Blu-Ray Drives

M. Malone

macrumors 6502a
Mar 11, 2004
670
0
it would be nice if Apple can start as soon as they can to include Blu Ray reading drives on their machines
 

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
16,983
4,929
I don't want Apple putting any Blu-ray until it's a combo drive that also does HD-DVD.
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
42
1123.6536.5321
I don't get Blu Ray. The initial reports regarding Blu Ray content is that it is not as good as HD-DVD, it is of course more expensive, and that in general it is disappointing. So I wouldn't buy it for the content. What's left? Capacity. Well, at the current cost per disc, Blu Ray's cost/GB is way higher than that of DVD. Am I going to want to pay such a high premium just for the luxury of having the same amount of data on 1 Blu Ray disc as opposed to 5 DVDs? I don't think so.

We'll see how things go, but I'm definitely not anxious to be jumping on Blu Ray the first chance I get. :cool:
 

MS bulldog

macrumors regular
Apr 19, 2006
108
0
for the love of moses, please keep this next gen junk out of macs until it is tried and tested by the masses. imo this junk is not needed for another 2 years at least. why would i want to buy optical media, when HDDs are so cheap and convenient. isn't the content still gonna be hi def on the computers.

please don't give me the "for backing up" response. in this day and age, HDDs are cheap enough per gig to do all the backing up needed.
 

Makosuke

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2001
6,163
346
The Cool Part of CA, USA
I think Apple has wisely decided to stay on the sidelines until things settle down at least a little. The whole Blu-ray/HD-DVD scene is, frankly, a complete mess right now. It's like the worst of DVD-R/DVD+R combined with VHS/Beta... or heck, DVD-R/DVD-RAM combined VHS/LaserDisc with a little DVD/Divx thrown in. Just ugly.

I mean, heck, the two consortiums said "We're going to sit down and work something out with our technologies to make things easier for the consumer." last year... then a bit later, said "No, actually, we're not." Man, that was a blown opportunity.
 

eenu

macrumors 65816
Aug 11, 2006
1,157
0
Manchester, UK
~Shard~ said:
I don't get Blu Ray. The initial reports regarding Blu Ray content is that it is not as good as HD-DVD, it is of course more expensive, and that in general it is disappointing. So I wouldn't buy it for the content. What's left? Capacity. Well, at the current cost per disc, Blu Ray's cost/GB is way higher than that of DVD. Am I going to want to pay such a high premium just for the luxury of having the same amount of data on 1 Blu Ray disc as opposed to 5 DVDs? I don't think so.

We'll see how things go, but I'm definitely not anxious to be jumping on Blu Ray the first chance I get. :cool:
Dual layer DVDs used to be expensive too, its one of those things....new toys at a premium that will soon come down in price. Though you would think that they would want to make it cheap so that people will buy it but hey..
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
42
1123.6536.5321
eenu said:
Dual layer DVDs used to be expensive too, its one of those things....new toys at a premium that will soon come down in price. Though you would think that they would want to make it cheap so that people will buy it but hey..
Yeah, that's the big issue right now with Blu Ray competing with HD-DVD. Sony will hopefully learn from its Beta woes. Otherwise, HD-DVD will win the war... Although I could argue that the war is already over - ano neither side has won. :cool:
 

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,368
119
Los Angeles
~Shard~ said:
Well, at the current cost per disc, Blu Ray's cost/GB is way higher than that of DVD. Am I going to want to pay such a high premium just for the luxury of having the same amount of data on 1 Blu Ray disc as opposed to 5 DVDs? I don't think so.
You weren't into computers when CD burners were first introduced were you?


Lethal
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
42
1123.6536.5321
LethalWolfe said:
You weren't into computers when CD burners were first introduced were you?
Actually I was into computers before CD burners existed - try more like when CDs themselves were first introduced in the early 80s. :p ;) :cool:

Perhaps what you meant to ask was "You weren't interested in buying a CD burner when it first came out due to its stupidly high cost?" in which case my answer would be yes. I didn't buy a DVD player/burner once those were initially released at $1200 a player either.

