasonic connected to a Pioneer 1080p Kuro.

There is NO difference between the quality that is possible on these formats. There are some discs on both formats where the quality of the transfer is subpar, but when executed well, the PQ is terrific on either.

Anecdotally, I've found the HD-DVDs in my collection to be more consistently of higher quality than my Blu-Rays, but Lost Season 3 and Ratatouille (both Blu-Rays) are the highest quality HD movies I've ever seen. Newer Blu-Rays seem to be far better quality than the original batch (which were actually using MPEG2 compression instead of VC1).

Life is too short. Pick one format or both and enjoy your movies looking and sounding better than ever. :D

!¡ V ¡!
Jan 3, 2008, 01:36 PM
I feel that both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray formats will be dead in the water, when flash media has already exceeded the 32 - 64 GB capacity range.

Feels stupid for the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray camp to biker about price and availability when the underdog flash media will overthrow them. ;)


The roadmap indicates that 128GB flash might be introduces sometime this year, though it will be expensive that only leave the 32GB to come down in price. :)

diamond.g
Jan 3, 2008, 01:40 PM
I feel that both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray formats will be dead in the water, when flash media has already exceeded the 32 - 64 GB capacity range.

Feels stupid for the HD-DVD and Blu-Ray camp to biker about price and availability when the underdog flash media will overthrow them. ;)


The roadmap indicates that 128GB flash might be introduces sometime this year, though it will be expensive that only leave the 32GB to come down in price. :)


Sigh, flash media will not ursup HDM for supremacy. You are looking at it from a storage perspective than from a content perspective. Movie companies won't use a flashmedia as a media/content delivery format. Major reason why? Can't get the price down fast enough for the amount of disk would have to be sent out. Could you imagine how much a 32-64GB flashdrive movie would cost? Or what kind of DRM would have to be implemented to keep you from copying it? Of how few movies could actually be made in a year (versus HDM where they can press millions of them in a real short time).

CWallace
Jan 3, 2008, 01:42 PM
In addition to HDMI/HDCP, I hope the new Cinema Displays support DisplayPort.

Chris F
Jan 3, 2008, 01:44 PM
Guys come on. All this argument is moot. Take it from the guy that writes HDTV driver code for a living.

Both HD-DVD and BD provide ample space and bandwidth to encode a movie at a high enough bitrate that on a big high quality 1080P display you will not be able to tell improvements by increasing the bitrate further. VC1 or H.264 (AVC), it does not matter.

The HD-DVD/BD battle is mainly a POLITICAL one being waged between giant corporations. The consumers are the victims. Dont get pissed off at each other. Get pissed off at the greed of Toshiba, Sony and co. Put your money where your mouth is and dont buy either format or if you are a video/audio junkie absolutely must, greatly restrict your purchasing until a proper solution is in place.

One last side technical note for the fellow who was saying that 1080P->1080i output will look exactly the same as 1080P. Well... sorta. The original 1080P signal will get run through an interlacing algorithms on the source player and a de-interlacer inside the TV which generally involve more and different post processing vs a progressive signal. In certain circumstances might result in visible differences. Typically however, I agree there will be no difference if the source material is originally high quality 1080P being interlaced and then de-interlaced on the other end.

AidenShaw
Jan 3, 2008, 01:49 PM
IIRC, When Apple added Superdrives (DVD/CD burners) to the PowerMac (the blue G3s), the entire Mac WITH Superdrive cost less than the current consumer price of a bare Superdrive alone.

Close, but no cigar.

Compaq (at CES 2001) and Apple (a week later at MWSF 2001) announced the availability of the Pioneer DVR-103 option and DVD authoring bundles.

This drive had around a $1000 list price, but was available soon after release for about $600-$700 at online retailers.

Prior to this drive, DVD writers were extremely expensive (about $5400) but these were not the same devices as the DVR-103.

http://www.manifest-tech.com/media_dvd/dvd_format.htm

The Pioneer DVR-103 is the first combination recordable DVD/CD drive for consumer PC use. It is a big breakthrough in price: the current DVR-S201 external DVD-Recordable drive for authoring sells for $5,400, down from $17,000 when it was first introduced in 1997.

The DVR-103 reads and writes four recordable formats including DVD-R (write once), DVD-RW (re-recordable), CD-R and CD-RW, and offers up to 4.7GB of storage capacity per DVD side. It records DVD-R discs at twice normal speed (2X). Pioneer plans to ship the DVR-103 as a retail product packaged as an internal IDE drive in Q2 2001 for a suggested price of $995.

welles13
Jan 3, 2008, 02:02 PM
than buy blu-ray....microsoft wants you to be confused, thats their number one goal since they are losing badly, but the answer is clear....the future is blu

Sick. Sony press releases aren't this vomit-worthy.

Porco
Jan 3, 2008, 02:04 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't HD-DVD region free and Blu-ray isn't (at least in the spec, but they'll turn it on all the discs if they win of course)? To me that is a major plus for HD-DVD, I like importing foreign films and TV series, and until there are multi-region Blu-ray players I'm for the one that doesn't region lock.

Apple should allow for both formats in my view, but I agree that they will probably favour Blu-ray, as Jobs seems paradoxically much more comfortable with DRM and anti-consumer technology for movies than for music, which is a shame.

Amigori
Jan 3, 2008, 02:15 PM
It's interesting to note, that entire page of glitches is all Blu-Ray authoring issues. There is only one HD-DVD issue and it was for a typographical error on the packaging.

Anyhow, I apologize to everyone for making a mess of the topic. Time to upgrade to AIX 6.1 on the new boxes! Laters.

True enough. I knew there were a few HD-DVD issues that weren't in the list; it only goes back to October. Here's (http://www.amazon.com/review/product/B000W7F50Q/ref=cm_cr_dp_synop?%5Fencoding=UTF8&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending#R3OEPLO48TUR5E) an HD-DVD issue. Seems that the Combo HD-DVD/reg DVD of Harry Potter 4 doesn't like the XBox HD-DVD player. 'Children of Men' also had issues with that player. There's a few other titles that have issues with that Xbox add-on, so it probably has to do with the firmware of the player and not so much the disc itself. Glad to see MS software (HDi) works with their hardware...haha

Back on topic....I'm looking forward to the high capacity of the discs, either format, for data use. Backing-up large databases, my music collection, and seasons of iTMS TV shows on one disc will be more convenient than X DVDs. Although blank media needs to come down in price, which it will eventually. FastMac (http://www.fastmac.com/) has Blu-ray burners for Powerbooks, but they are insanely expensive. $1k, no thanks. I could just setup an old box as a NAS with a big HD...meh...

I'm also hoping for high DPI displays. 10.5 has Resolution Independence, link (http://developer.apple.com/leopard/overview/), so hopefully with this hardware refresh, we'll see some higher res displays. Even if they leave the current housing, which looks awesome, but upgrade the panels. Maybe a 15" MBP, next refresh, with a 1920x1200 display.

dlethe
Jan 3, 2008, 02:15 PM
Let me preface this by saying this is an educated guess, and I am not disclosing anything I learned via a non-disclosure agreement ....

One of the manufacturers (Panasonic) announced an ultra-slim 9.5mm BD designed for notebooks a few days ago. They wil show it at the CES show starting on Jan 7th. This is the worlds thinnest BD at 9.5mm high, and surely what Apple was waiting for given their height constraints in the macbook platform.

Here are the specs of what Panasonic will announce, so unless another manufacturer is sandbagging prior to CES, then this is what Apple will offer:

Double speed reading and writing for both write-once BD-R and rewritable BD-RE discs.

R/W on BD-R DL (dual layer/50GB) and BD-RE DL discs and will be compatible with future organic pigment-type BDs.

Compatible with three types of optical discs (BD, DVD, CD). It supports reading and writing on four types of BD media (BD-R, BD-RE, BD-R DL, BD-RE DL) and reading of BD-ROMs. In addition, it is capable of reading and writing on seven types of CD/DVD media (DVD-RAM, DVD-R, +R, DVD-RW, +RW, CD-R, CD-RW) and reading of DVD-ROMs and CD-ROMs. Thus, the new drive provides a DVD Super Multi Drive function plus Blu-ray Disc support. Further, it is capable of 8x writing on DVD-R/+Rs, making the handling of DVDs fast and easy.

Regards, David

CWallace
Jan 3, 2008, 02:20 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't HD-DVD region free and Blu-ray isn't?

Correct. Blu-Ray has three regions:


A - North America, Central America, South America, Japan, Taiwan, North Korea, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Southeast Asia.
B - Europe, Greenland, French territories, Middle East, Africa, Australia, and New Zealand.
C - India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Mainland China, Pakistan, Russia, Central, and South Asia.

I would expect such Region-encoding would be defeated for PC-based players.

hjelmn
Jan 3, 2008, 02:21 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't HD-DVD region free and Blu-ray isn't (at least in the spec, but they'll turn it on all the discs if they win of course)? To me that is a major plus for HD-DVD, I like importing foreign films and TV series, and until there are multi-region Blu-ray players I'm for the one that doesn't region lock.

Apple should allow for both formats in my view, but I agree that they will probably favour Blu-ray, as Jobs seems paradoxically much more comfortable with DRM and anti-consumer technology for movies than for music, which is a shame.

The only movies that are region locked are those that are still in their original theatrical run. Once a movie leaves its original theatrical run the region lock is removed and new discs are pressed. This allows studios who don't have international rights to release a disc in the US before the overseas theatrical run is complete. A good example of this practice is the New-Line release Hairspray (on BD and DVD but not HD DVD).

This practice will not change when BD wins.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 02:22 PM
Sick. Sony press releases aren't this vomit-worthy.

begin choking on your own vomit...it may be disgusting but its true.


Back on topic....I'm looking forward to the high capacity of the discs, either format, for data use. Backing-up large databases, my music collection, and seasons of iTMS TV shows on one disc will be more convenient than X DVDs. Although blank media needs to come down in price, which it will eventually. FastMac (http://www.fastmac.com/) has Blu-ray burners for Powerbooks, but they are insanely expensive. $1k, no thanks. I could just setup an old box as a NAS with a big HD...meh...

I already got the $500 tray loading blu-ray burner and just mounted it in a external firewire enclosure. its a cheaper, more portable, and swappable solution for what you are talking about. I am looking forward to burning bundles of movies and seasons of shows on a single disc and watch them all on my ps3 :D


Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't HD-DVD region free and Blu-ray isn't (at least in the spec, but they'll turn it on all the discs if they win of course)? To me that is a major plus for HD-DVD, I like importing foreign films and TV series, and until there are multi-region Blu-ray players I'm for the one that doesn't region lock.

