Microsoft and Intel Back HD-DVD

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Reuters reports (http://today.reuters.co.uk/News/NewsArticle.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2005-09-27T042614Z_01_MCC715944_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-HDDVD.XML) that Microsoft and Intel have announced their plans to back the HD-DVD format for high definition content. Microsoft's support for the HD DVD format was expected based on previous announced partnerships with Toshiba.

Meanwhile, Apple announced support (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/03/20050310144840.shtml) for Blu-ray technology in March of 2005. Blu-ray is the main competitor to the HD DVD format.

While, Microsoft/Intel control a large proportion of PC hardware, content providers have not yet joined their site:

But the battle over next-generation DVD formats is far from over, Kaufhold said, noting support in Hollywood for Blu-ray. Several studios, including Walt Disney Co., Sony Pictures and News Corp. unit Twentieth Century Fox, have said that they will release high-definition movies on Blu-ray.

[Surreal]

that's an interesting development ...isnt apple behind...man, these formats are going to be annoying...arent they?

while blu ray may be more expensive...i think that it is the better choice. far more room for expansion.

[mgargan1]

maybe AMD should back blu-ray.

But it's funny that Apple is going to go with blu-ray, and intel is going to HD-DVD.

[x86isslow]

i'd say ominous that intel and apple are going in two different directions

[Hoef]

I think it will result in lack luster consumer demand .... Nobody wants to end up with the betamax of HD DVD's :mad:

[Steamboatwillie]

Steve did say that this is the year of HD :rolleyes:

[lcde]

Now with DVD+/-RW and DL I don't see why a combo drive wouldn't occur. Then no one would be "stuck".

[ZorPrime]

While, Microsoft/Intel control a large proportion of PC hardware, content providers have not yet joined their site:

big deal. :rolleyes:

Edit: Even Microsoft is unsure about HD-DVD... notice how they said they're putting HD-DVD in the XBox 360? Now they say they're "keeping their options open". HD-DVD is DOA. With all of the major PC manufacturers, Apple, Dell, HP, Sony, etc. backing Blu-Ray in addition to the manufacturers producing the embedded chips that will be decoding MPEG4 HD streams and broadcasts, I'm not worried about HD-DVD. Blu-Ray will win.

[Rod Rod]

Apple supports Blu Ray and HD DVD.

At the moment, Apple supports HD DVD more than it supports Blu Ray. Just look at DVD Studio Pro 4. It has the capability to author discs that conform to the preliminary HD DVD spec. This means that although right now only G5 equipped Macs running Tiger and DVD Player 4.6 can play back HD DVDs created with DVDSP 4, once HD DVD players hit the market they shouldn't have any trouble playing those discs.

Apple is committed to both emerging high definition DVD standards—Blu-ray Disc and HD DVD. Apple is an active member of the DVD Forum which developed the HD DVD standard, and last month joined the Board of Directors of the Blu-ray Disc Association.
source: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/apr/17hd.html

[SkAlex]

I just hope betamax comes out on top when this is all done with... :rolleyes:

[budugu]

I am with intel & MSFT here! Finally some one having some sense. HD-DVD is more compatible with current DVDs and is far cheaper than Blu-ray. Sony has a track record of making insanely expensive proprietery **** for sovling simple problems! i agree that having 50 GB is better than 30GB but at what cost and flexibility? As you can see the DVD-DL double of what a dvd can hold but who is using it (movies are released in DL for time or just to make it more painful to copy!)? I think the if blu-ray wins it is going to some ********** locked down version directed by content providers (& sony) who will be only worrying of how to protect that content than make it better. As long as they lock the tech down, they are not going to let the generic makers enter and make the stuff available for cheap.

GO HD-DVD! :cool:

[ryanw]

I think consumers would benifit most from a 'dual support' system. Blu-ray uses a very intense holographic type system to allow the intense amount of storage. There won't be any 'blu-ray' consumer burners for a LONG time. Where as HD-DVD could have consumer burners pretty quickly.

Why not allow for something like toshiba is doing where you could have a BLU-RAY reader and HD-DVD reader/burner?

If that isn't the solution, consumers are going to suffer. One format will win in the end (beta/vhs) and a group (either HDDVD or Blu-ray) will be left with a bunch of worthless media down the road (ie. beta)

I'm guessing that in the END, HD-DVD will win. Based off of ONE reason. People will think BLU-RAY is something new and weird, but HD-DVD is just a new version of DVDs. Consumers are stupid, which makes HD-DVD the default winner. It's the one consumers are going to know what it is and buy it.

[budugu]

Now with DVD+/-RW and DL I don't see why a combo drive wouldn't occur. Then no one would be "stuck".

it would cost more than twice to make the "combo". It is completely different laser technology.

[Mac_Freak]

The fight between HD a Blue-Ray should be fought like a men, in the ring.
In the left corner J Steve wearing his bleu jeans and black turtle neck, in the right Bill Gate$. Let get ready to ramble! :D

[andiwm2003]

is it possible to have both standards in one drive?

if not then just add an external dvd drive to your internal one. as a computer user it doesn't matter what format is supported. in the end we will have both and chose for our backup the more cost effective or stable. so whoever supports what will not matter one year later.

it's only relevant for customers buying a home theater. since that is not a time sensitive investment we can easily wait it out and buy then.

so i don't understand why this is so important for many people. what am I missing? does it affect the pro's in a particular way?

[BGil]

The fight between HD a Blue-Ray should be fought like a men, in the ring.
In the left corner J Steve wearing his bleu jeans and black turtle neck, in the right Bill Gate$. Let get ready to ramble! :D

Microsoft officially back both formats. They'll back anything that uses their codec. I'm guessing they prefer HD DVD because it's more compatible with their media center plans and their Xbox 360 strategy but they are playing both sides.

In addition, they have their own red-laser format backed by a few companies. It's basically the HD DVD authoring spec on a regular DVD like the High Def DVD's they've already released.

[Tommyg117]

Is anyone else angry that they have to get all new dvds? I don't know about anyone else but I have a fairly extensive dvd collection, I don't want to have to buy a whole new format, let alone one of TWO different formats. This is not cool

[Mac_Freak]

Is anyone else angry that they have to get all new dvds? I don't know about anyone else but I have a fairly extensive dvd collection, I don't want to have to buy a whole new format, let alone one of TWO different formats. This is not cool

Fortunately for me, I don't own any DVDs ;)

[Object-X]

Guess I'll wait for the PS3. In a lot of ways this really sucks for consumers. So much for console gaming platforms being the all in one home entertainment device. My TV only has one HDMI port, so which console is going to get it?

[shawnce]

i'd say ominous that intel and apple are going in two different directions

:confused:

I'd say totally irrelevant for the Apple / Intel CPU relationship.

[obeygiant]

this crap gives me a headache.

last time i saw a blu-ray disc, it was in a cartridge just like the old dvd-ram. it sucked. people want just a disc, not some confabulated doohicky.

[iMeowbot]

Apple partner Samsung have already said they expect to have a dual-format drive out within a year. There's nothing to see here.

[Porchland]

Is anyone else angry that they have to get all new dvds? I don't know about anyone else but I have a fairly extensive dvd collection, I don't want to have to buy a whole new format, let alone one of TWO different formats. This is not cool

Hopefully the consumer HD-DVR players will be backwards compatible with DVDs the same way DVD players are backwards compatible with audio CDs. If not, we'll all need another component in the home theater.

Either way, your DVDs will still play; they just won't look as good as the new ones. Why is it "not cool" to make a better product available that doesn't hurt what you have now?

[Stella]

Just yet more competing formats to confuse the consumer!

Life is Great!

[iMeowbot]

last time i saw a blu-ray disc, it was in a cartridge just like the old dvd-ram. it sucked.
That's been fixed (http://www.durabis.com/). (Maybe Apple should buy some of this stuff for their nano cases :p )

[ZorPrime]

Is anyone else angry that they have to get all new dvds? I don't know about anyone else but I have a fairly extensive dvd collection, I don't want to have to buy a whole new format, let alone one of TWO different formats. This is not cool

Your old DVDs will most likely play in the new players. :)

[rog]

Microsoft backing an inferior technology? Say it isn't so!

[Mitch1984]

this crap gives me a headache.

last time i saw a blu-ray disc, it was in a cartridge just like the old dvd-ram. it sucked. people want just a disc, not some confabulated doohicky.

Definately true but Blu-Ray's more of a leap forwards.

HD-DVD seems old before it's new if that makes any sense.

[ZorPrime]

Guess I'll wait for the PS3. In a lot of ways this really sucks for consumers. So much for console gaming platforms being the all in one home entertainment device. My TV only has one HDMI port, so which console is going to get it?

XBox 360 doesn't support HDMI, it will have VGAs though. The PS3 will have an HDMI port. I'm getting the PS3 and it's going to look really nice on my 1080p HDTV. :cool:

[Mitch1984]

Here's a really good page that explains why Blu Ray is a better choice.
Ok it's on a Blu-Ray site so of course it's gonna big itself up, but read it.

http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Section-13564/Index.html

Please post your comments about the above link.

[Maestro64]

I was about to say that here we go again Apple backing a technology even though it is better will most likely not be accepted, Kind of like the Betamax thing others have kindly pointed out.

Then I thought, wait Sony is backing this who happens to be movie content owner and the Movie industries has not signed on yet to either format. Also, who has the best reputation with Hollywood, Apple does, they hate MS they blame MS for all the piracy. No matter what MS/intel back it will all come down to what format Hollywood wants to use for thier movies. MS has been trying to make nice with Hollywood with little success.

This maynot be a lost case yet.

[SiliconAddict]

i'd say ominous that intel and apple are going in two different directions


WHY does this always happen? Mac users automatically assume that just because Apple and some other company have an arrangement that their thinking and corporate "alignment" has to be identical.
Intel is a big*** company. There are bound to be differences.