I'll adopt when it becomes more cost-effective. Right now, I simply can't justify it. Especially when neither format is very appealing to me. :cool:
 

tarjan

macrumors regular
Aug 11, 2006
244
1
blu-ray drives can play the movies just fine. The issue is that the drives don't come with applications to play them, and that no user purchasable hdcp compatible video cards are available.

Scot
 

Spanky Deluxe

macrumors 601
Mar 17, 2005
4,856
387
London, UK
I get the impression that Bluray's just not going to hit it off. For one its got a silly name, people think High Def, they think HD, high def optical disks, HD-DVD. Also, Blu-Ray costs so much!
I think it should become clear pretty quickly which format will dominate, be it Blu-Ray or HD. Give it a year and the war will be over.
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
42
1123.6536.5321
Spanky Deluxe said:
I think it should become clear pretty quickly which format will dominate, be it Blu-Ray or HD. Give it a year and the war will be over.
I agree, however I don't know if either format will truly "win". There are many reasons than I could get into why neither format is really special, or something that the masses will/should adopt...
 

MOFS

macrumors 65816
Feb 27, 2003
1,205
144
Durham, UK
~Shard~ said:
I agree, however I don't know if either format will truly "win". There are many reasons than I could get into why neither format is really special, or something that the masses will/should adopt...
I actually think this is gonna take years for the dust to settle. Whereas moving from VHS to DVD had clear advantages to the average user (easier to control, smaller/lighter), Blu-ray and HD-DVD have few obvious advantages apart from bigger memory capacities. People aren't gonna suddenly replace their DVD collections (which replaced their home VHS collections) - there is little incentive.
 

clayj

macrumors 604
Jan 14, 2005
7,475
181
visiting from downstream
Here's the text of a post I made on another forum about this a while back...

OK, for a long time I was torn between these two formats... but what I just heard yesterday has convinced me that Sony has BLOWN IT with Blu-Ray and that HD-DVD is the superior format. If you have some spare time, go to this page:

Xbox Live's Major Nelson : Show #183 The one about HD-DVD

and listen to Major Nelson's conversation with a couple of the guys at Microsoft (fair disclosure: Major Nelson, a.k.a. Larry Hryb, works for the Xbox Live group at Microsoft).

Here's the skinny:
  • Blu-Ray does have higher video throughput rates and per-layer video storage rates than HD-DVD. BUT, Blu-Ray disc makers (i.e., movie companies) are all using the 10 year old MPEG-2 video codec, which is not as efficient as the new VC-1 codec that HD-DVD makers are using. So Blu-Ray is using an older codec that requires MORE disk space and MORE video throughput than HD-DVD to produce the same results. HD-DVD discs are all using the latest technologies, so they're using the space they have more efficiently; Blu-Ray is wasting its advantages by using older technologies.
  • Because HD-DVD disc makers are all using VC-1, HD-DVD movies actually do look better than Blu-Ray movies. Blu-Ray movies, since they are using MPEG-2, actually don't look much better (if at all) than standard DVDs. (Did you know that 95% of the original bits of a movie are eliminated during the authoring process? That's how good the codecs for DVDs and HD discs are... 1 terabyte of uncompressed source data is being compressed down to 8.5 GB of space.)
  • Right now, dual-layer HD-DVD discs (15 GB per layer x 2 layers = 30 GB per disc) are in production, and you can actually buy movies on dual-layer HD-DVD. Blu-Ray discs are all still ONE layer (25 GB per layer)... Sony can't get the dual-layer Blu-Ray discs to work.
  • HD-DVD discs are MUCH more scratch resistant than Blu-Ray discs, because of the construction of the discs. HD-DVD discs contain their bits further inside the disc (at least .6 mm below the surface), while Blu-Ray discs contain data a mere .1 mm inside the disc. If you scratch a Blu-Ray disc, or even get fingerprints on it, you can ruin it.
  • Also, because of their design, it's possible (and practical) to make hybrid DVD/HD-DVD discs, where one side of the disc is a regular DVD and the other side is an HD-DVD. This is NOT POSSIBLE with Blu-Ray.
  • And the HD-DVD spec includes a lot of MANDATORY technologies, such as built-in Ethernet (so your HD-DVD player can communicate with the Internet for downloads, updates, and even live connections to new disc content), persistent memory (so you can bookmark clips from HD-DVD discs), and dual video-decoders (so you can do PIP off of a single disc... the main movie running normally, with a PIP of the director giving commentary, for example). These technologies are all OPTIONAL on Blu-Ray and none of them are in use in any available or announced Blu-Ray player.
Anyway, based on this, I've decided to back HD-DVD. I'm going to wait for the HD-DVD add-on for the Xbox 360, since it's only going to cost $200 and it'll be much easier to incorporate into my home theatre system... if it works well, then I'll consider a standalone HD-DVD player when there's more choice of players on the market (right now only the two Toshiba models are available).