Apple should allow for both formats in my view, but I agree that they will probably favour Blu-ray, as Jobs seems paradoxically much more comfortable with DRM and anti-consumer technology for movies than for music, which is a shame.

hd-dvd has approved region coding, just haven't used it. IF they win, which IMO they won't, they will surely have to turn it on.

its a simple question really....do you think studios would allow the next generation physical media to be without protection/regulation?

hjelmn
Jan 3, 2008, 02:24 PM
Let me preface this by saying this is an educated guess, and I am not disclosing anything I learned via a non-disclosure agreement ....

One of the manufacturers (Panasonic) announced an ultra-slim 9.5mm BD designed for notebooks a few days ago. They wil show it at the CES show starting on Jan 7th. This is the worlds thinnest BD at 9.5mm high, and surely what Apple was waiting for given their height constraints in the macbook platform.

Here are the specs of what Panasonic will announce, so unless another manufacturer is sandbagging prior to CES, then this is what Apple will offer:

Double speed reading and writing for both write-once BD-R and rewritable BD-RE discs.

R/W on BD-R DL (dual layer/50GB) and BD-RE DL discs and will be compatible with future organic pigment-type BDs.

Compatible with three types of optical discs (BD, DVD, CD). It supports reading and writing on four types of BD media (BD-R, BD-RE, BD-R DL, BD-RE DL) and reading of BD-ROMs. In addition, it is capable of reading and writing on seven types of CD/DVD media (DVD-RAM, DVD-R, +R, DVD-RW, +RW, CD-R, CD-RW) and reading of DVD-ROMs and CD-ROMs. Thus, the new drive provides a DVD Super Multi Drive function plus Blu-ray Disc support. Further, it is capable of 8x writing on DVD-R/+Rs, making the handling of DVDs fast and easy.

Regards, David

Add to this that Panasonic = Mas hitsu and Mas hitsu (wow, it sensors that name) is one of Apple's primary optical drive suppliers. Apple's other major supplier, Pioneer, is also BD exclusive.

CWallace
Jan 3, 2008, 02:29 PM
hd-dvd has approved region coding, just haven't used it. IF they win, which IMO they won't, they will surely have to turn it on.

They could do so with future releases, but to do so retroactively (and thus invalidating parts of one's collection) would be grounds for a nice, fat class action lawsuit.


its a simple question really....do you think studios would allow the next generation physical media to be without protection/regulation?

The main reason the Regional Encoding was done was to prevent a DVD in one country from being played in another country where it has yet to be released and/or is still in theaters. Between digital minicams in theaters and P2P file-sharing, folks around the world can see a movie that has only been shown in one theater to date.

So that horse has already left the barn (and the farm, for that matter). All it does now is limit sales of the content, which is counterproductive to the studio's financial goals.

ChrisK018
Jan 3, 2008, 02:31 PM
As a neutral, whatever helps end the 'format war' is welcome. Maybe Mac Pro's will only be a nudge, but every little bit helps.

Amigori
Jan 3, 2008, 02:33 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't HD-DVD region free and Blu-ray isn't (at least in the spec, but they'll turn it on all the discs if they win of course)? To me that is a major plus for HD-DVD, I like importing foreign films and TV series, and until there are multi-region Blu-ray players I'm for the one that doesn't region lock.

Apple should allow for both formats in my view, but I agree that they will probably favour Blu-ray, as Jobs seems paradoxically much more comfortable with DRM and anti-consumer technology for movies than for music, which is a shame.

Correct. HD-DVD, no region lock. Blu-ray, 3 regions, chart here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Blu-ray_regions_with_key.png). So depending on where you live and what you import, you may be ok with Blu-ray; the regions are pretty large, unlike DVD.

Apple is on the Board of Directors for the Blu-ray Disc Association, here (http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/#bluray_developers). Chances are practically zero that they'd equip Macs with HD-DVD, which is a Microsoft/Toshiba technology.

DRM is available for both formats and has more to do with the content provider than anything else. And it seems that Jobs is pretty Anti-DRM based on his public letters to various companies/industries.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 02:34 PM
Add to this that Panasonic = Mas hitsu and Mas hitsu (wow, it sensors that name) is one of Apple's primary optical drive suppliers. Apple's other major supplier, Pioneer, is also BD exclusive.
Wasn't Pioneer supposed to be releasing a dual format player, the BDR-103?

diamond.g
Jan 3, 2008, 02:37 PM
The only movies that are region locked are those that are still in their original theatrical run. Once a movie leaves its original theatrical run the region lock is removed and new discs are pressed. This allows studios who don't have international rights to release a disc in the US before the overseas theatrical run is complete. A good example of this practice is the New-Line release Hairspray (on BD and DVD but not HD DVD).

This practice will not change when BD wins.

So you are saying that they re-press BDROMs without RCE? Why is this not widely advertised?

Caris
Jan 3, 2008, 02:37 PM
As a neutral, whatever helps end the 'format war' is welcome. Maybe Mac Pro's will only be a nudge, but every little bit helps.

Yeah i agree, every little helps!

Porco
Jan 3, 2008, 02:41 PM
The only movies that are region locked are those that are still in their original theatrical run. Once a movie leaves its original theatrical run the region lock is removed and new discs are pressed. This allows studios who don't have international rights to release a disc in the US before the overseas theatrical run is complete. A good example of this practice is the New-Line release Hairspray (on BD and DVD but not HD DVD).

This practice will not change when BD wins.

Do you really believe that? Why are major movie studios still releasing 50+year old films with region locks on DVD if so?

Region Coding is beyond stupid, and in my view the studios should abandon it entirely. They need to move to worldwide release dates for big name movies IMHO.


The main reason the Regional Encoding was done was to prevent a DVD in one country from being played in another country where it has yet to be released and/or is still in theaters. Between digital minicams in theaters and P2P file-sharing, folks around the world can see a movie that has only been shown in one theater to date.

So that horse has already left the barn (and the farm, for that matter). All it does now is limit sales of the content, which is counterproductive to the studio's financial goals.

Totally agree. All it does is punish legitimate consumers and encourage piracy, just like most DRM and other attempts consumer manipulation do.

The insanity of buying a Macbook/Macbook Pro (or any laptop really), a portable machine designed to be used all over the world and finding it equipped with a drive that won't let you change regions more than 5 times has always struck me as particularly stupid.

V.K.
Jan 3, 2008, 02:48 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't HD-DVD region free and Blu-ray isn't (at least in the spec, but they'll turn it on all the discs if they win of course)? To me that is a major plus for HD-DVD,

Same here. I don't much care about the outcome of the whole blu-ray vs HD-DVD thing but the region encoding crap absolutely pisses me off. I've moved twice between north America and Europe and I have an assortment of DVDs from 3 different regions as a result. I strongly resent the fact that I need different drives to play my german, russian and american dvds. The fact that HD-DVD is region free is a major plus for the format in my book.

V.K.
Jan 3, 2008, 02:57 PM
The only movies that are region locked are those that are still in their original theatrical run. Once a movie leaves its original theatrical run the region lock is removed and new discs are pressed.
This practice will not change when BD wins.

Maybe that's how it's supposed to work and maybe that's what the studio PR departments say but this is not what I found in reality. I have lots of DVDs from different regions and 95% of them were bought well after their theatrical run ended. The only region free DVDs among them are some russian ones and I suspect that this is be due to the fact that they might be pirated. Not a single DVD I bought in germany (I have about 50) is region free.

Amigori
Jan 3, 2008, 03:01 PM
I already got the $500 tray loading blu-ray burner and just mounted it in a external firewire enclosure. its a cheaper, more portable, and swappable solution for what you are talking about. I am looking forward to burning bundles of movies and seasons of shows on a single disc and watch them all on my ps3 :D


This (http://faq.elgato.com/index.php/more/) is more of what I was thinking for my NAS. The PS3 part is about halfway down. I'm hoping to get a PS3 in the next few months. That solution's not without some limitations though. Granted I could probably do the same thing with AppleTV and watch the DRM'd stuff from iTMS, but I don't have one of those either. And there's tools to ditch the FairPlay if I wanted to remove it. There's a few other more technical solutions as well, including one from NullRiver (http://www.nullriver.com) that's rumored to have ps3 support coming. I have thought about an external solution too, they work pretty well.

hjelmn
Jan 3, 2008, 03:04 PM
Maybe that's how it's supposed to work and maybe that's what the studio PR departments say but this is not what I found in reality. I have lots of DVDs from different regions and 95% of them were bought well after their theatrical run ended. The only region free DVDs among them are some russian ones and I suspect that this is be due to the fact that they might be pirated. Not a single DVD I bought in germany (I have about 50) is region free.

I was not referring to DVDs at all, only BDs. DVDs use a different model (many more regions and more agressive region locking). I have 30 BDs and a total of 5 are region locked. Those 5 were new releases at the time I purchased them thus why they are region locked. Sony insiders have confirmed that they remove region locks from their BDs once the movie is no longer in its theatrical run.

V.K.
Jan 3, 2008, 03:19 PM
I was not referring to DVDs at all, only BDs. DVDs use a different model (many more regions and more agressive region locking). I have 30 BDs and a total of 5 are region locked. Those 5 were new releases at the time I purchased them thus why they are region locked. Sony insiders have confirmed that they remove region locks from their BDs once the movie is no longer in its theatrical run.
Oh, I see. Sorry. My mistake, I thought you meant DVD regions. Even so I would much prefer there were no regions period (DVD or BD). Otherwise they should devise the region system in such a way that it were possible to unlock region locked disks after the theatrical run of the movies is over.

KindredMAC
Jan 3, 2008, 03:30 PM
I'm really hoping for a nice redesign of the case to go along with the iPhone and iMac's Black/Glass/Chrome/Al current look.

Would like to see the Cheese Grater front go away for good and possibly shrink the overall size of the case by only 5-10%.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 03:38 PM
This (http://faq.elgato.com/index.php/more/) is more of what I was thinking for my NAS. The PS3 part is about halfway down. I'm hoping to get a PS3 in the next few months. That solution's not without some limitations though. Granted I could probably do the same thing with AppleTV and watch the DRM'd stuff from iTMS, but I don't have one of those either. And there's tools to ditch the FairPlay if I wanted to remove it. There's a few other more technical solutions as well, including one from NullRiver (http://www.nullriver.com) that's rumored to have ps3 support coming. I have thought about an external solution too, they work pretty well.

what products are you considering from elgato? EyeTV or HDHomeRun? both look pretty interesting, but I don't know exactly what your goals are.

Yeah, Im glad I got an external blu ray burner but im stuck waiting for its potential to be released

madoka
Jan 3, 2008, 04:07 PM
Monkeytap on 11/14/07:

if anyone claims to know who will win (the format war), they are lying.

Monkeytap today:


THE FORMAT WAR IS OVER

SheriffParker
Jan 3, 2008, 04:11 PM
Monkeytap on 11/14/07:



Monkeytap today:



owned

The format war is not over yet. HD-DVD will probably die a slow painful death, but its most certainly not over. Unfortunately, I will be dying with it, since I bought a HD-DVD player. :)

nubero
Jan 3, 2008, 04:11 PM
The problem I'm starting to see (for Apple at least) is that the new iMacs are starting to look like awfully good alternatives to spending $3000+ for a Mac Pro tower.