Personally I don't care if they do back HD-DVD. MS can bite me. Why anyone would go with a format that holds less is beyond me. That extra 20GB of store space could be what is needed to keep whole seasons of a TV series from needing more then one disk. Or those special in depth featureetts? They could be all filmed in high def as well and fit on the disk. I despise disk swapping yet people are gung hoe to scream that 30GB is more then enough. :rolleyes:

The only think that is making me worry about BR is the activation scheme that Sony may be pushing on consumer players when they come out. I will not go with ay HD format that requires me to hook it up to a net connection and activate my player. Oh hell NO^900000 :mad:

[mingisback]

it would cost more than twice to make the "combo". It is completely different laser technology.

"more than twice as much"??

um no.

so you're saying that adding a 2nd laser to a player would more than double the cost?

having 2 seprate players would surpass the costs of a single player with 1 extra part.

[SiliconAddict]

Here's a really good page that explains why Blu Ray is a better choice.
Ok it's on a Blu-Ray site so of course it's gonna big itself up, but read it.

http://www.blu-raydisc.com/general_information/Section-13564/Index.html

Please post your comments about the above link.


Hmmm the BR disk association's website...I think I would rather go to an impartial observer instead of the mother of the format.

[cube]

Is anyone else angry that they have to get all new dvds? I don't know about anyone else but I have a fairly extensive dvd collection, I don't want to have to buy a whole new format, let alone one of TWO different formats. This is not cool

That's your fault. I have been postponing buying movie DVDs for years until they come out in HD. I only have music DVDs.

[SiliconAddict]

I don't think MS had any choice in the matter with supporting HD-DVD. Remember that Sony is the key player in the blu-ray spec. What with PS3 vs. xbox 360 MS's isn't going to want to support and possibly GET the competitor's format. While initially the 360 is going to be just standard DVD they have stated they will prob offer an upgrade to a HD format in the near future. How that will work....no idea. No console has successfully deployed an addin to an extent that penetration is so high that developers can feel confident that they are programming for the majority of the audience. MS could be impaling themselves by doing that. Its somewhat of a moot point anyways.

PS3's are going to sell like mad next year and blu-ray is going to become firmly entrenched before HD-DVD even gets a player out the door. Which they were supost to this x-mas season but that fell though.

[stelriah]

i think the major reason for hollywood backing the blue-ray is because of piracy. they think massive file sizes will make it harder for people to copy or convert.

[treblah]

Hmmm the BR disk association's website...I think I would rather go to an impartial observer instead of the mother of the format.

Here is something better:
ARSTECHNICA LINK (http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/hardware/next-gen-dvd.ars) This is a pro hd-dvd peice but search their site. There are others about blu-ray on there too.

Heres a great link (http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000623059130/)

Easy to understand with pros and cons of each plus a list of who's backing who and who is backing both.

Prediction: Porn producers pick HD-DVD due to lower cost, therefore, HD- and BD- will coexist for a few years until BD- is cheaper and only then will there be one format. Of course by 2008-09 there will be another new format on the horizon. Let's hope that solid-state memory is cheap enough to get back to cartridge based media instead of optical so we can have yet another device to buy ;)

[Le Big Mac]

i'd say ominous that intel and apple are going in two different directions


as with another poster above, I don't see how intel's backing really matters on this. Is intel going to put DVD-on-a-chip? It's one thing for windows to support only one format. But Apple can put blu-ray in its computers, and windows boxes can have HD DVD (with blu-ray added through drivers). Relationship with intel doens't change this.

Anyway, blu-ray has the backing of the movie cos. That to me is the critical one. All the manufacturers will come along once it's clear consumers actually want to be able to watch movies on their new dvd players. No content=no success.

[Steamboatwillie]

Is anyone else angry that they have to get all new dvds? I don't know about anyone else but I have a fairly extensive dvd collection, I don't want to have to buy a whole new format, let alone one of TWO different formats. This is not cool

Funny, I said the same thing about my VHS collection when DVD's came out. Ditto for my cassettes when CD's came out. The cassettes were getting all old and crappy anyways so that didn't sting much but I had a few hundred movies on VHS. I was happy to see the quality and the physical size shrink but my investment... I held on to my VHS's for years, never watching them, until finally I sold them all at a garage sale. I got like $0.25 each for those dinosaurs. <sigh> Progress costs money. It costs the developers and the consumers. Moving forward will never be free.

[Steamboatwillie]

That's your fault. I have been postponing buying movie DVDs for years until they come out in HD. I only have music DVDs.

What's the winning lottery numbers next week?

[Maestro64]

Personally I don't care if they do back HD-DVD. MS can bite me. Why anyone would go with a format that holds less is beyond me. That extra 20GB of store space could be what is needed to keep whole seasons of a TV series from needing more then one disk. Or those special in depth featureetts? They could be all filmed in high def as well and fit on the disk. I despise disk swapping yet people are gung hoe to scream that 30GB is more then enough. :rolleyes:

Ah, do you remember 400/800 K floppies, and apple came out with the very first 400K floppies and to be different the PC industry had Sony change that to be 360/720 making the two formates incompatiable. This is what happen when marketing types decide what is best. So it might be beyond you but it happens all the time. The only opposite case is betamax verses VHS which we all know VHS holds more. But you had a trade off, you got more of less quality.

You see a trend here, people will buy crap as long as they get a ton of it. :D

[Whotheheck]

Heres a great link (http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000623059130/)

Easy to understand with pros and cons of each plus a list of who's backing who and who is backing both.

Prediction: Porn producers pick HD-DVD due to lower cost, therefore, HD- and BD- will coexist for a few years until BD- is cheaper and only then will there be one format. Of course by 2008-09 there will be another new format on the horizon. Let's hope that solid-state memory is cheap enough to get back to cartridge based media instead of optical so we can have yet another device to buy ;)


whoa, if porno companies pick hd-dvd, then hd-dvd wins! That's how vhs beat beta...

[Maestro64]

Heres a great link (http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000623059130/)

Easy to understand with pros and cons of each plus a list of who's backing who and who is backing both.

Prediction: Porn producers pick HD-DVD due to lower cost, therefore, HD- and BD- will coexist for a few years until BD- is cheaper and only then will there be one format. Of course by 2008-09 there will be another new format on the horizon. Let's hope that solid-state memory is cheap enough to get back to cartridge based media instead of optical so we can have yet another device to buy ;)

great link nice side by side comparison...

Not that I buy porn, but I am not sure if they are doing porn in HD, does not seem to be the norm for them if you follow your analysis, HD is not cheep and as we all know they make movie very cheap with what every equipment or people they can find.... :D :D

[saunders45]

Thing that sucks about blu ray, is it is gonna cost a freakin' crapload more to produce and get going. Oh and that little part where blu-ray players have a self destruct system, and even more DRM to deal with. Gotta love paying up the nose for technology that will be cracked anyway.

Costs:
http://arstechnica.com/articles/pae...t-gen-dvd.ars/1

5...4...3...2...1...

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050810_131820.html

http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000737057152/

[gangst]

In my opinion, I don't mind paying a little more for better quality material. Not only the quality, but the fact that Blu-Ray can hold more prevents us having to adopt a new format sooner, and will save me having to buy my favourite films again like I did from VHS to DVD and will have to do again, but if Blu-Ray is adopted it will save me money in the long term.

[Lacero]

Whichever format is inferior will win. Consumers demand mediocrity.

[Detlev_73]

Of course, M$ is going to back HD-DVD. I'm surprised a lot of movie companies are going with Blu-ray. Blu-ray has more capacity, more expansion room, and it seems from what I've read less DRM. Even if HD-DVD does get the hold on the market, there will be one smart hacker that is able to circumvent the copy-protection and DRM, just as it's been circumvented for mainstream DVDs nowadays.

Who wants to pay $20 for a movie, if you can rent it from Netflix or Blockbuster and burn yourself a copy for about 20 to 30 cents! Duh!

[ibook30]

great link nice side by side comparison...

Not that I buy porn, but I am not sure if they are doing porn in HD, does not seem to be the norm for them if you follow your analysis, HD is not cheep and as we all know they make movie very cheap with what every equipment or people they can find.... :D :D

Do we really want HD porn ? I mean - some of these "films" are shot with vaseline over the lense so we don't see all the details... :D ( uuuhhh- a friend told me about the vaseline, I am too evolved to watch porn,,, )

[steve_hill4]

I've always backed Blu-Ray, even before Apple did. Their list of backers just seems to get better and better as time goes on. Apart froma few big names, HD-DVD has a lot of no-hopers and certainly not big players.

Major factors will be so many people buying the BD compatible PS3, big three computer manufacturers, (Apple, HP, Dell), all supporting the format, a lot of the big selling electronics companies, (Sony, Panasonic, Philips), and some of the major movie producers and distributors, (where the balance is a little more even).

I stick by Blu-Ray and hope it wins out, (and hope the new PowerBooks come with them). :rolleyes:

[Maestro64]

Thing that sucks about blu ray, is it is gonna cost a freakin' crapload more to produce and get going. Oh and that little part where blu-ray players have a self destruct system, and even more DRM to deal with. Gotta love paying up the nose for technology that will be cracked anyway.


Don't you like the fact that you buy a piece of equipment and have to connected to the a phoneline/internet and someone can disable your equipment becuase they preceive you as doing something they do not want you to do.

I am sorry, it is my equipment and you better not mess with it. I think there is court law on this when MS try to disable people computers if they thought you pirated their software. I think it call an invation of privacy.

You know you can do want every you want behind close doors as long as it does not include non-concenting individuals and maybe an animal or two and the government and others cannot look in and say stop.... oh wait that is a moot point we have the patriot act these days

[Zigster]

Drives will become dual blu-ray and HD-DVD. Whichever format has the content first will get a lead. I can only hope that FCP and/or Media Cleaner will allow burnng to both formats.