Go HD-DVD!
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
42
1123.6536.5321
clayj said:
Thanks for the insight clayj, really good information there. I was once in the Blu ray camp myself, since I liked its potential at the time, and have always been a Playstation fan as well ;) however after reading the reviews, learning more about the technologies and how they have matured and progressed, I have definitely changed my opinion. I wouldn't say I am a definite HD-DVD supporter just yet, but I am definitely not as pro-Blu Ray as I once was. And I recognize that HD-DVD is currently better than Blu Ray - the facts simply don't lie. :cool:
 

portent

macrumors 6502a
Feb 17, 2004
623
2
I won't buy either until the following conditions are met:
- Both formats have been on the market for more than one year
and
- One format has achieved > 75% market share

both the technology and the market are too immature at this point to make any sensible decision.
 

ksz

macrumors 68000
Oct 28, 2003
1,669
60
San Jose, CA
I've already purchased a Toshiba HD-DVD player and have a collection of 15 HD-DVD titles so my comments may appear somewhat biased, but I really have no loyalties to either camp. I am only loyal to the best picture I can get.

Some comments:

1. The Toshiba HD-DVD player is really a PC with a Pentium-4 running Linux. It throws a fantastic picture with both HD-DVD and plain old DVD. In fact, it does such a good job with plain old DVD that I've stopped using my Camelot RoundTable ($3500 DVD player).

2. I'm using a DLP front projector, the Samsung 710AE with 1280x720 panel resolution, to project a 120-inch picture. The result is absolutely stunning. A fluid and seamless picture that I've been longing for for years. The Samsung has fantastic color calibration and a wonderful scaler.

3. Yes it's new technology and there's a format war, but who cares (well, I do care, but not too much). I'm thoroughly enjoying high-def movies, the player is cheap, and the movies are very decently priced at Amazon (plus 10% discount for 1 year).

4. Blu-Ray has an environmental advantage. The manufacturing process is completely green. It uses one toxic chemical, but that chemical is fully recycled. Standard DVD uses several toxic chemicals, many of which are not recycled.

5. Both formats have region codes like DVD, but BluRay has fewer (and thus bigger) regions. I believe BluRay has only 3 regions. HD-DVD (I think) has 6.

6. BluRay can make use of VC-1 and many studios may do just that in the future. Currently available titles, however, are using MPEG-2.

So again I don't care too much about the format war. I'm holding off of BluRay until good low-cost players and better-encoded titles appear on the market. And I'm having a blast with HD-DVD.
 

After G

macrumors 68000
Aug 27, 2003
1,583
1
California
clayj said:
Here's the text of a post I made on another forum about this a while back...

OK, for a long time I was torn between these two formats... but what I just heard yesterday has convinced me that Sony has BLOWN IT with Blu-Ray and that HD-DVD is the superior format.

<snip>

Go HD-DVD!
From this page: http://www.blu-ray.com/faq/

- VC-1 is also an option on Blu-ray, movie companies have to choose to use it though. Blame the movie company, not the format.
- Blu-ray discs, although the data is closer to the surface, have a scratch resistant coating to protect them. I'd like to see both scratched up before I make a decision on which is better in real world use.
- Since the data is closer to the surface on Blu-ray, I would think that hybrid two-sided Blu-ray/DVDs are possible. It's just nobody is making them.

Format loyalty makes users suffer. Just make the the format is future-proof in that a person can always get their data off. I also like that a lot of the tech is optional in Blu-ray (especially the Internet connection). Not everyone has broadband or an always-on internet connection.

But I'll wait like portent is doing. Really doesn't make sense to pick a winner when they're still in round one :D