The performance gap has been narrowing with new iMac refreshes and updates, while the Mac Pro has been completely stagnant.

I have a Mac Pro and one of the new 20" iMacs, and for most things I do, the speed difference is negligible, really. The Mac Pro can handle concurrent tasks without slowing down as much as the iMac. But in some situations, the iMac actually completes a given job FASTER than the Mac Pro does - when you're only running the one application on both machines.

Unless you spend most of your time in one of a few specialized "pro apps", or you tend to do a lot of background rendering/processing while expecting another app in the foreground to run as though nothing else was happening, the Mac Pro is hard to cost-justify right now. (Sure, I realize it has a bigger memory capacity, much more hard drive expandability, and you can pair it with whatever display(s) you like -- and it has the better video card options to make 3D gaming enjoyable. But ultimately, that amounts to paying a BIG premium for more slots and bays on the motherboard, you know?)

Blu-Ray included in some/all of the new Mac Pros is a good move for the future -- but it's strictly an "incremental change" in the grand scheme of things. The Mac Pro needs a new generation of motherboard/Xeon CPU inside it to be a "worthy upgrade", PLUS get some new video card offerings for the thing!


i for one am forced into buying a macpro since the imacs go these lovely bathroom-mirror displays on them now...
and if you buy an imac and a second screen you just throw money out the window since the difference to the price of a mac pro becomes minimal...

Eidorian
Jan 3, 2008, 04:15 PM
I tip my hat to overcast for dealing with the format wars.

Monkeytap on 11/14/07:

Monkeytap today:I believe this thread is OVER for Monkeytap.

Long story short and back on topic...

Who the hell is going to buy an optical drive from Apple as a stock option? Aren't you just going to buy it off of NewEgg and use Apple's drivers?

I got 4 GB of RAM for $80. You all know what Apple is charging.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 04:17 PM
lol madoka.

zedsdead
Jan 3, 2008, 04:18 PM
There has been a lot of mis-information about the format war going on, but that is really not worth getting into. Lets focus on what Apple is going to do.

(1) We know Apple is on the blu-ray board and has a close relationship with Disney, so a blu-ray mac will happen sooner or later.

(2) Apple's current stance in the format war is to support both since both support h.264.

(3) Apple has already taken the extra time to make sure that HD DVD's authorered in DVD studio pro 4 playback on Toshkba and Xbox 360's HD DVD players.

The only real question to ask is whether or not Apple will continue to support both with some type of hybrid player, of simply give people a choice of burner.

To anyone actually paying attention to the war objectively, neither is winning. HD DVD sells more stand alone, however blu-ray continues to outsell HD DVD by at least a 2:1 margin. Blu-ray is only doing well because of the ps3, so for it to continue, they need to sell more stand alone players (which appears to be happening since the prices have been coming down). Neither has sold anywhere near enough to be considered a "winner" and even Sony's CEO has downplayed the blu-ray "victory."

The fact that Paramount jumped ship really prolonged the war,and Apple really seems to not like Dvd's anymore anyway (based on Jobs attitude at the iMac keynote last year). It really is going to be interesting to see what Apple does. Either way, even with an HD drive in the Mac Pro I don't expect one in the consumer macs anytime soon, especially if Apple releases HD downloads in iTunes.

megfilmworks
Jan 3, 2008, 04:19 PM
I also trust Michael Bay (director of transformers) more than you, and he has clearly stated that after working with both, Blu-ray is the superior product and provides the highest quality.

BUT, im sure you have more experience them him :eek: ;)

You make some valid points, but I still prefer HD-DVD,
Mr. Bay may have reasons to say he prefers Blu-Ray. $$
As far as experience, yes I do have more;
having mixed more than 65 feature films.
I wish I had his money though. :)

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 04:24 PM
You make some valid points, but I still prefer HD-DVD,
Mr. Bay may have reasons to say he prefers Blu-Ray. $$
As far as experience, yes I do have more;
having mixed more than 65 feature films.
I wish I had his money though. :)
Michael Bay is the last person anyone should be trusting. He changes his mind every 5 minutes on what is the "best". First he was all HD-DVD, then he was all BluRay. Now it's all a big conspiracy, that both formats need to fail, so Microsoft can reign supreme in downloads.

http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9829956-1.html
http://www.michaelbay.com/blog/files/Michael-Bay-HD-DVD.html
http://www.fsdaily.com/Industry/Michael_Bay_HD_DVD_vs_Blu_ray_is_a_Microsoft_conspiracy

Porco
Jan 3, 2008, 04:32 PM
I was not referring to DVDs at all, only BDs. DVDs use a different model (many more regions and more agressive region locking). I have 30 BDs and a total of 5 are region locked. Those 5 were new releases at the time I purchased them thus why they are region locked. Sony insiders have confirmed that they remove region locks from their BDs once the movie is no longer in its theatrical run.

You see this is the difference: DVD is an established format that has horrendous (though thankfully comparatively easily defeated) region coding. The HD format war is still in full swing (IMHO) but I personally think as soon as one format 'wins' outright it isn't going to be long at all before you see older titles getting region locked. The theatrical release excuse simply doesn't hold water for all titles, because if that was the only reason for it you'd be able to see that was the case with DVDs, and you can't, because it isn't.

Does anyone here really think Sony in their benevolent kindness is going to NOT apply more region coding if they get to the stage where HD-DVD is dead?

I actually think the current situation with region coding of HD formats is probably the one big plus for the consumer, so long live the format war I say, it shouldn't be long before we can afford a player for both formats. Let them fight over it and keep region coding to a minimum, I think that is actually preferable to one format that's locked to 3 regions.

If I can't get my Japanese Ghibli films in HD because of stupid region coding I'm not going to be happy (the UK and Japan are the same region for DVD but not for Blu-ray. See how nuts this all is?)

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 04:37 PM
Monkeytap today

hey madoka (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=309325), are you gonna bring up those attachment rates again? funny, you pretty much stopped posting in that thread once you started down that road. take another look at the thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=385682&page=5), it has some good information that you could use, specifically CptGreedle's post.

nice thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=309325)by the way...your a great human being im sure.

owned

The format war is not over yet. HD-DVD will probably die a slow painful death, but its most certainly not over. Unfortunately, I will be dying with it, since I bought a HD-DVD player. :)

listen to yourself....you are right, hd-dvd will probably die a slow painful death and if I am wrong and hd-dvd somehow comes back from near death to win it......only than can you can say I got owned. until than I am just telling you that dominos are falling, and it cannot be stopped.

you, my friend, along with many other macrumor users (abercrombieboy, madoka, more) are the ones who got owned for making an ill advised investment in hd-dvd. sucks to be you. glad i researched before i made a decision, which ultimately was based on disc capacity and apple support (turns out im right)

Porco
Jan 3, 2008, 04:41 PM
Now it's all a big conspiracy, that both formats need to fail, so Microsoft can reign supreme in downloads.



I keep hearing this theory (and don't necessarily disbelieve it), but I think MS (and Apple for that matter) are severely overestimating many countries' internet infrastructures if they think enough people are going to download HD video in the next 5 years or so to make a physical format redundant. If you don't live in a city, HD online will be impractical and unattractive for many years to come IMHO.

Blu-ray and HD-DVD may well end up being be the last major mass-market physical formats, but that doesn't mean they will fail.

For the record I haven't actually bought into either format yet, but I did get my first Blu-ray disc today (part of a DVD+Blu-ray twin pack from Japan) so I'll probably want a blu-ray player of some kind eventually. I think a lot of people will actually end up buying both, especially if dual-format players happen (isn't there some weird licensing issues about that not supposedly being allowed ... anyone?)

snahrl
Jan 3, 2008, 04:42 PM
I have Transformers on HD-DVD, what "requirements" did it miss that you speak of? It was encoded at 1920x1080 and utilizes Dolby Digital Plus, am I missing something else that is "required"? It even has all of the interactive stuff that Sony has YET to implement with their Bluray Java nonsense. 51GB discs are being developed to quiet all of the people crying over Blu-Rays "superiority" based on disc space, and you know it. Both sides are in a space race, don't be so naive. It's just like any other product, look at the old MHZ race that clearly turned out to be pointless. If more space was needed, they would be using the 51GB discs. It's not reaching the consumer yet, because IT'S NOT NEEDED. The compression being used has to do entirely with Sony receiving royalties from their MPEG2 codec. Space/Bit rate comparisons between different codecs are like comparing apples to oranges. So stop it. Use your brain for 5 seconds and stop being so one sided.

So much FUD, it's incredible.

1. Sony has implemented interactive features with the BD 1.1 profile. HD-DVD no longer has an advantage here.

2. Transformers suffers from inferior sound. While most Blu-Ray movies have uncompressed lossless audio, most HD-DVDs do not because of space/bitrate limitations.

3. The space that Blu-Ray allows for (50 GB as opposed to 30 GB for HD-DVD) means less discs, more content, and better content. Harry Potter on Blu-Ray has all the bonus features in high def, HD-DVD's bonus features are in SD. For longer movies (think LOTR) or TV series, the space issues makes a huge difference.

4. Most encodes are not MPEG-2, but AVC.

There's absolutely no reason to support HD-DVD at this point unless you're a Microsoft shill. It's the better technology, it's selling better, it has more studio support, it has more CE support, it has more retailer support. It's the better format, period.

SilentLoner
Jan 3, 2008, 04:45 PM
I hope one of the new mac's has HD support even its not the macbook pro I would love to update my imac with ANY other apple product :D

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 04:54 PM
So much FUD, it's incredible.

1. Sony has implemented interactive features with the BD 1.1 profile. HD-DVD no longer has an advantage here.

2. Transformers suffers from inferior sound. While most Blu-Ray movies have uncompressed lossless audio, most HD-DVDs do not because of space/bitrate limitations.

3. The space that Blu-Ray allows for (50 GB as opposed to 30 GB for HD-DVD) means less discs, more content, and better content. Harry Potter on Blu-Ray has all the bonus features in high def, HD-DVD's bonus features are in SD. For longer movies (think LOTR) or TV series, the space issues makes a huge difference.

4. Most encodes are not MPEG-2, but AVC.

There's absolutely no reason to support HD-DVD at this point unless you're a Microsoft shill. It's the better technology, it's selling better, it has more studio support, it has more CE support, it has more retailer support. It's the better format, period.

1. The bluray specs are constantly changing.

2. Inferior according to who, you? Have you listened to the masters to discern the difference. EVERY review site is absolutely raving about Transformers in both the Video and Audio department. Hidefdigest and DVDTalk both gave it perfect audio scores. Countless professionals have commented on the merits of lossless and uncompressed audio. What makes you the expert? What critical listening hardware do you own, I must know. I would say MOST new discs released all have TrueHD tracks. What about King Kong? They had no problem making a masterful transfer and lossless audio. That is over 3 hours!

