Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple adopts Blu-ray Technology
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Bob Dobbs said:
Very salient point. I've seen
http://storage.itworld.com/4653/050110adulthd/page_1.html
Points out that the Porn industry is watching as well. I think you'll find them go HD-DVD because of costs. They really don't need the extra space of Blu-Ray IMO.
I've already seen some porn videos shot with those new Sony HDV cameras and all I can say is, mother o' mighty. HD is gonna catch on big time. Whichever format wins in the end, it's coming.
I believe 30GB or 50GB capacities do not matter much, as most of the advances will come by way of video compression technique. You can already fit 2 hours of HD material on a standard DVD by using WMV9 or h.264 codecs.
It may be split up with computer users embracing blu-ray, while movie distribution will be sent by way of HD DVD.
I believe 30GB or 50GB capacities do not matter much, as most of the advances will come by way of video compression technique. You can already fit 2 hours of HD material on a standard DVD by using WMV9 or h.264 codecs.
It may be split up with computer users embracing blu-ray, while movie distribution will be sent by way of HD DVD.
Lord Blackadder said:
No you have this wrong. Sony did NOT want Porn on Beta. Thus Porn went VHS and the rest is history.
I wonder what the likelihood of players and burners supporting both formats will be. Probably not an affordable prospect. I hope this doesn't become another DVD-A vs SACD tragedy. Neither format won in the end.
Capacity wins!
Neither one is big yet, so I don't see how it can have loyalists and forum rivalries yet
I prefer HD-DVD because the name is simpler.
I prefer Blu-Ray because it holds more, has more promise for the future, and isn't "one more acronym!"
So I was hoping Apple would go with Blu-Ray. I'm hoping the tide moves that way in general--and it's not too late to end up with ONE standard, since neither has CONSUMER momentum yet.
But if BOTH formats stay important, that's not the end of the world: Apple will offer the HD-DVD choice BTO when and if that becomes necessary. If it never does, anyone married to HD-DVD can get an external.
I certainly don't understand criticizing Blu-Ray just because early protoypes USED to be bulkier than HD-DVD. They're not anymore. Maybe the Blue-Ray folks turned to something more important in the beginning, like capacity!
Neither one is big yet, so I don't see how it can have loyalists and forum rivalries yet
I prefer HD-DVD because the name is simpler.
I prefer Blu-Ray because it holds more, has more promise for the future, and isn't "one more acronym!"
So I was hoping Apple would go with Blu-Ray. I'm hoping the tide moves that way in general--and it's not too late to end up with ONE standard, since neither has CONSUMER momentum yet.
But if BOTH formats stay important, that's not the end of the world: Apple will offer the HD-DVD choice BTO when and if that becomes necessary. If it never does, anyone married to HD-DVD can get an external.
I certainly don't understand criticizing Blu-Ray just because early protoypes USED to be bulkier than HD-DVD. They're not anymore. Maybe the Blue-Ray folks turned to something more important in the beginning, like capacity!
nuckinfutz said:
On the contrary, they should pick a side. The faster the other format dies off, the better. Betamax was superior to VHS, but Betamax and VHS existing at the same time would have been worst of all.
Spoken like someone who doesn't remember when CDs used caddies
~J
It's not political, it's technical
So, how many people have the HD drives? It's supposedly backwards compatible, but only in a half-assed way.
HDDVD is the loser technically. Some want it because they could start quickly with the current capital investment for manufacturing, but HDDVD can't hold as much and can't expand as much. This would mean that Blu-Ray can have the same amount of content (commentaries, etc.) as present DVDs have. And more. HDDVD is a dead end.
nuckinfutz said:
So, how many people have the HD drives? It's supposedly backwards compatible, but only in a half-assed way.
HDDVD is the loser technically. Some want it because they could start quickly with the current capital investment for manufacturing, but HDDVD can't hold as much and can't expand as much. This would mean that Blu-Ray can have the same amount of content (commentaries, etc.) as present DVDs have. And more. HDDVD is a dead end.
Saying that capacity is not important reminds me of the guy who said that the floppy would never go away -- afterall, who writes files bigger than 50k anyway?
HD video is a hog -- and high bitrate HD is a monster hog. Capacity is important.
(This isn't a vote for Blu-Ray, just an observation.)
HD video is a hog -- and high bitrate HD is a monster hog. Capacity is important.
(This isn't a vote for Blu-Ray, just an observation.)
Thank God the world is not run by marketers. Not yet, at least.
Hey, one of the big selling points for DVDs is that they have interviews with the cast, "Making of..." documentaries, and the like. They all go beyond 132 minutes, and it makes a difference in sales.
It's very convenient for the studios, but who cares about them?
HD-DVD only loses to Blu-Ray in total capacity. That capacity means nothing to Hollywood where %95 of their product works on both formats. Try as hard as you can people but for prerecorded content the 20GB of additional space are useless.
MPEG2 HD broadcasts are around 19Mbps throughput. Thus an hour costs us 8.5GB per hour. HD-DVD is barely sufficient here and would require Dual Layer discs to be comfortable.