[bigwig]

i'd say ominous that intel and apple are going in two different directions
Apple pretty much has to, in my opinion. This move is another in a long line of MS/Intel moves designed to mutually reinforce each other's near-monopoly in their respective fields. Now that Apple is moving to Intel, OSX is real potential competition to MS. I've no doubt that if hacked or official versions of OSX start appearing on non-Apple hardware in significant numbers MS will retaliate by discontinuing support of OSX. Thus Apple needs a format that uses a DRM technology that isn't controlled by MS.

[Maestro64]

Do we really want HD porn ? I mean - some of these "films" are shot with vaseline over the lense so we don't see all the details... :D ( uuuhhh- a friend told me about the vaseline, I am too evolved to watch porn,,, )

Even worse seeing those pimped wide asses all over your wide screen.... oh wait some ppl like that....:D:D

[Lacero]

The more realistic it is, the stiffer I get.

[MacTruck]

Its always SONY isn't it. They love to think that they are the best brains in the world yet all their computers SUCK. Heaven forbid they EVER cooperate with each other for the sake of the world. Isn't this the case with every single format though? + vs -, HD vs BluRay, Betamax vs VHS etc etc etc....

[JBytes]

...While, Microsoft/Intel control a large proportion of PC hardware, content providers have not yet joined their site:

Don't you mean "side?"


--JBytes

[nuckinfutz]

People, please freaking READ!!! Apple is a member of the DVD Forum and has been for years. Apple is NOT a Blu-Ray only supporter

http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/dvdstudiopro/

FFS people look at the damn DVD SP 4 page. Note this disc

http://images.apple.com/finalcutstudio/dvdstudiopro/images/indexhd20050417.jpg


Intel and MS in HD-DVD's corner is huge. Very few companies other than studios have came out publically and stated they are in one formats corner only. Many are hedging their bets. Apple is squarely in the middle here.

The PS3 will help Blu-Ray's penetration but then again you still need a HDCP DVI/HDMI HD tv as Blu-Ray players will only have SD 480p analog outputs.

Blu-Ray has not only AACS encryption but BD+ on top which means you are NOT going to be recording discs....ever. With revocable keys and the ability to shut down hacked players if bootlegging is your thing...Blu-Ray and HD-DVD will make that nigh impossible.

HD-DVD is going to be cheaper to produce. Pressing plants that press DVD-9 can upgrade to HD-DVD support for under $200k. Blu-Ray will require about a 2 million dollar investment for the pressers which aren't compatible with DVD. Do the math.

AVC and VC-1 make the extra space of Blu-Ray superfluous. Both formats will easily hold a feature length film with extras. Blu-Ray as a computer backup device is still a poor choice. The industry is moving to backup to hard drive...so will consumers.

HD-DVD has a .6mm protection layer just like DVD. Blu-Ray gets it's increased capacity and layer capability because it has only a .1mm protection layer which means your data is at risk of a scratch by a factor of 6x versus HD-DVD. This means BD discs will have to use TDKs Durabis coating or some other type of spincoat....$$$$$$$$$$ ca'ching more production costs and time.

If you think Blu-Ray has already won the battle you have just announced, to those who more fully understand the situation, that you don't know what's going on.

[cube]

What's the winning lottery numbers next week?

I can tell you this: I am not going to wait for UHDTV to buy DVDs.

[DrNeroCF]

Soo... who else thinks that both blu-ray and HD-DVD are completely worthless, and we might as well just make DVD players that play back h.264 HD? Sony knows that the ps2 was worthless without DVD playback, I mean, how long did it take a worthwhile game to come out for it? Now they're selling the ps3 for 5 to 600 bucks, while blu-ray players will be upwards of 1000. Way to rack up worthless numbers for your console, Sony...

[Maestro64]

People, please freaking READ!!! Apple is a member of the DVD Forum and has been for years. Apple is NOT a Blu-Ray only supporter
Gee you didn't read this

http://www.blu-raydisc.com/Section-13469/Index.html

Before telling people to read, read yourself, they are a board member of Blu-ray, unlike a promoter of HD DVD as you would have learned if you read this http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000623059130/

[Fabio_gsilva]

Maybe this is a sign of another betamax loss for Sony and other's? I mean, is history proving once again that it likes to repeat along the time???

Of course, IMHO it's dumb to choose HD-DVD over Blue-Ray. THey are thinking in short term run, but in the long run BLUE-Ray will rule HD-DVD, even because the maximum theoretical capacity is 200gb of data per Blue-Ray disc, against 60 gb for HD-DVD discs, if I'm not mistaken...

But, the Betamax curse is here, you know...

[illegalprelude]

this crap gives me a headache.

last time i saw a blu-ray disc, it was in a cartridge just like the old dvd-ram. it sucked. people want just a disc, not some confabulated doohicky.

then I guess last time u checked was 2 years ago? LOL where have you been? blue-Ray is not cartridge based but just like any other CD looking based.

TDK, has also made a 4 layer format of Blue-Ray, 100GB, HD comes no where close to that. HD will require a new dvd player as will Blue-Ray so both are at a tie. The thing that it comes down to, Blue Ray will set the companies up for the next 20 years while HD will only be 10. How long before we see that 30GB isnt enough and we need another format?

[Bakey]

I just hope betamax comes out on top when this is all done with... :rolleyes:

Whooaahh!!! Hold your horses there sonny boy... just hold off the Betamax, I'm backing Video 2000 all the way!!! ;)

[Maestro64]

HD-DVD has a .6mm protection layer just like DVD. Blu-Ray gets it's increased capacity and layer capability because it has only a .1mm protection layer which means your data is at risk of a scratch by a factor of 6x versus HD-DVD. This means BD discs will have to use TDKs Durabis coating or some other type of spincoat....$$$$$$$$$$ ca'ching more production costs and time.
Sorry I missed this one the first time I read it, another miss information.

Blu-ray gets is capacity due to the fact the blue laser has a smaller wavelength than the infared laser of the current technology. Therefore, it can read and write more information in a the same amount of space.

You are right about the scatched since blu-ray uses a smaller wavelength it be can interferred with due to very fine scratches and the thinkness becomes and issue since thinfilms can change light propagation properties depending in their thinkness. I do believe these devices use CRC so if an error is detected it will correct it on the fly. As we all know, new technologies cost more until it is refind and used more so the cost will be come moot at some point here..

[cube]

I can't stand the dropouts due to scratches of rented DVDs. Blu-ray is going to suck.

[FoxyKaye]

*Considers dusty Betamax tape player in storage, purchased because it was the superiour medium*

I think I'll just bide my time on this debate... Because choosing not to choose is a choice unto itself!

[steve_hill4]

I can't stand the dropouts due to scratches of rented DVDs. Blu-ray is going to suck.
Except the TDK Durabis not only removes the problem of increased scratches on the disc, but actually should improve it over that on the HD-DVD.

It's one of the main reasons for not going for BD, bu it is no longer a problem. The on other major reason people give is that the costs of manufacturing the discs, and switching over initially will be higher, but those costs will have to be met further down the line when people realise that HD-DVD isn't enough. With the lower capacity too, if ou want a decent amount of HD footage on HD-DVD, you seriously have to start considering multiple discs, so that cancels out the addtional costs of producing the discs, which again are projected to be about the same as HD-DVD once BD has significant penetration.

One single layer 25GB BD hold 135 minutes of HD content, you need around 2 layers for that with HD-DVD. That means around 5 hours on the maximum 60GB for HD-DVD, whereas BD will go up to about 18 hours. If BD does win and we go to HHD in say 10 years time, we have a large enough storage capacity to keep us going a bit longer, HD-DVD would really start to struggle, with maybe an hour of HHD at most. I know which I would prefer long term.

[cube]

Except the TDK Durabis not only removes the problem of increased scratches on the disc, but actually should improve it over that on the HD-DVD.


Reports actually say that they remain less resilient to scratches than HD-DVD, even after applying this coating.

[redAPPLE]

. Blu-Ray will win.

well, that is what i said when the firewire400 vs. usb2.0 debate started.

look at our beloved company now. hugging "the enemy". i don't care about the so-called "iPod halo effect". i also don't care about pc users. if a company has superior technologies. then it should use it.

[HiRez]

Even if combo players are available, and even if combo burners become available, it's still going to be a PITA headache for content producers. I'm sure there will be much confusion as to the different techniques needed to author the two formats (each of which will contain a number of variants, I bet). It's hard enough starting with one basic format. Remember the weirdness with CD, CD-R, CD-R/W, CD-RW+, CD-A, CD-XA, CD Extra, CD Plus, CD-I, DVD-R, DVD-RW, DVD-RW+, 5 GB vs. 10 GB, single vs. dual layers, single vs dual sided, etc., not to mention burning speed problems? Bleh. Just as an example, many content producers will have to go through two time-consuming and CPU-consuming encoding steps, one to fit content most efficiently on each format.

[yadmonkey]

well, that is what i said when the firewire400 vs. usb2.0 debate started.

look at our beloved company now. hugging "the enemy". i don't care about the so-called "iPod halo effect". i also don't care about pc users. if a company has superior technologies. then it should use it.

Assuming you know which is the superior technology. Just because bluray has a higher storage capacity doesn't make it superior. Will the first generation of blueray drives, which spin at 2x, be superior to current DVDs, which have a higher data transfer rate? Maybe for overall storage, but maybe not for games which require fast access to the data. Is a 30GB HD-DVD inferior to a 50GB bluray disc which may cost twice as much?

People are making a lot of assumptions based on the current state of CDs and DVDs, but I don't see either bluray or HD-DVD being a viable and reliable medium for data storage for quite some time. I expect both to serve as read-only format for the most part and thus, I'd give the edge to HD-DVD, as it will be faster and cheaper to start pumping them out. How many games, apps, and movies will require more than 30GB? How soon do you expect to be using archive-quality HD media for your personal burning purposes at a reasonable price point?