3. There are just as many people who could give a **** about extras, seriously, give it a rest. How many times do you watch them, honestly. Does it REALLY matter if it's all on a separate disc?

4. Yes, NOW they are.

snahrl
Jan 3, 2008, 05:01 PM
1. The bluray specs are constantly changing.

2. Inferior according to who, you? Have you listened to the masters to discern the difference. EVERY review site is absolutely raving about Transformers in both the Video and Audio department. Hidefdigest and DVDTalk both gave it perfect audio scores. Countless professionals have commented on the merits of lossless and uncompressed audio. What makes you the expert? What critical listening hardware do you own, I must know. I would say MOST new discs released all have TrueHD tracks. What about King Kong? They had no problem making a masterful transfer and lossless audio. That is over 3 hours!

3. There are just as many people who could give a **** about extras, seriously, give it a rest. How many times do you watch them, honestly. Does it REALLY matter if it's all on a separate disc?

4. Yes, NOW they are.

1. No they aren't. 1.1 was a recent addition that brings all of the Blu-Ray java features up to spec. HD-DVD has no advantage anymore. All Playstation 3's are BD 1.1 compliant.

2. Inferior according to the disk itself, which does not feature uncompressed lossless sound like its blu-ray counterparts.

3. I don't care if you could give a ***** about extras. Some people do. It's better to have them, than to not have them.

4. They have been for over a year now. It's the studio that is responsible for which one to support. Nearly all releases at this stage are AVC.

I mean, why argue with facts?

Blu-Ray: 50 GB, 54 Mbs

HD-DVD: 30 GB, 36 Mbs

Blu-Ray >>>>>> HD-DVD in terms of tech specs, matches it in terms of features, has more studio support, more CE support, more retailer support, and FAR GREATER SALES than HD-DVD.

Can you explain to me what the point of HD-DVD is, other than a failed, stop-gap format? Why would anyone support it at this point?

DakotaGuy
Jan 3, 2008, 05:01 PM
Yes, apparently you are "missing something"
qouted from the transformers review at high-defdigest.com:

"Indeed, I had the opportunity to attend a special 'Transformers' media event with Paramount late last week, and the question was asked almost immediately -- why no Dolby TrueHD or uncompressed PCM? The studio's answer was that due to space limitations on the disc, the decision was made to limit the audio to Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1 Surround only (here at 1.5mbps). Unfortunately, this confirms the long-held theory that the 30Gb capacity of an HD-30 dual-layer HD DVD disc has forced studios to choose between offering a robust supplements package (as they've done here) and the very best in audio quality."

I am not being naive, I just got done schooling you on your precious 51 GB disc, and you keep trying to justify it yet claiming 30 is plenty and if they needed more they would put it out on the 51 GB disc. alert: you are in need of more schooling: NONE OF THE HD-DVD PLAYERS ON THE MARKET CAN PLAY 4 LAYER DISCS.

once again I need to ask what your argument is, having an extra 10 GB per layer is a bad thing right?

warner movies that are on both formats (need to conform to hd-dvd) are MUCH WORSE than disney titles and other beautiful transfers from studios taking full advantage of blu-rays specs. the differences between the formats are very little indeed on titles being shared.




all of the sub $200 players that MOST consumers picked up during the fire sale were 1080i.

correction: most displays at kmart do not have 1080p inputs. any good tv nowaday does.



i care about quality as well when watching movies. I also care about space when I'm burning data DVDs.

blu-ray is just not as good? what movies are you refering to in the dubbing stage?

I trust myself more than you, and in my experience blu-ray is sometimes noticeably better, and other times the difference is neglible.

I also trust Michael Bay (director of transformers) more than you, and he has clearly stated that after working with both, Blu-ray is the superior product and provides the highest quality.

BUT, im sure you have more experience them him :eek: ;)

You do realize that the HD DVD version of Transformers was rated as one of the best sounding soundtracks of the year. I own the HD DVD version of Transformers and it has outstanding video and audio quality. Lossy soundtracks using Dolby Digital Plus will sound as good as lossless True HD soundtracks if they are properly encoded and Transformers is the proof of that. The only people that might be able to hear a slight difference is people with high end $$$ audio equipment.

I will continue to support Toshiba and HD DVD as long as it is available. If it doesn't win the war I will buy a Blu-ray player once prices go under $200 for full profile 2.0 and web support. I love the idea of backwards compatible HD DVD's that I can play on my HD DVD player and also play on my standard drive in my laptop. If the dual format triple layer makes an appearance it will be the best because it can play in any DVD or HD DVD drive. Even the flipper disks are fine for now. What is your solution for people that want both hidef and standard versions? Buy 2 disks??? You might have that kind of money, but most people don't.

As far as data is concerned it would be nice to be able to back up 50GB on a disk, but how slow is the burn time going to be? How expensive is the blank BR-R disks going to be? I just bought a 250GB Seagate external HDD for $50 that is much faster and can be moved and plugged into any computer. It seems like that is the best way for most people to go.

Last, I am very fearful for the consumer once Sony gets their hands on the entire distribution channel from the studio to the consumers home. They would love nothing more then to buy more studios and have total control. This only means more region coding, more DRM, and higher prices. Last I have seen NO effort made to make affordable fully compliant, upgradable Blu-ray players. Sony expects everyone to buy a PS3 to get a decent Blu-ray player. I have no use for a PS3 as millions of other people don't. I already own the #1 gaming console which is the Wii and I am not a hardcore gamer. If I was a hardcore gamer I would buy an xBox 360 because it has a lot more gaming titles available then the PS3.

If the price comes down and the format finally gets finalized then I might be interested. Sony is concerned most about their bottom line and I can promise if Warner did go Blu-ray only, you can forget about prices coming down for a long time. Sony will squeeze the consumer for every penny.

As far as burning Blu-rays for data I am much happier with an external HDD right now. I can use it on any computer and it is much faster.

Music_Producer
Jan 3, 2008, 05:03 PM
I'm not a videophile.. but I do know that when I'm doing music, or dubs on a project.. I prefer HD-DVD over Blu-Ray. Blu-Ray just looks 'compressed' for some reason. Kinda like compressing the heck out of a mix just to make it 'louder' but not better in quality.

Regarding everyone's complaints here about cost of blu-ray media, etc.. Yes, there are professionals who actually could use the space (and the portability of a 50 gb disc) They *can* afford that kind of media cost, because it's their job. It's a little amusing to see kids who download movies all day on limewire complain about the cost of media :p ("Hey, i download movies for free! i don't wanna pay so much for writing them on discs!")

Music_Producer
Jan 3, 2008, 05:05 PM
Blu-Ray >>>>>> HD-DVD in terms of tech specs, matches it in terms of features, has more studio support, more CE support, more retailer support, and FAR GREATER SALES than HD-DVD.



So you're saying PCs are better than Macs.. because of far greater sales of PCs? :rolleyes:

snahrl
Jan 3, 2008, 05:09 PM
You do realize that the HD DVD version of Transformers was rated as one of the best sounding soundtracks of the year. I own the HD DVD version of Transformers and it has outstanding video and audio quality. Lossy soundtracks using Dolby Digital Plus will sound as good as lossless True HD soundtracks if they are properly encoded and Transformers is the proof of that. The only people that might be able to hear a slight difference is people with high end $$$ audio equipment.

I will continue to support Toshiba and HD DVD as long as it is available. If it doesn't win the war I will buy a Blu-ray player once prices go under $200 for full profile 2.0 and web support. I love the idea of backwards compatible HD DVD's that I can play on my HD DVD player and also play on my standard drive in my laptop. If the dual format triple layer makes an appearance it will be the best because it can play in any DVD or HD DVD drive. Even the flipper disks are fine for now. What is your solution for people that want both hidef and standard versions? Buy 2 disks??? You might have that kind of money, but most people don't.

As far as data is concerned it would be nice to be able to back up 50GB on a disk, but how slow is the burn time going to be? How expensive is the blank BR-R disks going to be? I just bought a 250GB Seagate external HDD for $50 that is much faster and can be moved and plugged into any computer. It seems like that is the best way for most people to go.

Last, I am very fearful for the consumer once Sony gets their hands on the entire distribution channel from the studio to the consumers home. They would love nothing more then to buy more studios and have total control. This only means more region coding, more DRM, and higher prices. Last I have seen NO effort made to make affordable fully compliant, upgradable Blu-ray players. Sony expects everyone to buy a PS3 to get a decent Blu-ray player. I have no use for a PS3 as millions of other people don't. I already own the #1 gaming console which is the Wii and I am not a hardcore gamer.

If the price comes down and the format finally gets finalized then I might be interested. Sony is concerned most about their bottom line and I can promise if Warner did go Blu-ray only, you can forget about prices coming down for a long time. Sony will squeeze the consumer for every penny.

As far as burning Blu-rays for data I am much happier with an external HDD right now. I can use it on any computer and it is much faster.


WHY would you support an inferior format? It makes no sense. Have you heard an uncompressed lossless track and compared it to its lossy counterpart? It sounds significantly better.

Toshiba is taking a HUGE loss on their HD-DVD players in order to prop it up since it's a failing format. No CE manufacturer is going to jump on board. Don't kid yourself by thinking Toshiba isn't after their bottom line any less than Sony is. Sony is taking a huge loss on PS3 hardware right now, and so is Toshiba with their HD-DVD players. Toshiba has to cut more because, frankly, HD-DVD is dying right now. It's a dinosaur at retail.

The only thing you've proven is that you're a poor and care more about a subpar, cheap entrance point (how much did you pay for your player? what player is it?) than quality and future feasibility.

PS3 is only 399, if that's too much, then wow. Do you even own an HDTV?

snahrl
Jan 3, 2008, 05:10 PM
So you're saying PCs are better than Macs.. because of far greater sales of PCs? :rolleyes:

Apples and oranges. One is a standard format, the other is highly customizable and entirely dependent on separate OS's.

Apparently you can't figure out that distinction. :rolleyes:

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 05:12 PM
WHY would you support an inferior format? It makes no sense. Have you heard an uncompressed lossless track and compared it to its lossy counterpart? It sounds significantly better.

Toshiba is taking a HUGE loss on their HD-DVD players in order to prop it up since it's a failing format. No CE manufacturer is going to jump on board. Don't kid yourself by thinking Toshiba isn't after their bottom line any less than Sony is. Sony is taking a huge loss on PS3 hardware right now, and so is Toshiba with their HD-DVD players. Toshiba has to cut more because, frankly, HD-DVD is dying right now. It's a dinosaur at retail.

The only thing you've proven is that you're a poor and care more about a subpar, cheap entrance point (how much did you pay for your player? what player is it?) than quality and future feasibility.

