Gates announces HD-DVD drive for 360

[clayj]

i will forever hate ms...

Thanks for at least being honest.

 

[pseudobrit]

Tbh, I don't know why there's such an uproar over this. 30GB or 50GB... you can fit a 2hr movie in 720p onto a DL DVD, ffs! And this is now, not a year down the line when the file formats are even better! The differences in format don't actually affect the movies, but the consoles themselves. If you think about it, having your format lose out is good for the console, as it makes it a lot harder to pirate games for it (think GameCube here - from a piracy standpoint, that thing was a fricking fortress)

The 360 will only use standard DVD for games, so it's not going to help thwart piracy.

What also won't help is that when the 2nd and 3rd generation games are coming out for 360 and PS3, the PS3 games will be able to cram more raw data onto one Blu-ray disc while 360 games will have to make do with less and spread it across multiple discs.

The HD format wars are over, and HD-DVD is DOA. Almost all the studios have jumped to Blu-ray in some capacity.

Remember why VHS beat Beta? Capacity. Betamax was one hour, VHS was 2. Even as they expanded, VHS always stayed one step ahead.

So here's the thing:

Blu-ray:
25 GB/layer
100 GB prototypes are working
200 GB total theoretical capacity

HD-DVD:
15 GB/layer
45 GB prototypes in development
60 GB total theoretical capacity

Studios initially backed HD DVD because the discs' plastic bits are identical to DVDs and they could keep using existing factory equipment.

But Blu-ray's thinner surface layer allows for a more accurate focus from the lens and thus a more narrow track in the disc, and thus more data per square inch.

Existing DVDs suck for HD. Why buy an HDTV at 1080 when the DVDs can't do more than 720? Crippling the new media standard by limiting it to 15GB per layer is just stupid, too, because once you load up a movie in 1080 with enhanced audio and all the special features, you're going to be tickling the limit of that breathing room.

People want revolution, not evolution. I bought my PS2 largely because DVDs were revolutionary compared to VHS. You're not going to lure people away from DVD by selling a slightly more capacious DVD that only looks better if you've already dropped serious coin on a 1080 HD set, you're going to do it by dropping a 100 GB monster on them that can do everything better than anything else. That means data, games and video.

You can never be too rich, too good looking or have too much storage capacity.

 

[iAlan]

And this was on an XBox site - no wonder it was singing the praises of the new machine...

And by all reports there are still a lot of Xbox 360 machines sitting in stores, so shipping 4 million units doesn't mean a thing.

in fact, here in Japan the sales are well below expectations. The original Xbox sold close to 160,000 on the weekend of launch while the XBox 360 sold under 35,000 the weekend of launch - that is still a **** load of consoles but nowhere near what was expected.

I ain't a gamer so I really don't care about any of the consoles...

 

[takao]

well i guess the capacy isn't really _that_ important... after all you have to fill it up first .. what will those formats bring in term of movies ? higher resolution ? even more trailers ? or 7 different making-ofs ?

heck even with some dvds the studios are too lazy to even provide a stereo german language channel some times on older movies

the problem is that it's gonna hard to sell the new formats to customers since the advantages of both are more something for the home cinema guy.. for those who simply want to watch their favourite movies in a good quality with the original languages sometimes (that's my man reason for buying dvds: waching movies in english without buying it twice)

i think sony with their obsession of their own formats (and after the success of the ps2) shot themselves in the foot with the inclusion of blu-ray in the ps3.. after all if the ps3 was to launch soon they would have made a big deal about it at the CES (which they didn't).. i think they are making a mistake with the equation: "gamer = home cinema fan"

but of course they have to push their other content just like microsoft has to push their media edition windows thing which nobody buys (at least i haven't seen one in the wild yet )

 

[Abulia]

I still think that its rediculous and pathetic that after a mere few months after it's launch...

Oh my gawd, is this troll back? I thought he was banned?

 

[Abulia]

And by all reports there are still a lot of Xbox 360 machines sitting in stores, so shipping 4 million units doesn't mean a thing.

What reports? Where? Link?

I ask because I have several friends still searching for a 360 and they don't live in Japan.

 

[EricNau]

Which has Microsoft chosen to support? Are they sticking with HD DVD, or are they supporting both like Apple?

I think Blu Ray will win this battle because the PS3 is going to be a big seller, and many people are going to stick with buying Blu Ray movies because they already have the player.

If Microsoft is choosing only to support HD DVD, then they are going to have a problem.