[nbame786]

Steve did say that this is the year of HD :rolleyes:

bluray still uses hd video...



both of them use hd video. steve was still right, dont frown face me!

[redAPPLE]

oh wait that is a moot point we have the patriot act these days

not wanting to hijack the thread, but i got an off-topic question. let us say a new president gets elected, does he have the power to trash the patriot act?

i just need one answer and then go back on topic people :-)

[redAPPLE]

The more realistic it is, the stiffer I get.

excuse me? :eek:

[schatten]

Where does Sony weigh in on this? They tend to be a heavyweight on things like this.

[steve_hill4]

well, that is what i said when the firewire400 vs. usb2.0 debate started.

look at our beloved company now. hugging "the enemy". i don't care about the so-called "iPod halo effect". i also don't care about pc users. if a company has superior technologies. then it should use it.
I agree. Most PCs are coming with firewire/i.link/dv/IEEE 1394 anyway due to a lot of digital camcorders requiring it. It is merely apple trying to appeal to those with older PCs that don't have firewire and don't have the right operating system to run an iPod, ah, I sense a flaw in that. It does still apply to people with cheap PCs running Windows XP though, it's just selling out in order to get those consumers to go for an iPod above anything else.

I personally though would like to revive the term "Blu-perdrive", the term coined when Apple announced their support for Blu-Ray. It's yet another argument for BD to win out overall. :)

[ZorPrime]

The PS3 will help Blu-Ray's penetration but then again you still need a HDCP DVI/HDMI HD tv as Blu-Ray players will only have SD 480p analog outputs.



Wrong! Where are you getting your "facts"? PS3 supports 480i, which means it is playable on standard NTSC SD TVs. ;)

[ibook30]

The more realistic it is, the stiffer I get.

I'm not here to judge,,, but I can wonder.

[greatdevourer]

*Considers dusty Betamax tape player in storage, purchased because it was the superiour medium* Oh yeah! Beta Max was better than some DVDs

[steve_hill4]

Wrong! Where are you getting your "facts"? PS3 supports 480i, which means it is playable on standard NTSC SD TVs. ;)
Yes, it's fully backwards compatable. Microsoft have really goofed with the XBOX 360 only being DVD. They have also recently announced a delay, (in Europe, not sure about elsewhere), so they will not get that much of a headstart over the PS3 too.

I can see Sony really pushing the PS3 in order to get Blu-Ray to win out. If you get millions who already have something that will play the new format and others that are getting computers with the drives built in, you are halfway to winning I feel.

[steve_hill4]

Where does Sony weigh in on this? They tend to be a heavyweight on things like this.
You are joking aren't you? Sony were the main founders of Blu-Ray, (offically with Philips, but we know that Sony was the senior partner this time).

[obeygiant]

Where does Sony weigh in on this? They tend to be a heavyweight on things like this.


sony is blu-ray

[obeygiant]

btw, ANYTHING made by philips sucks major ass

[Steamboatwillie]

Where does Sony weigh in on this? They tend to be a heavyweight on things like this.

Dude, they're still sulking over the Betamax thing. Ken Kutaragi is still in therapy after sharing the stage with Jobs and relalizing the days of the Walkman have been all but slaughtered by the iPod. ;)

[Steamboatwillie]

btw, ANYTHING made by philips sucks major ass

JVC too, while we are venting...

[yoak]

JVC too, while we are venting...

Never had a better VCR than JVC, and Phillips came up with the CD didn´t they?
;)

[LethalWolfe]

Wrong! Where are you getting your "facts"? PS3 supports 480i, which means it is playable on standard NTSC SD TVs. ;)

You misunderstood his post. The copy protection on forthcoming HD content will only allow content to be played in HD if the TV/Monitor the player is attached is HDCP compliant (which means HDMI or DVI w/HDCP). If yer HDTV is not HDCP compliant (which very few HDTVs, and no computer monitors, being sold today are) then the content will only be played back in SD.


Lethal

[obeygiant]

Never had a better VCR than JVC, and Phillips came up with the CD didn´t they?
;)


philips still is crap. even down to their light bulbs (which last half as long as what it says on the box) n e v e r b u y p h i l i p s. e v a r!

[steve_hill4]

philips still is crap. even down to their light bulbs (which last half as long as what it says on the box) n e v e r b u y p h i l i p s. e v a r!
I agree that Philips are crap. Their menu systems make little to no sense most of the time. Remember though that the CD was another fine example of Philips-Sony working together. The last time they got something right, technically and commercially, hopefully this time will be another.

[yadmonkey]

I agree that Philips are crap. Their menu systems make little to no sense most of the time. Remember though that the CD was another fine example of Philips-Sony working together. The last time they got something right, technically and commercially, hopefully this time will be another.

Of course they're crap. They have almost zero competition at home... go to the Netherlands and try to find some audio components made by someone else!

[mania]

Is anyone else angry that they have to get all new dvds? I don't know about anyone else but I have a fairly extensive dvd collection, I don't want to have to buy a whole new format, let alone one of TWO different formats. This is not cool

I am angry, but I'll take those dvds off your hands for a buck each.
:D

[network23]

this crap gives me a headache.

last time i saw a blu-ray disc, it was in a cartridge just like the old dvd-ram. it sucked. people want just a disc, not some confabulated doohicky.

That's some nice FUD you've got going there!

Every new disc-based technology has started off in a carrier. The first server Macs with CD's had to hold them in a carrier. The Sawtooth Mac sitting beside me right now has a special DVD-"tray" to eliminate the need for a carrier, but it still can still accept a DVD carrier. As tech progresses, the ability to hold discs without carriers always follows.

Don't worry, you'll get your "dohickyless" computer.

As for Apple's position, I can definitely see why they went Blu-Ray. Because of Pixar -- and Apple being the "apple" of the entertainment industry's eye, they want to play nice with them, and they are backing Blu-Ray.

[steve_hill4]

It still seems that the major studios are drifting over to Blu-Ray. Some of the big name studios may be siding with HD-DVD, but when you consider the big films that those studios will be releasing, Blu-Ray has a better back catalogue. Fox are on their side and I already know that they have been working on the HD releases of Star Wars. So that's another few million going to Blu-Ray for one reason alone.

[SiliconAddict]

Whichever format is inferior will win. Consumers demand mediocrity.

No whichever format is better at marketing themselves will win.

[SiliconAddict]

That's some nice FUD you've got going there!

Every new disc-based technology has started off in a carrier. The first server Macs with CD's had to hold them in a carrier.

Too be fair the first gen of the BR disk did have a cart. That was because they hadn't designed the disk yet to include a scratch resistant resin\cover. A lot has changed since then. Specs on both BR and HD-DVD have changed in the last year. Anyone who is basing their comparison's on facts they picked up over a year ago are being foolish.

[mania]

the way i sees it...

consumers will just continue to buy DVDs for a long time. look at superdisc and dvdaudio vs CD. cds win because its 'good enough' and you can rip them to your itunes.

same thing will happen with blue-ray and hd-dvd. sure there will be purists who buy the latest and spend the most, but trust me on this, the winner will be plain old DVD for a long time to come. its 'good enough' for most people. you can watch them on your computer, even rip them and store them on a hard drive if you are so inclined. why would anyone give that up.

[SiliconAddict]

Is anyone else angry that they have to get all new dvds? I don't know about anyone else but I have a fairly extensive dvd collection, I don't want to have to buy a whole new format, let alone one of TWO different formats. This is not cool

No. Because anyone sane realizes that NO ONE is forcing you to upgrade. I know more then a few people still on VHS. They will upgrade with DVD burners become commonplace. And lo and behold their collections are still up and running. The successor to the DVD will be backwards compatible. Period. End of discussion. Putting a red laser next to a blue one is trivial and will happen.

Once again no one is forcing you to upgrade. You don't want HD content don't buy the player and the disks. It's that simple. I own very close to 600 DVD's now (When you count TV series its OVER that.) and I have no plans on upgrading my entire collection. I will however upgrade specific movies. Apollo 13, Alien series, Star Trek, Star Wars, Jaws, Indiana Jones, CSI, the bond series, the new Battlestar Galactica, Stargate SG-1, and of course the Lord of the Rings...there are others but I'm going to be picky. So please. It's not like you don't have a choice in all of this. Tech progresses. No one is forcing you to progress with it.

[SiliconAddict]

the way i sees it...

consumers will just continue to buy DVDs for a long time. look at superdisc and dvdaudio vs CD. cds win because its 'good enough' and you can rip them to your itunes.

same thing will happen with blue-ray and hd-dvd. sure there will be purists who buy the latest and spend the most, but trust me on this, the winner will be plain old DVD for a long time to come. its 'good enough' for most people. you can watch them on your computer, even rip them and store them on a hard drive if you are so inclined. why would anyone give that up.


For a while yes. Once TV's start switching over to HD watch HD content take off. watching DVD content on my 46" widescreen TV is OK....just OK....I hooked up my computer the other day to the HDMI port and tried some H.264 content on the thing through Quicktime....Yah....*drools*...a LOT.

[ZorPrime]

Maybe this is a sign of another betamax loss for Sony and other's? I mean, is history proving once again that it likes to repeat along the time???

Of course, IMHO it's dumb to choose HD-DVD over Blue-Ray. THey are thinking in short term run, but in the long run BLUE-Ray will rule HD-DVD, even because the maximum theoretical capacity is 200gb of data per Blue-Ray disc, against 60 gb for HD-DVD discs, if I'm not mistaken...

But, the Betamax curse is here, you know...

I don't think so. The difference this time around is that Sony owns a ton of content. Ever hear of Sony Studios or Columbia Pictures? During the Beta v VHS war Sony had marginal access to content. That has changed. Even though Sony lost the consumer market, Sony Beta won the professional broadcast market. I don't think history will repeat itself, as Sony most likely has learned from the last format war.