PS3 is only 399, if that's too much, then wow. Do you even own an HDTV?
I HAVE compared the difference, EVERY HD-DVD I own I compare the TrueHD track to it's DD+ and even the Dolby Digital track. There is a massive leap from DD to DD+ and barely if anything more than placebo from DD+ to TrueHD. HAVE YOU?

snahrl
Jan 3, 2008, 05:14 PM
I HAVE compared the difference, EVERY HD-DVD I own I compare the TrueHD track to it's DD+ and even the Dolby Digital track. There is a massive leap from DD to DD+ and barely if anything more than placebo from DD+ to TrueHD. HAVE YOU?

Yes I have, and it's a gigantic leap.

I got rid of my HD-DVD player because I was fed up with the subpar releases, inferior bit rate and sound.

Looks like I made the right move, too, because HD-DVD is looking like BetaMax right now at retail.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 05:16 PM
Yes I have, and it's a gigantic leap.

I got rid of my HD-DVD player because I was fed up with the subpar releases, inferior bit rate and sound.

Looks like I made the right move, too, because HD-DVD is looking like BetaMax right now at retail.
So tell me, what was the title that had an astounding difference between Bluray and HD-DVD between audio formats. I want specifics.

Porco
Jan 3, 2008, 05:16 PM
Can you explain to me what the point of HD-DVD is, other than a failed, stop-gap format? Why would anyone support it at this point?

As I've intimated, HD-DVD seems to be less disposed towards region coding. If my favourite foreign films end up being available on HD-DVD from wherever and will play in my machine, but the blu-ray discs are region locked and don't play on my machine, it doesn't matter one iota if Blu-ray is 100 times better than HD-DVD technically. Just like it didn't matter that Betamax was better than VHS when all the rental stores had tonnes more VHS titles.

But that's just me saying why would anyone (me) support it, not a reason why HD-DVD will win or anything (I think Blu-ray probably will eventually)!

DakotaGuy
Jan 3, 2008, 05:23 PM
The only thing you've proven is that you're a poor and care more about a subpar, cheap entrance point (how much did you pay for your player? what player is it?) than quality and future feasibility.

PS3 is only 399, if that's too much, then wow. Do you even own an HDTV?

How do you know I am poor? Talk about a personal slam. Yes, I am a teacher and a National Guard Officer so I am not loaded, but I have enough money to live comfortably. I am a value minded consumer. HD DVD does the exact same thing for less money. When I bought an HDTV I bought a Vizio. Why? Because it offered the most for the money. When I bought my Toshiba HD-A3 for $169 it also offered the best value for the money. I went with a 720p/1080i player because my 42" Vizio is also 720p/1080i. I have read many articles that say under 50" 1080p is not noticeable. As far as sound goes I have a Harman/Kardon AVR247 HDMI receiver and a Bose Acoustimass 16 speaker system.

Now I am sure with all of your wealth this is not a system that you would have in your house, however for me it provides many hours of great enjoyment.

Last, yes I do trust the DVD forum and Toshiba to work for lower prices for the consumer. I do not trust Sony. Sony has never been concerned with the consumer. Like I said, they only want total control from the studio to the end users home. That is my opinion, nothing more, but that is how I feel.

diamond.g
Jan 3, 2008, 05:36 PM
No they aren't. 1.1 was a recent addition that brings all of the Blu-Ray java features up to spec. HD-DVD has no advantage anymore. All Playstation 3's are BD 1.1 compliant.
Can you explain to me what the point of HD-DVD is, other than a failed, stop-gap format? Why would anyone support it at this point?

Yes the PS3 is a great BD player, what about every other standalone unit? You do realize that there is the BD-Live profile right? The one where it finally makes things like internet connection (which HD DVD has had from day 1) mandatory? So yes they are still changing the specs. Another good reason to support HD DVD is the ability to play import movies from around the world. No more region encoding (yeah I know it is apart of spec, I think it was added to make some of the other studio's *cough*disney*cough* happy cause it wasn't there originally).

HD DVD is no more a failed format than m4a is against mp3.

davidfig
Jan 3, 2008, 06:02 PM
When I bought my Toshiba HD-A3 for $169 it also offered the best value for the money.

Interesting. An inexpensive HDDVD, but it doesn't do HD 1080p.

overcast
Jan 3, 2008, 06:13 PM
Interesting. An inexpensive HDDVD, but it doesn't do HD 1080p.
Interesting, most TV's don't even support 1080P input. More interesting, it doesn't matter. Even more interesting, most people don't even know what that means.

If you're someone that cares about it, get the A30 or the A35.

DakotaGuy
Jan 3, 2008, 06:21 PM
Interesting. An inexpensive HDDVD, but it doesn't do HD 1080p.

Can you please explain to me what the advantage of buying a 1080p player would be since I (and millions of other people) own a 1080i TV?

Music_Producer
Jan 3, 2008, 06:28 PM
Apples and oranges. One is a standard format, the other is highly customizable and entirely dependent on separate OS's.

Apparently you can't figure out that distinction. :rolleyes:

Oh, then next time do a favor and don't capitalize something if it is not relevant. You made it sound like the higher sales was the most important factor. When pointed out that, that was irrelevant.. you defend yourself by claiming something entirely different.

winterspan
Jan 3, 2008, 06:29 PM
The problem I'm starting to see (for Apple at least) is that the new iMacs are starting to look like awfully good alternatives to spending $3000+ for a Mac Pro tower.

The performance gap has been narrowing with new iMac refreshes and updates, while the Mac Pro has been completely stagnant.

I have a Mac Pro and one of the new 20" iMacs, and for most things I do, the speed difference is negligible, really. The Mac Pro can handle concurrent tasks without slowing down as much as the iMac. But in some situations, the iMac actually completes a given job FASTER than the Mac Pro does - when you're only running the one application on both machines.

Unless you spend most of your time in one of a few specialized "pro apps", or you tend to do a lot of background rendering/processing while expecting another app in the foreground to run as though nothing else was happening, the Mac Pro is hard to cost-justify right now. (Sure, I realize it has a bigger memory capacity, much more hard drive expandability, and you can pair it with whatever display(s) you like -- and it has the better video card options to make 3D gaming enjoyable. But ultimately, that amounts to paying a BIG premium for more slots and bays on the motherboard, you know?)

Blu-Ray included in some/all of the new Mac Pros is a good move for the future -- but it's strictly an "incremental change" in the grand scheme of things. The Mac Pro needs a new generation of motherboard/Xeon CPU inside it to be a "worthy upgrade", PLUS get some new video card offerings for the thing!


Ahem... Of course if you are running Firefox or Word you are not going to notice any difference. :) But seriously, the Imac runs laptop parts.. 800mhz bus, 533/667mhz ram, laptop processors, 5400rpm drives, etc.
If you are running any type of compute-intensive apps ( rendering, video production, audio production, data visualization, numerical analysis, physics simulations, other scientific apps, heavy photoshop, etc) there is just no comparison.

darthraige
Jan 3, 2008, 06:48 PM
I really don't think the Mac Pro is a MWSF item... never has been. Notebooks are Apple's big consumer thing and this is a consumer show...

Q1 yes, MWSF no.

The MacPro can debut whenever it wants to. Apple should just debut the MacPro, 2008's fastest Mac, and then the stupid Ultra Portable, 2008's thinnest Mac. The MacPro will come this month, you wait and see.

CWallace
Jan 3, 2008, 06:49 PM
The only real question to ask is whether or not Apple will continue to support both with some type of hybrid player, of simply give people a choice of burner.

My guess would be Apple will offer a hybrid Blu-Ray/HD-DVD player (that can record plain DVD) and a Blu-Ray burner. No HD-DVD burner option from the factory.

That way, they support both formats for playback and Blu-Ray for burning because that is the format backed by Disney-Pixar.

Eidorian
Jan 3, 2008, 06:50 PM
The MacPro can debut whenever it wants to. Apple should just debut the MacPro, 2008's fastest Mac, and then the stupid Ultra Portable, 2008's thinnest Mac. The MacPro will come this month, you wait and see.Sounds good to me.

9 years since the SuperDrive...

AidenShaw
Jan 3, 2008, 07:25 PM
Sounds good to me.

9 years since the SuperDrive...

Compaq announced the first DVD recording systems with the Pioneer DVR-103 at CES 2001.

Apple announced the DVR-103 in a PowerMac, renamed the "SuperDrive" by the Apple marketeers, at MacWorld 2001 a few days after Compaq.

http://www.emedialive.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?CategoryID=30&ArticleID=5334

Eidorian
Jan 3, 2008, 07:27 PM
Compaq announced the first DVD recording systems with the Pioneer DVR-103 at CES 2001.

Apple announced the DVR-103 in a PowerMac, renamed the "SuperDrive" by the Apple marketeers, at MacWorld 2001 a few days after Compaq.

http://www.emedialive.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?CategoryID=30&ArticleID=5334You don't tell me what I already know. :rolleyes:

megfilmworks
Jan 3, 2008, 07:32 PM
Not to beat this to death but another disadvantage of Blu-ray is more error in playback and more glass master rejections at manufacture. I'd rather have two more reliable HD-DVD discs than 1 overstuffed Blu-Ray. That being said I own two of each (and a third HD-DVD coming tomorrow from Amazon) and both are DOA. Downloadable content is king. Unless you are a pro I would not recommend either format!@

megfilmworks
Jan 3, 2008, 08:02 PM
Yea but remember, Betamax was a better quality too and it lost the battle to VHS. How many pornos are on Blu-ray/HD-DVD? We'll know who will win by that hahaThis may be the most accurate statement on this thread.

Carl Spackler
Jan 3, 2008, 08:28 PM
My guess would be Apple will offer a hybrid Blu-Ray/HD-DVD player (that can record plain DVD) and a Blu-Ray burner. No HD-DVD burner option from the factory.

I certainly hope something like this is the case...hybrid player standard, with BRD and HD-DVD burners as BTO options. I mean, "The Big Lebowski" is HD-DVD, while "Big Trouble in Little China" will hit BRD.

I need a hybrid player, man. You gotta feed the monkey.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 09:06 PM
You do realize that the HD DVD version of Transformers was rated as one of the best sounding soundtracks of the year. I own the HD DVD version of Transformers and it has outstanding video and audio quality. Lossy soundtracks using Dolby Digital Plus will sound as good as lossless True HD soundtracks if they are properly encoded and Transformers is the proof of that. The only people that might be able to hear a slight difference is people with high end $$$ audio equipment.


so the people with high end audio equipment should suffer at the expense of consumers who settle for sub par audio? I honestly do not understand why you do not realize that it would be better with lossless audio, and hence better on blu-ray. its not just me who realizes this.