VC-1/AVC codecs can deliver equivalent quality at 12Mbps or less. Thus an hour of HD video costs us 5.4GB easily fitting on both formats single layer discs with extras.
Blu-Ray's capacity only really comes into play for computer storage needs.
Does anyone want to give a "real" reason for Blu-Rays superiority other than the very tired "it has more capacity" ?
No studio support = death people. Blu-Ray can be a consumer backup format only and that market isn't exactly that hot for sales.
In the end it will all work out.
With the demand for HD video it will not be long before a standard is reached. It may be the case that the movie industry would prefer to use a format that is not supported on most personal computers as a deterent to piracy. I am looking forward to my recordings looking as good as my HD satellite programs.
With the demand for HD video it will not be long before a standard is reached. It may be the case that the movie industry would prefer to use a format that is not supported on most personal computers as a deterent to piracy. I am looking forward to my recordings looking as good as my HD satellite programs.
Lord Blackadder said:
actually... Sony would not let porn to be released on beta. JVC did on VHS.
got that from a Cnet story, but I remember it that way.
nuckinfutz said:
Cause it's the only format for PS3 which most likely will have over 100 million owners at the end of it's cycle, plus be the cheapest Blu-Ray player around.
I'm new too, hehe, just got a mini
JesterJJZ said:
Yes but imagine the extra cost of using that coating versus the lack of the need for the coating for HD-DVD.
The costs of going Blu-Ray seem to be mounting.
1. You can't use todays modern DVD-9 production equipment.
2. There is extra cost and process to apply the TDK coating
Remember people when studios ink production deals they deal down the the half penny. If Blu-Ray is even a penny over the costs of HD-DVD it could cause a studio to balk at support.
Dell, HP, Apple and many of the computer companies don't have to front these costs but studios do and thus will be watching the pricing of the formats.
Say what you want but 89 titles announced by 3 studios is a bird in the hand right now compared to the "promises" of Blu-Ray(cheaper production costs and future 4 layer tech)
HD-DVD give me what I want right now and doesn't make too many promises for the future.
Now someone remind me again. Who's superior?
ironfistphil said:
What if Microsoft, who's announced Longhorn support for HD-DVD, decides to use HD-DVD drives for the Xbox 2?
For the record I'm a supporter of both technologies. I realize that I will have to own both but I grow weary of the "Blu-Ray is better because it holds more data" while that's great for storing my own data it means squat for studios.
This is irrelevant. For data storage harddrives are faster and cheaper. Either HD-DVD or BluRay will be big enough for movies. Backward compatibility is far more important.
All I care is that Apple does _NOT_ do another DVD-RAM disaster by picking the losing horse. I know I will not buy a machine with either HD-DVD or BluRay until this whole issue of compatibility and standardization is done. At which point it will become irrelevant once again as they bring out a new standard.
All I care is that Apple does _NOT_ do another DVD-RAM disaster by picking the losing horse. I know I will not buy a machine with either HD-DVD or BluRay until this whole issue of compatibility and standardization is done. At which point it will become irrelevant once again as they bring out a new standard.
I don't know, Apple has a history of being fully behind products or technology before they are universally adopted, or droping products long before anyone else does. (Why the smurf are there still floppies?)
Course there are some thing they need to star getting on the ball about, PCI-Express
Course a wet dream of mine is the memory intterconnects of PS3 making it into a mac at some pointt, I'm no semiconducer noob even but the bandwidth ps3 seems to have between components is insane.
Course there are some thing they need to star getting on the ball about, PCI-Express
Course a wet dream of mine is the memory intterconnects of PS3 making it into a mac at some pointt, I'm no semiconducer noob even but the bandwidth ps3 seems to have between components is insane.
nuckinfutz said:
It's all about installed base
100 million plus is quite a bit more than what, 30 million
There are 100 million ps2 owner who will PROB get a PS3, and will PROB buy Blu-Ray movvies that can play on it.
Sure there are 89 title ffor HD-DVD (Uh that's supposed to be alot) but people forget Sony itself has access to a HUGE library I guarentee will all be Blu-Ray releases.
Burning a iDVD and playing it on your PS3 does not appeal to anyone?
Man is this all you have?
89 titles vs NONE for Blu-Ray.
Lends credence to the fact that Blu-Ray is going to be too expensive. Where are the plant manufactures getting behind Blu-Ray. Yeah i'm sure they want to retool their lines for a new format that may not survive. At least with HD-DVD they can press DVD-9 discs should HD-DVD fail.
Remember Apple at one time was flogging DVD-RAM and that went nowhere. So we cannot trust Apple to pick the best formats.
Blu-Ray has Sony Pictures/Columbia and MGM definitely in the camp. Everything else is tenuous.
HD-DVD has Paramoun, WB, Universal and New Line. And they haven't even brought out the BIG movies like LotR.
I'd say the odds are 60/40 HD-DVD over Blu-Ray.