[nuckinfutz]

I'm going to buy both. I need my movies man.

At the last tradeshow many observers said that both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD looked fabulous. That's enough for me. Hopefully Samsung makes good on their promise of a Universal player.

[steve_hill4]

Even though Sony lost the consumer market, Sony Beta won the professional broadcast market. I don't think history will repeat itself, as Sony most likely has learned from the last format war.
Yeah, most broadcasters use BetaCam and I also agree that Sony will have learnt from the past, after all, they have had a lot of experience.

Beta vs VHS
MiniDisc vs mp3
DVD+R vs DVD-R (although Sony hedged their bets on both sides on this one)

Let's hope they have learnt their lesson.

[steve_hill4]

I'm going to buy both. I need my movies man.

At the last tradeshow many observers said that both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD looked fabulous. That's enough for me. Hopefully Samsung makes good on their promise of a Universal player.
Anyone know if there will be any demonstrations of the two at MacExpo London at the end of next month? I am on my way there on the Friday and want to try and get as much information as I can. It would be nice to hear apple's views on the subject directly too.

[oskar]

For a while yes. Once TV's start switching over to HD watch HD content take off. watching DVD content on my 46" widescreen TV is OK....just OK....I hooked up my computer the other day to the HDMI port and tried some H.264 content on the thing through Quicktime....Yah....*drools*...a LOT.

Television is already switching to HD. No one will force you to throw out your old television and DVDs once HD television finally becomes the standard in the US. But AFAIK they are making a huge effort to have to make you buy an HDTV unless you want to stop watching American television in a few couple of years. All broadcasters already have a deadline for providing HD content. I'm not sure if this has been changed or postponed in the last few weeks, though.

Once that happens everybody will want to play high definition quality DVDs on their brand new HDTV. So one way or another, I see it as we are being forced into having to get an HDTV and a better DVD system. I don't think its something bad, as I can only see advancements in technology as a good thing.

I think HD DVD is the easier and better solution for consumers and will probably be a much cheaper media format in the long run. But then again it doesn't seem that HD DVD copying and burning will be any harder than it is to do now with regular DVDs, so maybe the big movie distributors will go for a harder-to-copy Blu-ray solution. I guess that as long as Apple supports both formats, everything is well. :cool:

[danielsan26]

Follow the money:
I think it's clear by the movie industry (sans Sony) backing HD-DVD that an HD-DVD will support a feature length movie at 1080i but no more. They feel threatened that the Blu-ray just might have enough capacity to store a feature length at whatever vertical resolution comes after that. That keeps them from selling an entirely new generation of VHS/DVD/HD-DVD/SuperHD-DVD movies (and the Toshiba/NEC backers of HD-DVD from selling another generation of players). I for one want to be able to use my Blu-ray player to watch a full length movie on my 2160i TV instead of having to buy a SuperHD-DVD.

[jettredmont]

I'm guessing that in the END, HD-DVD will win. Based off of ONE reason. People will think BLU-RAY is something new and weird, but HD-DVD is just a new version of DVDs. Consumers are stupid, which makes HD-DVD the default winner. It's the one consumers are going to know what it is and buy it.

Ah, but you are forgetting the inevitable rebranding to "HD+DVD" or, perhaps, "DVD Hi-Volume" while renaming "standard DVD" to "DVD Full-Volume" (or is that the other way around?) leaving people to ask, "But is that HD-DVD Full-Volume or Hi-Volume?"

On the other hand, you also have that sizeable contingent of consumers who will hop over to Best Buy, see the "HD-DVD" version of their favorite movie, and not get it because they already have the "DVD" version and it looks like nothing but the packaging has changed. Not the early-adopter crowd, of course, but the later-adopters do tend to get confused when names are similar far more than when they are dissimilar.

It's funny how stupid consumers are, yet how much infuriatingly mindless techno-jargon crap gets hurled their way by so-called "tech" companies. The poor guys don't stand a chance!

In the end, nothing matters except what the blue-shirt at Best Buy claims to be the "de-facto standard" anyways. It could be called "SheepDisks" and it'll sweep the world by storm if you can get those semi-illiterate legions out there guiding the ill-informed masses the right way!

[aafuss1]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Reuters reports (http://today.reuters.co.uk/News/NewsArticle.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2005-09-27T042614Z_01_MCC715944_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-HDDVD.XML) that Microsoft and Intel have announced their plans to back the HD-DVD format for high definition content. Microsoft's support for the HD DVD format was expected based on previous announced partnerships with Toshiba.

Meanwhile, Apple announced support (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/03/20050310144840.shtml) for Blu-ray technology in March of 2005. Blu-ray is the main competitor to the HD DVD format.

While, Microsoft/Intel control a large proportion of PC hardware, content providers have not yet joined their site:

It's good for Apple-as DVD Studio 4 already supports HD-DVD, but no Mac's have Blu-Ray or HD-DVD burners yet.

[toughboy]

Microsoft backing an inferior technology? Say it isn't so!

Tell me its not truee....

[steve_hill4]

Follow the money:
I think it's clear by the movie industry (sans Sony) backing HD-DVD that an HD-DVD will support a feature length movie at 1080i but no more. They feel threatened that the Blu-ray just might have enough capacity to store a feature length at whatever vertical resolution comes after that. That keeps them from selling an entirely new generation of VHS/DVD/HD-DVD/SuperHD-DVD movies (and the Toshiba/NEC backers of HD-DVD from selling another generation of players). I for one want to be able to use my Blu-ray player to watch a full length movie on my 2160i TV instead of having to buy a SuperHD-DVD.
While you have a very good point there, I don't think this is foremost in the studios' minds when deciding. A lot of the major players are siding with Blu-Ray, for its apparent copyright advantages. If they lose a fortune by going for the wrong format and gambling on people willing to buy another format in 10 years, but in the mean time a lot of bootlegging going on, they will look like complete fools. I think they are smarter than just going for a format because they can potentially cash in a little bit later. If this was their primary factor, why din't they try to push LaserDisc more in the 80's to replace VHS and then introduce DVD rather than offering minimal support for LD and then jumping straight to it's smaller cousin?

[danielsan26]

While you have a very good point there, I don't think this is foremost in the studios' minds when deciding. A lot of the major players are siding with Blu-Ray, for its apparent copyright advantages. If they lose a fortune by going for the wrong format and gambling on people willing to buy another format in 10 years, but in the mean time a lot of bootlegging going on, they will look like complete fools. I think they are smarter than just going for a format because they can potentially cash in a little bit later. If this was their primary factor, why din't they try to push LaserDisc more in the 80's to replace VHS and then introduce DVD rather than offering minimal support for LD and then jumping straight to it's smaller cousin?

I honestly think that the RIAA and MPAA are gradually getting wise to the fact that no matter what precautions and safeguards they establish, some 13 year-old will crack it. I think that in the future, litigation of a few people to scare the masses and legal actions against the major pirating players are going to be their their only recourse. This only leaves a constant turnover in media formats to recoup losses in the long run.

[ZorPrime]

You misunderstood his post. The copy protection on forthcoming HD content will only allow content to be played in HD if the TV/Monitor the player is attached is HDCP compliant (which means HDMI or DVI w/HDCP). If yer HDTV is not HDCP compliant (which very few HDTVs, and no computer monitors, being sold today are) then the content will only be played back in SD.
Lethal

I disagree. Not talking about Copy protection. He was talking about the 480p (which isn't HD) signal being sent from the player. Most HDTVs' embedded processors "UPCONVERT" whatever signal they receive to their native resolution. You won't need an HDTV to view movies from a Blu-Ray player playing HD movies. You simply won't get the benefits of HD, if you don't have an HDTV and you won't get the "best" if you don't have HDMI. These issues exist today, coax, rca, svideo, component, etc...

Also, the higher resolution HDTVs 770i, 1080i or higher tend to have digital inputs and if the input isn't in the format you need, you can buy a converter. Blu-Ray players will support 480i, which is what most people have. ;)

This is what he said, which isn't correct.


The PS3 will help Blu-Ray's penetration but then again you still need a HDCP DVI/HDMI HD tv as Blu-Ray players will only have SD 480p analog outputs.

PS3 is also a "player", wich will work on a standard TV. By the way, do you really think Sony will push for replacement DVD players and format that will negate 80% of the US TV market???? :eek:

[danielsan26]

The only difference between Blu-ray and HD-DVD is whether DVD-Jon's name will become HDDVD-Jon or Blu-Jon.

(Jon Lech Johansen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_Jon) helped make DeCSS which enabled the creation of such programs as Mac the Ripper (http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/22715))

[barneygumble]

All i know is i stopped buying DVD's until they sort this crap out

[iQuit]

Blue-Ray seems too ahead of its time....it'll do good for a while and then fail, like the DreamCast.

(edit) too

[MacsRgr8]

Of course they're crap. They have almost zero competition at home... go to the Netherlands and try to find some audio components made by someone else!

?????????

I'm no Philips supporter.... but this is outrageous.

You mean if I buy some Sony stuff I get Philips components?? :confused:

[SBG88]

I'm guessing that in the END, HD-DVD will win. Based off of ONE reason. People will think BLU-RAY is something new and weird, but HD-DVD is just a new version of DVDs. Consumers are stupid, which makes HD-DVD the default winner. It's the one consumers are going to know what it is and buy it.

Yes, I believe you are correct. I partnered in a video rental business in the early to mid eighties. Although beta was actually a superior format the vhs won for part of that reason.

[Surreal]

Blue-Ray seems too ahead of its time....it'll do good for a while and then fail, like the DreamCast.


yeah, i could see that happening. yeah. damn shame what we did to the dreamcast here in america.