 

[clayj]

Which has Microsoft chosen to support? Are they sticking with HD DVD, or are they supporting both like Apple?

I think Blu Ray will win this battle because the PS3 is going to be a big seller, and many people are going to stick with buying Blu Ray movies because they already have the player.

If Microsoft is choosing only to support HD DVD, then they are going to have a problem.

Considering that Microsoft is a SOFTWARE company, it's easy for them to support both formats if they want to.

But for right now, they're just supporting HD-DVD... publicly, anyway. It wouldn't surprise me one iota if they've got software engineers working on Blu-Ray support for Vista.

 

[dejo]

Remember why VHS beat Beta? Capacity. Betamax was one hour, VHS was 2. Even as they expanded, VHS always stayed one step ahead.

AFAIK, the reason VHS beat Beta was not capacity, but the decision of JVC to openly share the VHS technology. This allowed other companies to produce VHS decks as well. Thus, VHS decks were cheaper to buy than Betamax decks. So, the average consumer, being an idiot, chose VHS (lower price) over Beta (higher quality).

"The average consumer is an idiot." - one of DEJO's Axioms

 

[G5Unit]

Well I'm stuck here. I want good graphics, games like Halo, good online play, and just good User interface. PS3, Xbox 360, or Rev? Also, they need to come out with HL2 for Xbox 360.

 

[pseudobrit]

AFAIK, the reason VHS beat Beta was not capacity, but the decision of JVC to openly share the VHS technology. This allowed other companies to produce VHS decks as well. Thus, VHS decks were cheaper to buy than Betamax decks. So, the average consumer, being an idiot, chose VHS (lower price) over Beta (higher quality).

"The average consumer is an idiot." - one of DEJO's Axioms

Betamax did not have superior quality. That's a bit of an urban myth.

As mentioned, VHS was the winner of a protracted and somewhat bitter format war during the early 1980s against Sony's Betamax format. Since Betamax's technical specifications are better on paper, it is often stated that VHS' eventual victory was a victory of marketing over technical excellence. In fact, however, the root causes of VHS' victory are somewhat more complex. Betamax held an early lead in the format war, but by 1980 VHS was gaining due to its longer tape time (2 hours at SP) and JVC's less strict licensing program. Ultimately Betamax did manage to make up the difference on recording time, but this was too little, too late. Sony ultimately conceded the fight in the late '80s, bringing out a line of VHS VCRs. Betamax survived as a professional format, but VHS had no serious competitors in the home video market until the arrival of DVD and digital video recorders.

Blu-ray has some serious heavy hitters vested in its success. HD DVD currently has support from Toshiba, NEC, Sanyo, and now Intel and MS.

I think it's Universal who are the only remaining studio pledging exclusive support for HD DVD.

 

[pseudobrit]

Well I'm stuck here. I want good graphics, games like Halo, good online play, and just good User interface. PS3, Xbox 360, or Rev?

I think the longer you wait the more obvious the answer will be.

I also am sure this is why MS released the 360 so early. The PS3 is set to hand the 360 its lunch after the second generation of games roll out, so capturing the early adopters is critical before they get wise.

I'm not sure what Nintendo will do, but it's certain to be cheap, so they're hoping to create and capture a good chunk of a larger +1 segment in the market (those who can afford an extra system beyond their preferred console).

 

[LethalWolfe]

Existing DVDs suck for HD. Why buy an HDTV at 1080 when the DVDs can't do more than 720? Crippling the new media standard by limiting it to 15GB per layer is just stupid, too, because once you load up a movie in 1080 with enhanced audio and all the special features, you're going to be tickling the limit of that breathing room.

W/the amount of compression that's going to be used to compress the movies both formats are going to have mountains of room leftover after a movie and bonus features are put on the disc.

People want revolution, not evolution. I bought my PS2 largely because DVDs were revolutionary compared to VHS. You're not going to lure people away from DVD by selling a slightly more capacious DVD that only looks better if you've already dropped serious coin on a 1080 HD set, you're going to do it by dropping a 100 GB monster on them that can do everything better than anything else. That means data, games and video.

You can never be too rich, too good looking or have too much storage capacity.

How is the move from DVD to HiDef DVDs anything but evolutionary? You are basically taking 25 year old technology and tweaking the storage capacity again. Until a new, attention grabbing medium comes out (like holographic storage) I think the consumer move to Hi Def DVDs will be a lot like consumer HD adaption now. Lukewarm and pretty much forced.