I will continue to support Toshiba and HD DVD as long as it is available. If it doesn't win the war I will buy a Blu-ray player once prices go under $200 for full profile 2.0 and web support. I love the idea of backwards compatible HD DVD's that I can play on my HD DVD player and also play on my standard drive in my laptop.

combo discs? how many combo discs do you actually have and are expected to be released in 2008? this is already been stated by others in the thread, but you are just a very short minded value shopper who buys and justifies the cheapest option even though its always the one thats needs to be fixed/repaired/upgraded the fastest. and this is again the case. you will end up paying more than me when you are forced to buy a blu-ray player, and I make more than you so its funny how that works out (not insulting, just pointing out the downsides of your value theory)



As far as data is concerned it would be nice to be able to back up 50GB on a disk, but how slow is the burn time going to be? How expensive is the blank BR-R disks going to be? I just bought a 250GB Seagate external HDD for $50 that is much faster and can be moved and plugged into any computer. It seems like that is the best way for most people to go.

Last, I am very fearful for the consumer once Sony gets their hands on the entire distribution channel from the studio to the consumers home. They would love nothing more then to buy more studios and have total control. This only means more region coding, more DRM, and higher prices. Last I have seen NO effort made to make affordable fully compliant, upgradable Blu-ray players. Sony expects everyone to buy a PS3 to get a decent Blu-ray player. I have no use for a PS3 as millions of other people don't. I already own the #1 gaming console which is the Wii and I am not a hardcore gamer. If I was a hardcore gamer I would buy an xBox 360 because it has a lot more gaming titles available then the PS3.

If the price comes down and the format finally gets finalized then I might be interested. Sony is concerned most about their bottom line and I can promise if Warner did go Blu-ray only, you can forget about prices coming down for a long time. Sony will squeeze the consumer for every penny.

As far as burning Blu-rays for data I am much happier with an external HDD right now. I can use it on any computer and it is much faster.

a HDD is a completely different solution than discs. I have an unlimited potential of space with blu-rays- which will be much more portable and accessible than hard drives. it might work for you, but I will enjoy burning/ripping/and backing up data on my blu ray drive.

the wii is a great video game system, but I could never only play wii games...a fun time for 15 minutes or watching the kiddies play. thats about it. the ps3 is an amazing gaming system and although you have no need for it, it is a much greater value than the hd-dvd player you got. it will be all the things you are looking for in a blu-ray player (you will eventually upgrade) plus it has wi-fi and internet browsing, a gaming system that matches and in some cases beats the xbox360, a fully compliant blu-ray player, and much much more. you are in big denial, sucks you wasted the less money you have on a less valuable product.


This may be the most accurate statement on this thread.

if you want to bring up PORN (http://www.n4g.com/News-96269.aspx) :D

Digital playground was the company who went hd-dvd exclusive which caused all the shockwaves across the internet that hd-dvd would win. if you read the story, you noticed they've since switched and released a "gangbuster" on blu-ray. I personally think everyone can get their porn online for free, but if it has any effect on the format war it looks like advantage blu. FYI: girls gone wild has also been announced for blu ray

yeroen
Jan 3, 2008, 09:16 PM
I'm wary of the inevitable Blu-Ray support. With it will come a whole new layer of resource-hogging DRM enforcement .

Vista can properly be called the OS that DRM built

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

has a good breakdown of what this entails for Vista, and from that you can infer what it will mean for Leopard.

Bruizer
Jan 3, 2008, 09:18 PM
1. The bluray specs are constantly changing.


So are the HD-DVD specs (Tri layer you keep being so proud to tout). What is your point?

2. Inferior according to who, you?


To most people that understand the technology? The larger aperture provides for closer spaced tracks on BD compared to HD-DVD. Closer spaced tracks allow for greater storage and higher bit rates on BD compared to HD-DVD.

Thinner surface provides more room for expansion in layers. More layers provide additional spaces to store data. This is, of course, where HD-DVD gets its one (and only one) advantage. Price. Since HD-DVD is based on the old technology of DVD, it is cheaper to make the blanks.

That advantage, however, will be gone within a year and HD-DVD will be left with nothing to help it technically (if you include $$$ as a technical advantage).


3. There are just as many people who could give a **** about extras, seriously, give it a rest. How many times do you watch them, honestly. Does it REALLY matter if it's all on a separate disc?


The answer to that is simple. YES. It lowers that cost thing you are so amazingly concerned with. Or do you not understand that?

archer75
Jan 3, 2008, 09:39 PM
I'm wary of the inevitable Blu-Ray support. With it will come a whole new layer of resource-hogging DRM enforcement .

Vista can properly be called the OS that DRM built

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

has a good breakdown of what this entails for Vista, and from that you can infer what it will mean for Leopard.

That article again? It's been debunked so many times.

Yes, there is built in DRM support for HD/BD discs in Vista and will also be in OSX if they launch with players.
The ONLY time the DRM is active is if you are playing one of these discs and it calls for it. If you never play a DRM protected disc you will never see the difference.
The DRM on the discs also affects your set top player and your TV. It's no different than the PC/mac.

So much FUD, it's incredible.

1. Sony has implemented interactive features with the BD 1.1 profile. HD-DVD no longer has an advantage here.

2. Transformers suffers from inferior sound. While most Blu-Ray movies have uncompressed lossless audio, most HD-DVDs do not because of space/bitrate limitations.

3. The space that Blu-Ray allows for (50 GB as opposed to 30 GB for HD-DVD) means less discs, more content, and better content. Harry Potter on Blu-Ray has all the bonus features in high def, HD-DVD's bonus features are in SD. For longer movies (think LOTR) or TV series, the space issues makes a huge difference.


In terms of movies the space doesn't matter. There is not a single HD movie out there that can even attempt to fill up 30gb of space. I have tons ripped to my hard drive. They aren't that big, even with extras, blue ray included.

Audio is better on HD-DVD for the simple fact that more formats are required while on blue ray they are merely optional.
Take a look at phantom of the opera, it's available for both formats but is lacking in audio on blue ray.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 09:59 PM
In terms of movies the space doesn't matter. There is not a single HD movie out there that can even attempt to fill up 30gb of space. I have tons ripped to my hard drive. They aren't that big, even with extras, blue ray included.

Audio is better on HD-DVD for the simple fact that more formats are required while on blue ray they are merely optional.
Take a look at phantom of the opera, it's available for both formats but is lacking in audio on blue ray.

hmmm....you obviously have no experience ripping BLU-RAY movies seeing most are well over 30 GB of space. I bet you have like a bajillion "blue-rays" on your 100 GB harddrive :cool: ohhhh sweet... did you rip the phantom of the opera in HD DUD or blue-ray? :p

AidenShaw
Jan 3, 2008, 10:00 PM
You don't tell me what I already know. :rolleyes:

Ok, I get it.

You said "9 years" when the DVR-103 actually came out 7 years ago, because you don't expect the Mac Pro to be updated until MacWorld SF 2010 !!

You may be right, but I wouldn't bet against MacWorld SF 2009.

Eidorian
Jan 3, 2008, 10:03 PM
Ok, I get it.

You said "9 years" when the DVR-103 actually came out 7 years ago, because you don't expect the Mac Pro to be updated until MacWorld SF 2010 !!

You may be right, but I wouldn't bet against MacWorld SF 2009.The Power Mac G3 Blue & White is 9 years old but it never had a SuperDrive.

bigwig
Jan 3, 2008, 10:07 PM
2. There is nothing wrong with MPEG-2 with the exception that more bits are needed to encode with the same quality as VC-1 and AVC. MPEG-2 with 50 GB can produce a perfect HD picture.

That's not true. MPEG-2 creates artifacts that don't appear in VC-1 or H.264.

bs6268d
Jan 3, 2008, 10:07 PM
wow just bought MacBook now this

archer75
Jan 3, 2008, 10:07 PM
hmmm....you obviously have no experience ripping BLU-RAY movies seeing most are well over 30 GB of space. I bet you have like a bajillion "blue-rays" on your 100 GB harddrive :cool: ohhhh sweet... did you rip the phantom of the opera in HD DUD or blue-ray? :p

You mean on my server box with 8 hard drives? I have a large collection of HD movies I stream to my HTPC and display on my panasonic projector. But what would I know.

AidenShaw
Jan 3, 2008, 10:17 PM
hmmm....you obviously have no experience ripping BLU-RAY movies seeing most are well over 30 GB of space. I bet you have like a bajillion "blue-rays" on your 100 GB harddrive :cool: ohhhh sweet... did you rip the phantom of the opera in HD DUD or blue-ray? :p

He ripped them into VCD quality, obviously.

I've never been able to watch a DivX clip without shuddering at the compression artifacts...gross.

The Power Mac G3 Blue & White is 9 years old but it never had a SuperDrive.

What does this have to do with your statement "9 years since the SuperDrive..." ?? And with the "Power Macintosh G4 (Digital Audio)" in January 2001 which was the first with the DVR-103 option? Which my 64-bit calculator says is 7 years....

I have no idea what this argument is about now ;)

archer75
Jan 3, 2008, 10:28 PM
He ripped them into VCD quality, obviously.

I've never been able to watch a DivX clip without shuddering at the compression artifacts...gross.

The bulk of my rips are in x264 in an mkv container.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 10:29 PM
You mean on my server box with 8 hard drives? I have a large collection of HD movies I stream to my HTPC and display on my panasonic projector. But what would I know.

well if you've ever bought a drive capable of ripping blu-rays, im sure you would have at some point noticed its not spelled "blue-ray"

you don't know very much apparently.

AidenShaw
Jan 3, 2008, 10:40 PM
The bulk of my rips are in x264 in an mkv container.

What re-compression factor from the originals?

If you're re-encoding a 25 GB file to 5 GB, you're going to be sacrificing a lot.... If you reencode it to 1 GB, then you'll have the Youtube flash version :eek:

archer75
Jan 3, 2008, 10:46 PM
well if you've ever bought a drive capable of ripping blu-rays, im sure you would have at some point noticed its not spelled "blue-ray"

you don't know very much apparently.

Is that all you got? Resorting to bitching about spelling mistakes? You're a real winner. Why post at all? It's clear you have nothing to contribute, at least nothing intelligent.

AidenShaw
Jan 3, 2008, 10:51 PM
Is that all you got? Resorting to bitching about spelling mistakes? You're a real winner. Why post at all? It's clear you have nothing to contribute, at least nothing intelligent.

But, if you can't spell the name of the technology correctly, why should we believe the rest of your arguments? :confused:

Seriously - sloppy writing is often the result of sloppy thinking. If you want to make your point, take care with your discourse.

Any Apple user should realize that appearance is sometimes as important as substance.

Norco
Jan 3, 2008, 10:58 PM
its apple. it would be blu-ray authoring as well :D


THE FORMAT WAR IS OVER if this happens....blu-ray has been pretty much been dominating if you pay attention to the real numbers (didn't lose a single week in sales all of last year) and if it were any other way apple would do a combo drive.