[jettredmont]

not wanting to hijack the thread, but i got an off-topic question. let us say a new president gets elected, does he have the power to trash the patriot act?

i just need one answer and then go back on topic people :-)

Quick answer: No. The Patriot Act is an act of Congress, with no Executive suspension clauses AFAIK. The only chances of getting rid of it are:

* Elect a congress which cares about personal rights as much as this one cares about the corporate "rights" of Enron and Halliburton.
* Hope that the Supreme Court overturns the Patriot Act as over-reaching and unduly extreme. Not likely given its major proponent is determining two of the judges on the bench, and the other judges aren't real softies for individual liberties (Antonin, I'm lookin at you!)
* Elect a President who has the political will and wherewithall to chip away at the most inflammatory areas of the act, and/or on "coat tails" long enough to convince Congresscritters to think of people instead of a police state.

That's it. As an act of Congress, it can only be "checked" by Constitutionally-based high-court reversal, or by Congress itself. The Executive can enact orders which contradict the act, and/or "fill in the blanks" of specific situations, but it's already been signed into law and so the only way to really "undo" it is through previous law (court option) or future law (congress option).

Now, back to the topic at hand ...

[Yvan256]

My TV only has one HDMI port, so which console is going to get it?

Your future A-B HDMI switch? :D

[DavidCar]

I just came across this. Maybe someone already posted it. It lists six reasons for the decision.

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050927_190208.html

[MarcelV]

Ok, I haven't read alll the posts, but clearly most people think, that there are only two standards for the DVD successor. It may not surprise you, but Microsoft is developing with Taiwanese producers another successor which is FVD (Forward Versatile Disc), and then we also have the chinese companies building another standard called EVD. It will be a long road to HD......

[nuckinfutz]

I just came across this. Maybe someone already posted it. It lists six reasons for the decision.

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050927_190208.html

Holy smokes man!! Great link. If this is true...HD-DVD has just taken the lead. Once people get used to streaming HD content from a networked drive they won't want to go back.

BDROM 50GB non-existent? That's very bad news for the BDA. We already knew that BDROM was more expensive but I thought Sony had the DL stuff down pat.

I had forgotten all about Intel's VIIV as well. I knew MS wouldn't want to support Java either.

Last but not least is China. With them onboard there's no way BD can automagically become as cheap.

I've revised my odds now from 50/50 to 60/40 in favor of HD-DVD.

[chatin]

I would leave the drive making up to the world's best optical drive manufacturer. Sony is great at under-promising and over-delivering!

What hardware became wildly sucessful after the company destroyed 200 prototypes in favor of waiting for a better optical drive.

Answer: The original Playstation!

[stephenli]

Now we have iMovie HD / Final Cut Studio HD, and we have displays capable for 1080i HD production, but we still didnt have an optical drive for output....

anyway my first Blu-Ray player would be.....PS3!!!

[ZorPrime]

I honestly think that the RIAA and MPAA are gradually getting wise to the fact that no matter what precautions and safeguards they establish, some 13 year-old will crack it. I think that in the future, litigation of a few people to scare the masses and legal actions against the major pirating players are going to be their their only recourse. This only leaves a constant turnover in media formats to recoup losses in the long run.

True, no security encryption is 100% but at least with Blu-Ray content owners will be able to change the encryption algorithms without having to invest in huge amounts of $$$. They can simply change the encryption and no one will know or have to buy a new DVD player to play the newly encrypted discs. In other words: some kid cracks the code, the studios change the code without switching to a new platform, and consumers don't have to buy new dvd players. The beauty of it is its flexibility.

Also the nature of the photo emulson enscribing techniques used for Blu-Ray disc authoring will make it extremely difficult for mass bootleggers to steal and mass produce copyrighted Blu-Ray movies.

[ZorPrime]

Follow the money:
I think it's clear by the movie industry (sans Sony) backing HD-DVD that an HD-DVD will support a feature length movie at 1080i but no more. They feel threatened that the Blu-ray just might have enough capacity to store a feature length at whatever vertical resolution comes after that. That keeps them from selling an entirely new generation of VHS/DVD/HD-DVD/SuperHD-DVD movies (and the Toshiba/NEC backers of HD-DVD from selling another generation of players).

Good point.


I for one want to be able to use my Blu-ray player to watch a full length movie on my 2160i TV instead of having to buy a SuperHD-DVD.

WHA, you have a 2160i TV???? I want one! :eek:

[LethalWolfe]

In regards to movies storage size really isn't an issue. W/the new codecs (like h.264) you can compress a feature length film into a very good quality HD movie that'll be around 4 or 5 gigs.

And in regards to the copy protection I think it'll be tougher to break because the player and the TV/monitor are actively sending encrypted signals back and fourth (I think its a few times a second) verifying each other and the "list" of verified devices can be changed by the content provider. So, for example, let's say you buy a "black box" so you can watch HD-DVDs on your non-HDCP compliant HDTV. You hook both the TV and the player into the box and the black box spoofs the player so it will send the HD signal. Once, let's say, Sony becomes away of the black box they'll get one, determine what keys it's using to spoof the player and the send and an update (piggy backed on HD/Blu-ray DVDs or TV signals) and the player will no longer recognize the keys the black box is using.

I wouldn't downplay anything M$ does in regards to HD. They got super burned by Apple on the music front and they don't want to let that happen again. I've read the MS has started soliciting the studios now when in the past MS always made people come to them.


I disagree. Not talking about Copy protection. He was talking about the 480p (which isn't HD) signal being sent from the player. Most HDTV's embedded processor "UPCONVERTs" whatever signal they receive to their native resolution. You won't need an HDTV to view movies from a Blu-Ray player playing HD movies. You simply won't get the benefits of HD, if you don't have an HDTV and you won't get the "best" if you don't have HDMI. These issues exhist today, coax, rca, svideo, component, etc...
Yeah, looks like I misunderstand the conversation. There's a difference though between having to use a lower quality i/o and having having your player refuse to output an HD signal because your HDTV is not HDCP compliant. The difference between s-video and component is much smaller than the difference between SD and HD (espeically if you are viewing SD on and HDTV).

Also, the higher resolution HDTVs 770i, 1080i or higher tend to have digital inputs and if the input isn't in the format you need, you can buy a converter. Blu-Ray players will support 480i, which is what most people have. ;)

I'm assuming you meant 720p. ;)


By the way, do you really think Sony will push for replacement DVD players and format that will negate 80% of the US TV market???? :eek:
Well, considering they (and the HD DVD backers) are screwing over everyone by forcing you to have a HDCP compliant TV/monitor if you want to get an HD signal to come out of the player I wouldn't much past'em. ;) Sucks to be an early adopter...


Lethal

[ZorPrime]

anyway my first Blu-Ray player would be.....PS3!!!

Me too! It'll go really nice with my 1080p HDTV with HDMI! :D

[ZorPrime]

I wouldn't downplay anything M$ does in regards to HD. They got super burned by Apple on the music front and they don't want to let that happen again. I've read the MS has started soliciting the studios now when in the past MS always made people come to them.


Good point. :)


The difference between s-video and component is much smaller than the difference between SD and HD (espeically if you are viewing SD on and HDTV).


Very true. I totally agree.


I'm assuming you meant 720p. ;)


Nope. I meant 770p. I have a 42" 770p XGA Plasma Display (JVC # PD-42X795) and I also have a Mitsubishi 1080p 52" DLP HDTV (#WD-52627). ;) :cool:

[johnnyjibbs]

This is all very interesting. While traditionally Sony innovations have flopped by the wayside, I don't think the small fact of the Playstation 3 supporting BluRay will mean they should get the coffin ready for it yet. Not to mention both Apple and Dell support for the format.

On the other hand, HD-DVD, as I understand it, provides backwards compatibility with the existing DVD format, meaning that, as a video medium, customers will not have to keep their old DVD players or necessarily be forced into buying all their favourite movies again (for a third time!). I'm not overly convinced the extra quality will get people upgrading - most will not really be able to tell the difference and most (certainly in the UK) will not have a TV up to the job. I think the reason DVD video eventually took off was because it offered instant access (chapters) and didn't require rewinding NOT the increase in quality of picture.

We shall see...

[cube]

Anybody can tell the difference between standard definition garbage and HD. It's not like with audio.

[steve_hill4]

This is all very interesting. While traditionally Sony innovations have flopped by the wayside, I don't think the small fact of the Playstation 3 supporting BluRay will mean they should get the coffin ready for it yet. Not to mention both Apple and Dell support for the format.

And if they can get round the copy protection, having more computers with the drives to enable the copying of PS3 games would be a major advantage. Perhaps even with the xbox 360 we will see Blu-Ray win. Microsoft use DVD, prepare for an expensive HD DVD upgrade, people create a huge market in copied 360 discs, Microsoft change their mind and decide that the heavier copy protection of BDs is better.

On the other hand, HD-DVD, as I understand it, provides backwards compatibility with the existing DVD format, meaning that, as a video medium, customers will not have to keep their old DVD players or necessarily be forced into buying all their favourite movies again (for a third time!). I'm not overly convinced the extra quality will get people upgrading - most will not really be able to tell the difference and most (certainly in the UK) will not have a TV up to the job. I think the reason DVD video eventually took off was because it offered instant access (chapters) and didn't require rewinding NOT the increase in quality of picture.
I agree, most here seem to be less bothred by HD anyway. They just see it as another scam to immediately follow digital. Very much like the US backing of the lower quality VHS, DVD is enough for most here. Once Blu-Ray and HD-DVD come down in price, those with HDTV will go for it, those without won't necessarily. I also see everywhere selling DVD recorders for £100 or so, and most of those cheaper ones use the inferior DVD+R. If HD-DVD continues to be cheaper in discs, manufacture and player/recorder, a lot will just go for the cheaper technology again. Philips knows this which is why it flooded the market with cheap +R only recorders. If only Philips could make their BD recorders cheap enough to flood the market with.


We shall see...
Hopefully we will, and not in several years time.