Consumers typically chose convience over quality. Vinly or cassette tape? MP3 or CD? iTMS or DVD-A/SACD? DVD's took off so fast because they were new and cool and sleek and sexy... and they offered better quality than VHS which had been around for around 20 years. What's the latest rage now? Conveniently download your favorite show for $2 in a super compressed format. The next gen DVDs will probably do better than LaserDisc and D-VHS, but I think they are going to be a short lived format that will largely be looked upon as a dud. If "hey, it's better quality" is you biggest, or only real, selling point you aren't going to get very far.


Lethal

 

[rhsgolfer33]

Whats the level of HD on HD-DVD and Blu-Ray? Hopefully its 1080p.

 

[pseudobrit]

W/the amount of compression that's going to be used to compress the movies both formats are going to have mountains of room leftover after a movie and bonus features are put on the disc.

25 GB (one layer of Blu-ray and nearly 2 layers of an HD-DVD) holds about 4 hours of HD video.

How is the move from DVD to HiDef DVDs anything but evolutionary? You are basically taking 25 year old technology and tweaking the storage capacity again. Until a new, attention grabbing medium comes out (like holographic storage) I think the consumer move to Hi Def DVDs will be a lot like consumer HD adaption now. Lukewarm and pretty much forced.

It's a slow process because the existing infrastructure for NTSC is so ubiquitous. VHS was easy to replace with DVD because the TV is the center of the entertainment hub, not VHS players.

It will take a long time for the installed base of televisions to die.

Consumers typically chose convience over quality. Vinly or cassette tape? MP3 or CD? iTMS or DVD-A/SACD?

It's never one thing alone that wins a standards war, and it's impossible to reliably predict which factors will weigh more.

Will it be convenience? Price? Speed? Saturation of software(media)/hardware? Capacity? Marketing? Future-proofing? FUD? Hype? Corporate backing? A PETA endorsement?

We can't say the customer "typically" chooses anything, only that they choose.

DVD's took off so fast because they were new and cool and sleek and sexy... and they offered better quality than VHS which had been around for around 20 years. What's the latest rage now? Conveniently download your favorite show for $2 in a super compressed format. The next gen DVDs will probably do better than LaserDisc and D-VHS, but I think they are going to be a short lived format that will largely be looked upon as a dud. If "hey, it's better quality" is you biggest, or only real, selling point you aren't going to get very far.

I think the selling points will be how blown away people are by the image quality of a 1920x1080 television when it's actually pumping out over 1 million pixels of a film (interlaced; fully double what DVDs flash and seven times NTSC. Progressive scan will light 2 million pixels on 1080p HDTVs).

And the PS3 games with massive amounts of detail and cutscenes that can be crammed onto one disc while the 360 has to spread them across 3 or 4.

And backing up 200GB onto a cheap (per GB) optical disc.

 

[LethalWolfe]

25 GB (one layer of Blu-ray and nearly 2 layers of an HD-DVD) holds about 4 hours of HD video.

Just like w/DVDs today the total amount of video you can fit on a disc depends on the compression rate used. T2 in HD fit on a single DVD, and the 1080p Batman Begins trailer on Apple's trailer page is roughly 150MB and 2.5 minutes long. Which equates to about 5.4gigs for a 2hr movie (assuming my math is right... and that's a big assumption).

It's a slow process because the existing infrastructure for NTSC is so ubiquitous. VHS was easy to replace with DVD because the TV is the center of the entertainment hub, not VHS players.
It will take a long time for the installed base of televisions to die.

Agreed. And HD would probably flop as a format if it wasn't for a government mandate forcing the switch to digital (and HD becoming the de-facto digital standard). Why? Mostly because current NTSC offerings are seen by the masses as "good enough" especially considering the cost and hassle of migrating to HD.

We can't say the customer "typically" chooses anything, only that they choose.

One can't say w/100% certainty, but one can look at consumer trends and make educated guesses.

I think the selling points will be how blown away people are by the image quality of a 1920x1080 television when it's actually pumping out over 1 million pixels of a film (interlaced; fully double what DVDs flash and seven times NTSC. Progressive scan will light 2 million pixels on 1080p HDTVs).

Well, current HD offerings haven't exactly taken off. The cost to get into HD is just prohibitively high for the mainstream right now. In the eyes of the average consumer the cost/bennifet just isn't there. By the time it is, IMO, there will be bigger, cheaper, cooler options (Holographic storage for example). HD will of course prosper because there will no alternative, and I'm just saying that the Hi Def DVDs that are coming out are a stop gap and won't be a very successful, or long lived, delivery format.

And the PS3 games with massive amounts of detail and cutscenes that can be crammed onto one disc while the 360 has to spread them across 3 or 4.

That's all academic until all the systems hit the marketplace. The Dreamcast used a 1gig GD-ROM storage disc and had many games that can go toe-to-toe w/the PS2 in the gfx department.


Lethal

 

[pseudobrit]

Just like w/DVDs today the total amount of video you can fit on a disc depends on the compression rate used. T2 in HD fit on a single DVD, and the 1080p Batman Begins trailer on Apple's trailer page is roughly 150MB and 2.5 minutes long. Which equates to about 5.4gigs for a 2hr movie (assuming my math is right... and that's a big assumption).

Not according to wikipedia:

The BD-ROM format specifies at least three video codecs: MPEG-2, the standard used for DVDs; MPEG-4's H.264/AVC codec; and VC-1, a codec based on Microsoft's Windows Media 9. The first of these only allows for about two hours of high-definition content on a single-layer BD-ROM, but the addition of the two more advanced codecs allows up to four hours per layer.

One can't say w/100% certainty, but one can look at consumer trends and make educated guesses...
That's all academic until all the systems hit the marketplace. The Dreamcast used a 1gig GD-ROM storage disc and had many games that can go toe-to-toe w/the PS2 in the gfx department.

But the graphics weren't what killed the Dreamcast. It had a good launch, but Sony quickly announced the PS2 would have backward compatability with the PSX and that it would be capable of playing DVDs, and it was those two facet which kept further customers away.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Not according to wikipedia: The BD-ROM format specifies at least three video codecs: MPEG-2, the standard used for DVDs; MPEG-4's H.264/AVC codec; and VC-1, a codec based on Microsoft's Windows Media 9. The first of these only allows for about two hours of high-definition content on a single-layer BD-ROM, but the addition of the two more advanced codecs allows up to four hours per layer.

I haven't found wikipedia to be very reliable when it comes to nitty gritty stuff (like bleeding edge video tech specs). All of the codecs can do VBR encoding and 2 hours of 720p24 content isn't going to take up as much room as 2 hours of 1080p24 so sweeping statements like, "X hours of HD will take up X number of gigs" are pointless w/o defining all the the probable variables. Frame rate, resolution, codec and bit rate are all gonna factor in to how much footage you can fit onto a disc. 4hrs per 25gig layer means about 6.25gigs per hour. Assuming this is correct how did MS use it's VC-1 codec to fit T2 on a 8gig disc?

But the graphics weren't what killed the Dreamcast. It had a good launch, but Sony quickly announced the PS2 would have backward compatability with the PSX and that it would be capable of playing DVDs, and it was those two facet which kept further customers away.

Agreed. I was just pointing that just because console X uses a medium w/greater storage capacity doesn't mean that said console will have better gfx.


Lethal

 

[greatdevourer]

25 GB (one layer of Blu-ray and nearly 2 layers of an HD-DVD) holds about 4 hours of HD video.

And backing up 200GB onto a cheap (per GB) optical disc.

1) I have no idea how they get such a low figure for that, because everywhere I've seen HD movies in practice, they're a lot more compressed than a 6GB/hr.
2) And spending a lot more on buying a new burner every backup. That's one real problem with BD-ROM - they can't get lasers to survive more than one or two burns (not a problem for mass production, but for the general public, this is a bit of a downer)

 

[d_saum]

Perhaps they'll release an HD-DVD version of Halo 3, on one disc instead of four, to spur on sales of the external HD-DVD drive?

Oh, and EVERY game console has its problems when it makes its way into the Real World.

Unless M$ lied, they won't ever release ANY games on HD-DVD as to not alienate any 360 owners.

And I totally agree that, yes, most consoles DO have problems when they first launch. From all the news sites I've read though, the 360 has a MUCH higher percentage of issues. Honestly, they just wanted to be the first out, and they rushed it. They REALLY should have just took a few more months and launched with a better power cinder-block and HD-DVD.

I was in Circuit city yesterday and played COD2 and I have to be honest. I was not impressed. Yes, the graphics were better and yes I realize that the games will get MUCH better as developers get used to the system, but for right now, I am VERY glad I did not pre-order. I will say that I cannot wait to see what they can do with the other cores once they get the development down.