The BluRay side has been claiming that "the format war is over" for awhile now, I've come to terms that it's other equivalent is "Mission Accomplished," and look where we are 5 years later...

zdobson
Jan 3, 2008, 11:01 PM
What is the life of a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD disc? I don't burn movies on DVD, so I'm more interested in using discs for archiving photos (in addition to external drives). Most of my shoots currently take up 3-4 DVDs, so it would be nice to fit them all on one disc. How long are they expected to last?

Lynxpro
Jan 3, 2008, 11:04 PM
Do you actually own HD-DVD and Blurary software/hardware? Because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. HD-DVD has had stellar transfers from the start. 30GB is MORE than enough to fit HD media. Considering Bluray discs are maxing out at 50gb and there are 51GB HD-DVD discs, what is your argument? That the inefficient MPEG2 codec and uncompressed audio that Sony continues to push on everyone, requires immense amounts of space? Well then you'd be correct.


You are seriously and comically ill-informed.

1. Blu-ray does not max out at 50GB. TDK and others are working on 100 and 200GB Blu-ray discs. HD DVD is the inferior platform that is now trying to tout a triple-layer 51GB HD DVD disc that from most reports won't be compatible with any of the existing HD DVD players on the market.

2. Uncompressed audio is superior to compressed audio. By stating that uncompressed is "inefficient" you prove your lack of understanding on the subject. HD DVD discs don't have enough space to provide uncompressed audio - unlike Blu-ray - because again it is an inferior platform.

3. The majority of the discs available for Blu-ray are encoded using AVC - not MPEG-2 - which is the version of the MPEG-4 video codec [H.264] that Sony and Apple both played a hand in developing. It is superior to Microsoft's VC-1 (aka Windows Media 9) that is almost exclusively used by HD DVD. Apparently Paramount thinks AVC is superior to VC-1; that's why they used AVC for the HD DVD release of Transformers. If Paramount isn't cheap, they'll do an even better higher bit-rate AVC transfer of that film for the Blu-ray release when their 18 month HD DVD exclusive contract comes to an end.

But do go ahead and enjoy that proprietary Microsoft platform of yours. Just keep in mind that people will be laughing at you when it turns out to be the next Beta...especially the rest of the Apple-supporting Mac community.

Lynxpro
Jan 3, 2008, 11:06 PM
Wtf are you talking about, the resolution of Blu-ray is EXACTLY the same as HD-DVD. 1920x1080p. This forum is seriously SO misguided in almost everything.


Same resolution, but much different bit rate capacity. Blu-ray has a much higher bit-rate ability than HD DVD, whether it is using MPEG-2, VC-1, or the superior AVC codec.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't HD-DVD region free and Blu-ray isn't (at least in the spec, but they'll turn it on all the discs if they win of course)? To me that is a major plus for HD-DVD, I like importing foreign films and TV series, and until there are multi-region Blu-ray players I'm for the one that doesn't region lock.


Region coding on Blu-ray only lasts for 1 year in order to protect the studios from "parallel importing" (aka "gray import", which the MPAA considers a form of piracy) that can ruin the box office in foreign territory if the movie is still in the theatres. And since Blu-ray has this feature, "neutral" studios like New Line are releasing titles on Blu-ray six months before they hit HD DVD. It should also be noted that HD DVD also approved region codings but hasn't enacted them [yet]. If this is an issue for you, you should know that very few Blu-ray titles even have it enacted. Don't fall for the FUD from the other side bankrolled by the convicted monopolist corporation headquartered in Redmond Washington.


I have Transformers on HD-DVD, what "requirements" did it miss that you speak of? It was encoded at 1920x1080 and utilizes Dolby Digital Plus, am I missing something else that is "required"? It even has all of the interactive stuff that Sony has YET to implement with their Bluray Java nonsense.


Java nonsense? I guess you prefer proprietary formats bought and sold by Microsoft. Perhaps you shouldn't be on a Mac themed website if that is how you feel. Furthermore, you are incorrect. Sony is already releasing titles that support BD-J... One of which is Resident Evil Extinction. Sunshine is coming out soon and it also supports BD-J... and the PiP features that are part of the BD Profile 1.1. War from Lionsgate also supports those features. More to come later.

It should be noted that while Blu-ray has multiple profiles which enable further supplemental features, HD DVD cannot upgrade its underperforming bit-rate transfers without wiping out compatibility. It should also be noted that Toshiba was willing to drop HD DVD and adopt Blu-ray in exchange for a lower royalty fee from Sony and the rest of the BDA but Microsoft interfered and "encouraged" them to go ahead and release HD DVD anyway. If anyone has any doubts that Microsoft is the company behind this format war, they should ask themselves why it is that Microsoft - and NOT Toshiba - that is handling the consumer complaint issues with the Combo DVD/HD DVD title releases. Check the AVS forums...it is Microsoft support handling those "issues" even though Microsoft is not the disc manufacturer. Hmmm....

Yuppi
Jan 3, 2008, 11:17 PM
All Macs need hardware acceleration drivers before one could even think to work with 1080p AVC coded materials.
I tried it and even the most capable MacBook Pro is unable to play some of those movies. The reason is the lack of AVIVO or PureVideo in any Mac player. That is really a shame..

Eidorian
Jan 3, 2008, 11:29 PM
What does this have to do with your statement "9 years since the SuperDrive..." ?? And with the "Power Macintosh G4 (Digital Audio)" in January 2001 which was the first with the DVR-103 option? Which my 64-bit calculator says is 7 years....

I have no idea what this argument is about now ;)I was more concerned about a change in the ability to read optical media.

Which is now the DVD-ROM in the beige G3. :rolleyes:

Guess that happens after talking about the B&W recently. It is 7 years since the DVR-103 though.

bgillander
Jan 3, 2008, 11:34 PM
so the people with high end audio equipment should suffer at the expense of consumers who settle for sub par audio? I honestly do not understand why you do not realize that it would be better with lossless audio, and hence better on blu-ray. its not just me who realizes this.

I found it funny how you earlier chose to quote the highdefdigest review of Transformers as an example of the poor audio of HD DVD, while stopping the quote just prior to that review's next sentence: "That said, it is hard to imagine any film taking a Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1 Surround track to its zenith better than 'Transformers.'" You also failed to mention that same review actually gave the disc a five star rating for audio quality. http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1110/transformers.html

Apparently even after his initial expectation, the reviewer kept an open enough mind to actually listen to the audio, rather than just look at a specifications and assume he was right. That seems to be a rare quality these days.

I think that is what I find most frustrating about the constant mantra that blu is better because it is bigger. A larger capacity simply means it has the potential to have higher quality, but the quality of the encode is actually more important. The thing that bothers me most was that Sony was talking up the importance of how blu had larger capacity even for the first 6 months of both systems, at a time when most HD DVDs were dual layer 30 GB discs and almost every blu-ray disc was a 25 GB disc, apparently counting on the population's inability to do very simple math (and it seems they were right, as people were talking even then about how blu-ray held more! Now that's good marketing!) And to add insult to injury, most of the their discs were MPEG2 while HD DVD were using MPEG4. If you check the early reviews you will see that Sony was over-promising and under-delivering for most of their early releases, while Warner was actually delivering quality releases. Sony have certainly improved their releases, as illustrated by the remastered "Fifth Element" which replaced the universally panned initial blu-ray release. A comparison review which illustrates the extreme importance of the encode as opposed to the kind of disc is at your previously mentioned highdefdigest. http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/894/fifthelement_remastered.html

You seem to be very negative towards Warner, who I've personally found to have one of the more consistent track records for quality encodes. Have you checked out the "Blade Runner" release on either blu-ray or HD DVD? I thought it looked rather good, and every review I've read has raved about it. http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/355/bladerunner.html


combo discs? how many combo discs do you actually have and are expected to be released in 2008? this is already been stated by others in the thread, but you are just a very short minded value shopper who buys and justifies the cheapest option even though its always the one thats needs to be fixed/repaired/upgraded the fastest. and this is again the case. you will end up paying more than me when you are forced to buy a blu-ray player, and I make more than you so its funny how that works out (not insulting, just pointing out the downsides of your value theory)

Actually, the combo discs are not even close to the cheapest option, so I'm not sure what you are thinking there. As much as I hate the flipper discs, I do like the ability to be able to play the SD version on the Macbook, but in Canada there is an even higher price premium for them. $40 for "Knocked Up"? Are they mad? My main concern, though, is the fragile nature of two exposed playing sides. If they are able to come out with a single sided combo disc similar to the combo SACD/CDs, it would be a much more appealing product.

And on the topic of fragile, that was my main initial concern with blu-ray... that the thinner protective layer would be a high risk to scratching and ruining the disc. However I must say that the TDK coating they are using does appear to work great and I have yet to see a scratched blu-ray disc. I wish they would use that coating for everything from CDs to DVDs to HD DVDs.

misfit356tsw
Jan 3, 2008, 11:35 PM
Doesn't anyone realize this format war is going to be decided by the average consumer and not by someone who lives in his parent's basement. 3 Blu-Ray players and 2 HD-DVD players pffft. If superior formats always won I would be listening to a SACD player and not my I-Pod in all of it's compressed glory.

monkeytap
Jan 3, 2008, 11:57 PM
Is that all you got? Resorting to bitching about spelling mistakes? You're a real winner. Why post at all? It's clear you have nothing to contribute, at least nothing intelligent.

i honestly am not a stickler on spelling mistakes, but if it was a spelling mistake you wouldn't have done it multiple times. IF you actually had a blu-ray drive you would at least have some knowledge in the area and would not spell it like a severely uninformed consumer rather than a HD media guru as you portray yourself.

The BluRay side has been claiming that "the format war is over" for awhile now, I've come to terms that it's other equivalent is "Mission Accomplished," and look where we are 5 years later...

yeah...MADOKA (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=309325) conveniently left out the whole "if this happens" portion to delude himself into thinking he got back at me for making him eat his words in a previous thread on the manner.

I'm glad apple is choosing blu-ray, and as a devoted mac user I took into account their position on the BDA when deciding which format I would go with. I made the right decision, and so did apple. blu-ray has so many advantages over hd-dvd that have been numerously discussed between the dribble on this thread, it is also much more viable in the PC world, so for me I saw this coming.

etrigan63
Jan 4, 2008, 12:46 AM
All Macs need hardware acceleration drivers before one could even think to work with 1080p AVC coded materials.
I tried it and even the most capable MacBook Pro is unable to play some of those movies. The reason is the lack of AVIVO or PureVideo in any Mac player. That is really a shame..

Which is why the current crop of iMac sporting HD2600 cards can handle Blu-ray once the support is added into Leopard. HD2xxx & HD3xxx cards have hardware decoders for HD content (both formats). I have tested this on the PC side with one of the new LG dual-format player drives for computers. Flawless playback @1080p on my 30" display at 2560x1600 over a dual-link DVI.

More than likely the new crop of Mac Pros will sport the HD38XX family of video cards and bring this functionality to the top end. I also predict the entire lineup to be 8-core to differentiate it from an upcoming iMac refresh to Penryn quad-cores.

Eidorian
Jan 4, 2008, 12:47 AM
I also predict the entire lineup to be 8-core to differentiate it from an upcoming iMac refresh to Penryn quad-cores.Enlighten me.

Porco
Jan 4, 2008, 01:29 AM
Region coding on Blu-ray only lasts for 1 year in order to protect the studios from "parallel importing" (aka "gray import", which the MPAA considers a form of piracy) that can ruin the box office in foreign territory if the movie is still in the theatres. And since Blu-ray has this feature, "neutral" studios like New Line are releasing titles on Blu-ray six months before they hit HD DVD. It should also be noted that HD DVD also approved region codings but hasn't enacted them [yet]. If this is an issue for you, you should know that very few Blu-ray titles even have it enacted. Don't fall for the FUD from the other side bankrolled by the convicted monopolist corporation headquartered in Redmond Washington.

I hope you and other Blu-ray supporters are right and that region coding is only going to ever be used on brand new films, if at all. But I simply don't believe that given the option (which is theirs) the movie studios will not abuse it like they have done with DVDs. The same movie studios you're saying will only use region coding for a year on HD are still using it on films that are years and years old on DVD - the argument just doesn't hold any water. You're obviously a staunch Blu-ray fan, but I think you're swallowing their excuses more than I am believing any MS FUD. In my view the ONLY reason region coding is not being used for ALL Blu-ray discs is the format war. What would be the incentive for Sony and co to abandon it otherwise?

I do know that many Blu-Ray titles don't use it right now, but I simply don't believe that that won't change if Blu-ray wins the format war. And who knows, maybe the same thing will happen with HD-DVD if that wins out, I wouldn't put it past them. All I know is, region coding sucks, and I think the excuse about harming theatrical runs is a load of rubbish IMHO, and it's always been about controlling markets and keeping prices artificially high.

It's simply not in the interests of Sony or the movie studios to abandon region coding, because it controls the market and keep prices higher for newer releases, whether it be the release of a recent Hollywood blockbuster or the re-release of a 50+year old foreign arthouse movie.

My point is that both sides know region coding is horrible for the consumer, but at this point it seems it's only HD-DVD's policy to simply not use it. That's a big plus for HD-DVD for me, because if the choice was no film because it was region locked or a *slightly* less good HD disc, I'd take the latter, it's still going to be better than a plain old DVD.

Hopefully there will be multi-region players regardless like for DVD and it will be a moot point.

JFreak
Jan 4, 2008, 01:57 AM
It's gonna be region-free at some point, but it's gonna take a while to happen.

History will repeat itself, trust me. First there will be a chip mod, then a "secret" code such as 31415926 (does this sound familiar?) for changing the region on the fly, and after some time they're gonna be truly region free.

I skipped the first part with standard DVD's, but jumped to buy one that was region-free without any physical modifications. Now my 2nd DVD player is truly region free as it should have been in the first place. Maybe this progress will be faster with high definition players? Who knows. But it's gonna happen eventually!

mixel
Jan 4, 2008, 02:08 AM
The only BDs I have don't even have the region coding turned on.. 300, Planet Earth box set, Blade Runner FC - they say they're for the US but they work fine in the UK.. So they're definitely more relaxed about region codes now - I don't mind it being in the spec as long as its easy to research the "region 0" type stuff before purchase.. I have a few "no region" DVDs too, and a multi-region swap disk for the PS2..

There will likely be a multi-region swap disk for the PS3/BD too if it ever becomes an issue, which I doubt it will!

Warner don't seem to use region coding at all on BDs either.. People making a mountain out of a molehill, especially now regions are part of the HD-DVD spec too.

hjelmn
Jan 4, 2008, 02:09 AM
That's not true. MPEG-2 creates artifacts that don't appear in VC-1 or H.264.

Not really. Just like mp3 is capable of supporting CD quality sound (320 kbps) MPEG-2 is more than capable of supporting full HD without noticeable artifacting. The only disadvantage of MPEG-2 is that it is much more bit hungry than either AVC or VC-1 requiring as much as twice the number of bits to encode at the *exact same* quality as newer codecs. I would take MPEG-2 or AVC over VC-1 any day because Microsoft's encoder appears to apply a filter that softens the picture to reduce film grain. A major disadvantage of VC-1 IMHO.

TMay
Jan 4, 2008, 02:21 AM
I hope you and other Blu-ray supporters are right and that region coding is only going to ever be used on brand new films, if at all. But I simply don't believe that given the option (which is theirs) the movie studios will not abuse it like they have done with DVDs. The same movie studios you're saying will only use region coding for a year on HD are still using it on films that are years and years old on DVD - the argument just doesn't hold any water. You're obviously a staunch Blu-ray fan, but I think you're swallowing their excuses more than I am believing any MS FUD. In my view the ONLY reason region coding is not being used for ALL Blu-ray discs is the format war. What would be the incentive for Sony and co to abandon it otherwise?

I do know that many Blu-Ray titles don't use it right now, but I simply don't believe that that won't change if Blu-ray wins the format war. And who knows, maybe the same thing will happen with HD-DVD if that wins out, I wouldn't put it past them. All I know is, region coding sucks, and I think the excuse about harming theatrical runs is a load of rubbish IMHO, and it's always been about controlling markets and keeping prices artificially high.

It's simply not in the interests of Sony or the movie studios to abandon region coding, because it controls the market and keep prices higher for newer releases, whether it be the release of a recent Hollywood blockbuster or the re-release of a 50+year old foreign arthouse movie.

My point is that both sides know region coding is horrible for the consumer, but at this point it seems it's only HD-DVD's policy to simply not use it. That's a big plus for HD-DVD for me, because if the choice was no film because it was region locked or a *slightly* less good HD disc, I'd take the latter, it's still going to be better than a plain old DVD.

Hopefully there will be multi-region players regardless like for DVD and it will be a moot point.

Not to make too much of a point of it, but most people live in a single country their whole lives, few are out of region for any length of time, and only a small percentage of users are actually inconvenienced by region coding . I'm especially sympathetic to those that are interested in foreign films, which aren't available in the local market, and would require importation with region codes that wouldn't be supported. To date, there have been a few hundreds of titles issued within each of the HD groups, with Blu-Ray having a very small title advantage. I doubt that there are more than a handful of those titles that are not produced for all regions.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060526-6927.html

Either way, both formats have a region coding specification, and it would appear that some studios ignore this feature for back catalogue titles. A studio would be considered foolish to provide a recent blockbuster release without region coding, risking losses due to gray market sales out of region.

At any rate, I won't lose any sleep over this issue.

digitalfrog
Jan 4, 2008, 03:13 AM
I'm a bit surprised to read from some that Blu-ray or HD-DVD will matter for backup purpose.

I feel using a media so fragile and with limited capacity to do backups is archaic.

As far as I'm concerned, disk backup is the only way to go. They are cheap nowadays and can just buy a couple of 500gb per year and dump my (disk) backups on those and archive them in a couple of different locations...

Bluray and HD-DVD are both a step BACK in this matter.

Just my 2 cents.

Ralph

Towhead
Jan 4, 2008, 03:13 AM
Bottom line:

HD-DVD and Microsoft are headed for irrelevance.

zetsurin
Jan 4, 2008, 03:23 AM
If I can't get my Japanese Ghibli films in HD because of stupid region coding I'm not going to be happy (the UK and Japan are the same region for DVD but not for Blu-ray. See how nuts this all is?)

Region coding is a very valid concern for consumers. It's the one thing that I think stinks badly about blu-ray. However is there a similar guarantee that region coding won't pop up in HD DVD's future? I mean, this ultimately is something mandated by the studios themselves and both formats no doubt must have some form of support for regional control at least available to support this.

Anyway, as for Japanese films, this is why I bought a region A PS3 as I can get all the US and Japanese releases. The rest of the world doesn't exist as far as I am concerned. Everything arrives absurdly late almost everywhere outside of those two regions (and no I am not an American). As far as I am concerned there is only one blu-ray region: A :D

Norco
Jan 4, 2008, 03:54 AM
Bottom line:

HD-DVD and Microsoft are headed for irrelevance.

I personally don't care what direction Apple decides to go, I still refuse to support Sony in any capacity. Regardless that this is a Mac forum and most users on here are HEAVILY bias against Microsoft, if you think that Sony is a company that is looking out for your interests then you seriously have another thing coming. I've been on the Sony ship in the past when they came out with 'cutting edge' technology, and I can report that my MiniDisc sits today in a junk drawer. Enjoy riding the Sony ship...

zetsurin
Jan 4, 2008, 04:06 AM
I personally don't care what direction Apple decides to go, I still refuse to support Sony in any capacity. Regardless that this is a Mac forum and most users on here are HEAVILY bias against Microsoft, if you think that Sony is a company that is looking out for your interests then you seriously have another thing coming. I've been on the Sony ship in the past when they came out with 'cutting edge' technology, and I can report that my MiniDisc sits today in a junk drawer. Enjoy riding the Sony ship...

MiniDisc was actually an excellent replacement for casette tape. Put this into context... does a Newton and/or Motorolla ROKR sit next to the MiniDisc in your drawer? To paraphrase your point, do you think Apple have your personal interests in mind? Let's not refract perspectives for our own little personal hate agendas: if you feel that way about Sony, then you really must dislike every company.

TMay
Jan 4, 2008, 04:45 AM
I personally don't care what direction Apple decides to go, I still refuse to support Sony in any capacity. Regardless that this is a Mac forum and most users on here are HEAVILY bias against Microsoft, if you think that Sony is a company that is looking out for your interests then you seriously have another thing coming. I've been on the Sony ship in the past when they came out with 'cutting edge' technology, and I can report that my MiniDisc sits today in a junk drawer. Enjoy riding the Sony ship...

It's a consortium, not Sony.

Major hardware members include: Sony, Sharp, Hitachi, Panasonic, HP, Dell, LG, Thomson, Sun (Java), Philips, Pioneer, Samsung, Mitsubishi Electric, TDK.

Pretty sure that Apple makes that list once they ship Blu-Ray players/burners.

Cinner
Jan 4, 2008, 05:38 AM
The videocards in the latest MBP's do not support HDCP, which seems like a basic requirement for Blu-ray movie playback. Does this mean these computers will get a new or updated videocard? That is, if Blu-ray is coming to the portables.

diamond.g
Jan 4, 2008, 06:49 AM
The videocards in the latest MBP's do not support HDCP, which seems like a basic requirement for Blu-ray movie playback. Does this mean these computers will get a new or updated videocard? That is, if Blu-ray is coming to the portables.

Portables + iMac could be exempt if Apple makes the exeternal display turn off when playing a HDM movie. I know that toshiba and sony have notebooks that aren't using hdcp displays (internal), but also have hdmi out for the external displays.

It will be interesting to see if Apple will continue to lag behind practically every other computer maker in the hdm front.