[steve_hill4]

Anybody can tell the difference between standard definition garbage and HD. It's not like with audio.
A lot can tell the difference, (even with audio), but many aren't bothered to the point of actually wanting to replace equipment or going for the very best quality. If it records, it'll do in their books.

[pizzach]

In regards to movies storage size really isn't an issue. W/the new codecs (like h.264) you can compress a feature length film into a very good quality HD movie that'll be around 4 or 5 gigs.
Lethal

Not quite right from what I can tell. The standard dvd on a nice tv or computer monitor you can still see the artifacts. On a HD-DVD on a Hi-def TV you can STILL see the artifacts. With blu-ray you can't because of that extra space. (I've read this so it's second hand info.) Seems like HD-DVD is not what it should be.

Also, from everything that i read, Blu-ray does everything that HD-DVD does and more. Like you can still put a standard DVD in a Blu-ray disc. How handy is that if you want to bring the movie to a friends house?

DVDs, HD-DVD, and Blu-ray will and do undoubtably have copy-right protection.

In the end, blue ray is more expensive, but you get what you pay for. It feels like true next generation technology. Not an interm zip-drive. Remember, even SHARPER HD-tvs are coming out in the future with even HIGHER RESOLUTIONS. If blu-ray dies, it will be from lack of knowledge. Starting with the fact that they didn't but HD or DVD in their name....

Shoot me in the foot if I misstated anything :p

[minimax]

Of course they're crap. They have almost zero competition at home... go to the Netherlands and try to find some audio components made by someone else!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++TROLL

[Hoef]

Of course they're crap. They have almost zero competition at home... go to the Netherlands and try to find some audio components made by someone else!

Huh .... I feel flattered that you call a 16 million people country a competitive market. Your logic is flawed when you assume that they therefore make crappy products. In the world markets there is plenty of competition.... Maybe they are not that crappy afterall.

[danielsan26]

WHA, you have a 2160i TV???? I want one! :eek:


Lol.....my hypothetical 2160i TV....I'm going to wait until the prices come down a little bit :rolleyes:

[pubwvj]

Boycott the new formats. Don't buy movies in either format.
Better yet, boycott Hollywood and don't buy any movies at all.
Even better, don't buy CD's either. Bunch'a money grubbing...

[LethalWolfe]

ZorPrime,
Do you know much about the 770p function of the set? It sounds like a marketing gimmick to me.

Not quite right from what I can tell. The standard dvd on a nice tv or computer monitor you can still see the artifacts. On a HD-DVD on a Hi-def TV you can STILL see the artifacts. With blu-ray you can't because of that extra space. (I've read this so it's second hand info.) Seems like HD-DVD is not what it should be.
Assuming you have a good enough monitor you are always going to see artifacts though. The footage has to be severely compressed to be transmitted and it has to be severely compressed to end up on a DVD.

Also, from everything that i read, Blu-ray does everything that HD-DVD does and more. Like you can still put a standard DVD in a Blu-ray disc. How handy is that if you want to bring the movie to a friends house?
Are you sure that's right? I'd read that one of the HDDVD backers had developed a way to add an "SD layer" in a HDVD disc. So, for example, you could have the SD and HD versions of the movie on the same disc but on separate layers so it would playback in both HDDVD players and current DVD players.


In the end, blue ray is more expensive, but you get what you pay for. It feels like true next generation technology. Not an interm zip-drive. Remember, even SHARPER HD-tvs are coming out in the future with even HIGHER RESOLUTIONS. If blu-ray dies, it will be from lack of knowledge. Starting with the fact that they didn't but HD or DVD in their name....

Better quality HDTVs I know will come down the pipe (currently all HDTVs cheat and don't give true line for line reproductions of HD content), but higher res? What's the point of having a display that's higher res than than the recording format? All it will do is make the image quality look degraded (just like when you watch SD content on a computer monitor or HDTV).


Lethal

[TheMonarch]

Lets not forget that MPEG-2 is OLD, add in a new codec such as H.264 and Bam! HD-DVD is awesome/cheap and space really won't be a problem...

[ZorPrime]

ZorPrime,
Do you know much about the 770p function of the set? It sounds like a marketing gimmick to me.

Don’t be jealous. :p

I'm very much well aware of what 720i, 770p, 480i, 1080p, etc. refer to. Do you? There is a difference between a 720 and 770 monitor, a 770 has greater vertical real estate, which I prefer. I can tell the difference between a 770p monitor and a 1080i. Notice the suffixes? If you actually owned an HDTV or viewed one outside of your local electronics store, you'd probably have a different opinion from what you currently have, maybe not. I don’t know what your visual acuity is so it’s completely possible it doesn’t make a difference to you and therefore is a gimmick. ;)


Assuming you have a good enough monitor you are always going to see artifacts though. The footage has to be severely compressed to be transmitted and it has to be severely compressed to end up on a DVD.


I agree with you that viewing an upconverting a SD signal on an HDTV isn't as good as viewing a native HD signal. But the upconverted image, is still substantially nicer than than the original. Upconverting isn't the same as, viewing a 320x180 movie file on a computer monitor of 1280x1024, then stretching that 320x180 file to view it in 1280x1024 full screen.

As far as artifacts are concerned, an HDTV’s resolution has nothing to do with artifacts. The occurrence of artifacts is mainly dependent on two things: the originating signal and how the HDTV’s embedded processor processes that signal, interlaced or progressive.

When it comes to HDTVs, the embedded chip processes the signal for viewing in the monitor’s native resolution. There are two ways a video signal is processed by an HDTV, progressive and interlaced. An interlaced signal will always be of a lower quality than a progressive signal. An interlaced signal will always have more artifacts than a progressive.

Because in an interlaced setting, the first scan is of every odd line of the monitor, then the second follows the previous scan with the scanning of the even lines. We know there are approximately 30 frames shown per second. As a result, the monitor shows one half of every frame per sixtieth of a second. Lower frame rates mean it’s harder to cover up artifacts, in high speed or action sequences such pan-shots of football players, etc.

Progressive scanning shows the whole picture, the entire frame in one showing, every sixtieth of a second. This provides for a much smoother picture because the frame rate is twice as high, 60 frames per second, compared with interlaced. This process drastically reduces the occurrence of artifacts by “masking them.” I also agree that pretty much every HDTV will encounter artifacts but progressive HDTV have far fewer and the ones that do creep up are far less conspicuous.

How that converted signal looks depends on the processor. A 720p monitor will typically have a better picture than a 1080i monitor because of the way in which the video signal is processed and in tern displayed. A progressive scan monitor will bump an interlaced image up a generation or so.

As progressive signals occupy more space and require higher bandwidth, Blu-Ray is the preferable choice over HD-DVD in viewing and broadcasting progressive scan/higher resolution HD content. BD have higher data transfer rates than HD-DVD... more information means less compression which means better quality. :)

[LethalWolfe]

Don’t be jealous. :p
Can't be jealous of something I don't want. ;)

I'm very much well aware of what 720i, 770p, 480i, 1080p, etc. refer to. Do you? There is a difference between a 720 and 770 monitor, a 770 has greater vertical real estate, which I prefer. I can tell the difference between a 770p monitor and a 1080i. Notice the suffixes? If you actually owned an HDTV or viewed one outside of your local electronics store, you'd probably have a different opinion from what you currently have, maybe not. I don’t know what your visual acuity is so it’s completely possible it doesn’t make a difference to you and therefore is a gimmick. ;)
I'm well aware of the HD specs (both for acquisition and for b'cast) and I don't see 770 anywhere which is why it sounds like a marketing gimmick to me (720i doesn't look familiar either).

As far as artifacts are concerned, an HDTV’s resolution has nothing to do with artifacts.
I never said it did. I was talking about the quality of the display. Watch an HD signal on a broadcast monitor and you'll see things you won't see on a consumer HDTV from Wal-Mart. Both can have the same native res, but I'll bet the b'cast monitor will look a lot different than the one from Wal-Mart.

An interlaced signal will always be of a lower quality than a progressive signal. An interlaced signal will always have more artifacts than a progressive.
Depends on what you are shooting. Interlaced only starts to artifact when there is camera motion and/or motion happening in the frame.

Progressive scanning shows the whole picture, the entire frame in one showing, every sixtieth of a second. This provides for a much smoother picture because the frame rate is twice as high, 60 frames per second, compared with interlaced.
Progressive does show each image as a whole, but how frequently it displays depends on the frame rate (i.e. 24p, 30p, and 60p show images every 24, 30, and 60 seconds respectively).

As progressive signals occupy more space and require higher bandwidth, Blu-Ray is the preferable choice over HD-DVD in viewing and broadcasting progressive scan/higher resolution HD content. BD have higher data transfer rates than HD-DVD... more information means less compression which means better quality. :)
Again, you have to take frame rate into consideration. For example, a 1080/24p signal is smaller than a 1080/60i signal.


Lethal

[wdlove]

I certainly don't want to be an early adopter of this technology. Very happy with my analog TV. IMHO Digital Cable is just too expensive. Will just wait until Digital comes to Basic Cable. Think that $9.16/m is all that the technology is worth. Still get to enjoy movies on a nice Apple LCD.

[ZorPrime]

Can't be jealous of something I don't want. ;)


Sure. :rolleyes:


I'm well aware of the HD specs (both for acquisition and for b'cast) and I don't see 770 anywhere which is why it sounds like a marketing gimmick to me (720i doesn't look familiar either).


Never mentioned anything about 770 being a broadcast standard. You’re confusing broadcast with playback. By the way Fox and ABC broadcast in 720p. NBC and CBS in 1080i.

It doesn’t matter what the broadcast is anyway, since your HDTV will convert the signal for playback in its native resolution. So if you have an HDTV with 770 vertical lines, you will see you motion image in that resolution p or i.


I never said it did. I was talking about the quality of the display. Watch an HD signal on a broadcast monitor and you'll see things you won't see on a consumer HDTV from Wal-Mart. Both can have the same native res, but I'll bet the b'cast monitor will look a lot different than the one from Wal-Mart.


I’m not talking about Broadcast Monitors, I was talking about HDTVs consumers watch broadcasts on. ;) You’re referring to them interchangeably, nice rhetorical trick but pointless.


Progressive does show each image as a whole, but how frequently it displays depends on the frame rate (i.e. 24p, 30p, and 60p show images every 24, 30, and 60 seconds respectively).

Show me a currently sold consumer HDTV with its native resolution at a frequency of less than 60MHz. SDTV refresh rates are 60MHz, yet the broadcast signals are 6Mhz. I didn't know the broadcast controlled the hardware. :eek:

As far as DTV broadcasts are concerned, yes the ATSC standard does support a plethora of frame rates and resolutions, per broadcast compression need.

Anyway, once and finally the playback of an HDTV is not the same resolution, frequency, fsp, dpi or whatever as the original signal, be it broadcast, from a VCR, DVD, etc. The HDTV’s embedded chip plays the signal back in its native resolution, whatever that may be. End of story.

When you watch a VHS or DVD movie on your consumer SD or HDTV (not broadcast monitor) are you viewing it in its original format? Nope.

The paradigm is different but the convention is the same: http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

I’m finished with this particular discussion. You have your opinion and I have mine. In the end more people would rather have an HDTV than an SD. The thing holding wide adoption is pricing. Once the price of a medium sized HDTV hits $400-600 USD, HDTV will become ubiquitous. I’m sure there’re people still around that would rather view motion pictures via a stereopticon but it’s a good thing they’re not calling the shots.

[ZorPrime]

I certainly don't want to be an early adopter of this technology. Very happy with my analog TV. IMHO Digital Cable is just too expensive. Will just wait until Digital comes to Basic Cable. Think that $9.16/m is all that the technology is worth. Still get to enjoy movies on a nice Apple LCD.

I totally agree with you. I have satellite and if my wife wasn't working for the company that builds them along with her nice discount, I wouldn't waste my money on digital cable or satellite either. We get digital satellite for about $30 per month with all the major channels and ton of extra channels, I stopped counting after 500.

[JoeG4]

We got satellite service because it was cheaper than cable service out here.

So far I don't like either BD or HDDVD, the idea that playing a disc should require a "protected monitor" is disgusting, no thanks.

[LethalWolfe]

Sure. :rolleyes:
Does my lack of envy hurt your Home Theater sensibilities? I guess it would just about kill you then to learn I used to watch TV on a 6yr old, 14", $80 Sharp TV w/a dinky mono speaker on the side and no cable. That's right, OTA only. My only complaint was that snipping was hard in Halo 'cause the screen was so small.

Never mentioned anything about 770 being a broadcast standard. You’re confusing broadcast with playback.
Yer right. I'm confused as to why having a TV that "goes up to 11" wouldn't be considering a marketing gimmick.

I’m not talking about Broadcast Monitors, I was talking about HDTVs consumers watch broadcasts on. ;) You’re referring to them interchangeably, nice rhetorical trick but pointless.
I was using an extreme example to prove a point. You do realize that a broadcast monitor is basically the same as a TV right? It will be of higher quality, and probably will have professional I/O's and some other pro bells and whistles, but basically it's just a TV. Okay, so how about this. Take the most expensive HDTV you can find at you favorite Home Theater vender and compare it to the lowest priced HDTV you can find at Wal-Mart (both w/the same native res and I/O's of course). There will be a difference in image quality, yes?

Show me a currently sold consumer HDTV with its native resolution at a frequency of less than 60MHz. SDTV refresh rates are 60MHz, yet the broadcast signals are 6Mhz. I didn't know the broadcast controlled the hardware. :eek:

As far as DTV broadcasts are concerned, yes the ATSC standard does support a plethora of frame rates and resolutions, per broadcast compression need.

Anyway, once and finally the playback of an HDTV is not the same resolution, frequency, fsp, dpi or whatever as the original signal, be it broadcast, from a VCR, DVD, etc. The HDTV’s embedded chip plays the signal back in its native resolution, whatever that may be. End of story.
My mistake. I didn't realize your broad generalizations weren't meant to be broad generalizations.


In the end more people would rather have an HDTV than an SD. The thing holding wide adoption is pricing. Once the price of a medium sized HDTV hits $400-600 USD, HDTV will become ubiquitous.
So, HDTV is so popular that people aren't willing to pay for it until the government deadline for ending SD transmission is reached and/or SDTV's basically stop getting made because TV manufacturers want everyone to buy a new TV. Yeah, sounds like everyone would rather have an HDTV.
The move by consumers to HD is going to be one of practicality not one of popularity. There will be no "boom" like there was for DVDs or iPods or Playstations.

I’m sure there’re people still around that would rather view motion pictures via a stereopticon but it’s a good thing they’re not calling the shots.
Just because I'm not a now-screwed own of an HDTV that won't display an HD signal from the forth coming HDDVD/Blu-ray players doesn't mean I'm against HD. Personally I think its a very exciting time to be in the entertainment industry as we switch from analog to digital. It's also a royally PITA time too so the sooner SD goes away the better. I'm just not in a hurry to jump on the HDTV bandwagon yet.

Maybe it's cause I don't watch much TV. Maybe it's because I know some TV shows use the same SD master for both their SD and HD b'casts. Maybe it's because I'm around b'cast quality SD and HD all day and I know consumer HD is never, ever, ever gonna look anywhere near as good as what I see at work. So instead of seeing HDTV as a step up from SD I see it as a step down from the HD I see at work everyday. Also, I find TV entertaining because of good storytelling, not supreme technical merit. Will HD make "Law & Order" or "Dangerous Housewives" better than they already are? Will HD make watching "Pearl Harbor" a less painful experience?

I'm in no way against HD, I'm just not willing to pay a premium on an immature technology. You early adopters take the risks and cut the trail thru the woods. I'll wait until the path is paved, thank you. :p


Lethal

[ZorPrime]

Does my lack of envy hurt your Home Theater sensibilities?


Nope. I'd have to actually have an emotional attachment to what you think or say to care.


I was using an extreme example to prove a point. You do realize that a broadcast monitor is basically the same as a TV right?


Uhmmm... what's a TV?? does it have something to do with charged particles or a cathode thingy? no wait, maybe gas, no wait maybe Si... 5 years doing PostProd and CGI with SKG made me forget.


Yer right. I'm confused as to why having a TV that "goes up to 11" wouldn't be considering a marketing gimmick.


yet here we are, on MacRumors. :eek:


My mistake. I didn't realize your broad generalizations weren't meant to be broad generalizations.


No prob. It's hard to get specific when answering vacillating axioms mistaken for convention but it's entertaining none the less.

Will HD make "Law & Order" or "Dangerous Housewives" better than they already are? Will HD make watching "Pearl Harbor" a less painful experience?


Don't get too deep on us or else we dilettantes will feel left out. :rolleyes:


I'm in no way against HD,


Didn't construe you as being.

Now, do you think you can have the strength not to reply to an uninformed nobody? ;)

[LethalWolfe]

Now, do you think you can have the strength not to reply to an uninformed nobody? ;)

LOL

No, obviously not. :D


Lethal

[saunders45]

I don't mean to interrupt the uber-nerd battle here, but i thought i post a semi-update to the drama that is unfolding.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050929-5366.html

[milzay]

I've backed Blu-Ray from the start, but just now I checked the Blu-Ray website (http://www.blu-ray.com/info/) and it states that discs will hold 25/50 GB?!?!?!? I always thought it was a lot more isn't this passing into HD-DVD territory?

[Eric5h5]

I've backed Blu-Ray from the start, but just now I checked the Blu-Ray website (http://www.blu-ray.com/info/) and it states that discs will hold 25/50 GB?!?!?!? I always thought it was a lot more isn't this passing into HD-DVD territory?

Not really; that's a helluva lot more than the 15/30 that HD-DVD does. If for some reason 25/50 isn't enough for you, I guess you'll have to wait for holographic storage or something. ;) (Might not actually be as long of a wait as all that from what I've heard lately.)

--Eric

[saunders45]

I've backed Blu-Ray from the start, but just now I checked the Blu-Ray website (http://www.blu-ray.com/info/) and it states that discs will hold 25/50 GB?!?!?!? I always thought it was a lot more isn't this passing into HD-DVD territory?


The thing is, the 50 GB is theoretical, they have only been produced in a lab settings. 30 GB HD DVD's are available today.

[ZorPrime]

The thing is, the 50 GB is theoretical, they have only been produced in a lab settings. 30 GB HD DVD's are available today.

Irrelevent. It's widely accepted that BD most likely will not be first to market. Big deal. :rolleyes: Being first to market doesn't equal winning the market. When BDs do make it to market they will be of higher capacity. ;)

Edit: Don't be fooled by BS, I mean MS.

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050930_134726.html

[LethalWolfe]

We also have to keep this all in perspective. Until full blown production starts, these things start shipping and independent reviews can be made of them all this discussion basically relies on PR machines pimping their respective formats.


Lethal

[BGil]

Irrelevent. It's widely accepted that BD most likely will not be first to market. Big deal. :rolleyes: Being first to market doesn't equal winning the market. When BDs do make it to market they will be of higher capacity. ;)

Edit: Don't be fooled by BS, I mean MS.

http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20050930_134726.html


Contrary to what ignorant "journalists" say, Blu-ray is in production already. Sony has a line of high-def cameras and decks and they all use the 25GB disc.

[ZorPrime]

Contrary to what ignorant "journalists" say, Blu-ray is in production already. Sony has a line of high-def cameras and decks and they all use the 25GB disc.

True. Let's also not forget the PSP. UMDs are Blu-Ray. :cool: