Egg on my face, but I think HD-DVD will ultimately win in the end.
Same here, Blu Ray seems more appealing to me, don't ask me why but it does. HD-DVD will win in the end though.
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.
HD DVD or Blu Ray?
- Thread starter Kalns
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Same here, Blu Ray seems more appealing to me, don't ask me why but it does. HD-DVD will win in the end though.
Cheap DVD pricing will win the war i reckon, if the next gan DVD is only a few £££/$$$ more than a DVD then people won't mind.
Blu-ray is the superior format, but then again so were V2000 and Betamax. So my prediction is that HD-DVD will win because there's too many idiots in society. That's how VHS won in the end.
I'm rooting for Blu-ray though!
Hmm paying 400 dollars or 1000 dollars for the same quality? I don't feel like an idiot if I go for the 400 dollars HD DVD player.
Fair enough, at the moment the players for HD-DVD are cheaper, but its a matter of time before the prices will even up (PS3 gives you a BD player for $500). Blu-ray is superior because the technology used allows for a much greater capacity on a disc. There are some other differences as well of course, but it'll get too technical!
One of the marvels of marketing is that you can still win ever if you're selling the inferior product. Its all about timing, targeting and positioning. For now it looks like the HD-DVD consortium is a doing a better job, but only time will tell!
Saw my 1st HD DVD today, well the case anyway, smaller than a DVD and a lot more expensive at £25 ($45ish) in HMV, but most non-mainstream items tend to be pricey.
The 360 HD DVD drive popped up in a few places, surprised by that as well - thought it would be post Xmas before it hit the UK.
The 360 HD DVD drive popped up in a few places, surprised by that as well - thought it would be post Xmas before it hit the UK.
I said neither. By the time they figure out which one to use, we will be downloading all our movies
I believe blu-ray will win, without a doubt in my mind.
Think about it. Every single ps3 buyer already has a blu-ray player in their house.
they dont have to sell the blu-ray players as long as everyone gets on with their ps3...the stand lone could bomb and theyed still kill hd.
HD has the problem of selling their players...u have to convince people to buy the HD-dvd player while blu-ray doesnt.
Im not not sure what the exact #'s are but by 2008 there will probably be about 8 million ps3's sold....thats 8 million machines playing blu-ray movies...hd cannot possibly sell that many players....even witht the cheapo xbox 360 add-on...thank you...
Think about it. Every single ps3 buyer already has a blu-ray player in their house.
they dont have to sell the blu-ray players as long as everyone gets on with their ps3...the stand lone could bomb and theyed still kill hd.
HD has the problem of selling their players...u have to convince people to buy the HD-dvd player while blu-ray doesnt.
Im not not sure what the exact #'s are but by 2008 there will probably be about 8 million ps3's sold....thats 8 million machines playing blu-ray movies...hd cannot possibly sell that many players....even witht the cheapo xbox 360 add-on...thank you...
but if the ps3 already sucks, then the penetration of bluray is already diminished.
Why not stick to the dvd format? It's still good!
It depends on what your definition of "inferior" is. VHS didn't look as good as BetaMax, but it was superior in terms of price and convenience. You have to look at the product as a whole. Blu-ray has the potential for much greater storage capacity, but it terms of home theater it's a bit of a non-issuse because of the more advanced codecs available for use (of course if Blu-ray continues to use MPEG2 instead of h.264 or VC1 then they will need all the disc space they can get).
I'm of the mind that though both formats will flounder because the masses won't be willing to shell out so much money for improved image quality alone. HDTV+HiDef player+HiDef movies is a lot of money to fork over for image quality alone (not to mention a bit of leg work too to chose something among all the HD options).
Lethal
I can't deny that the costs of switching to HD are very high. But your standpoint would suggest that the US switching to HD broadcasting also wasn't worthwhile. From what I understand there's a lot of praise towards all the mainstream US channels for switching to HD. There must also be enough compatible hardware out there to make it worthwhile!
I doubt either of the HD formats will take off quickly. DVD player prices have pretty much bottomed out and before the HD players will have dropped sufficiently to reach the masses it is unlikely we'll see a winner in the HD-DVD vs BD contest.
DVD is actually kind of pathetic compared to HD content. Its not quite as bad as VHS compared to DVD, but there definitely is a noticeable difference!
Well, but one forgot that Blu-Ray = BSOD-Ray.
Why pay $40 for a Blu-ray movie when you get the the DVD for $8?
Let's see.
Both have the same quality, both in terms of audio (7.1) and resolution (1080p). Both can easily fit a 2 or 3 hour movie on a single layer disk with room to spare and can theoretically go to at least four layers or more (theoretically; so far HD-DVD is at two layers, Blu-ray is at one, so HD-DVD is in the lead).
Same quality in all respects and more than enough space.
Except HD-DVD is much cheaper and more open, and Sony is trying to ram Blu-ray down consumers throats with the PS3 and have a very bad track record with proprietary formats.
Apple is in both camps (they've announced Blu-ray support and put their name on the DVD Forum and HD-DVD camp).
I'm going to have to go with HD-DVD. The cheaper price and lack of Sony control win the tiebreaker.
As far as a video player, Blu-ray is NOT superior.
Both are EQUAL. Both use the same video codecs and have the same maximum resolutions and audio formats (7.1, 1080p).
Blu-ray has a maximum theoretical capacity, but since currently HD-DVD has working dual layer disks in production and Blu-ray does not, HD-DVD currently has the better capacity.
There is ZERO visual difference, and both can fit a 3+ hour movie on a single layer disk with room to spare.
Both have the same quality, both in terms of audio (7.1) and resolution (1080p). Both can easily fit a 2 or 3 hour movie on a single layer disk with room to spare and can theoretically go to at least four layers or more (theoretically; so far HD-DVD is at two layers, Blu-ray is at one, so HD-DVD is in the lead).
Same quality in all respects and more than enough space.
Except HD-DVD is much cheaper and more open, and Sony is trying to ram Blu-ray down consumers throats with the PS3 and have a very bad track record with proprietary formats.
Apple is in both camps (they've announced Blu-ray support and put their name on the DVD Forum and HD-DVD camp).
I'm going to have to go with HD-DVD. The cheaper price and lack of Sony control win the tiebreaker.
As far as a video player, Blu-ray is NOT superior.
Both are EQUAL. Both use the same video codecs and have the same maximum resolutions and audio formats (7.1, 1080p).
Blu-ray has a maximum theoretical capacity, but since currently HD-DVD has working dual layer disks in production and Blu-ray does not, HD-DVD currently has the better capacity.
There is ZERO visual difference, and both can fit a 3+ hour movie on a single layer disk with room to spare.
.but you're right. personally, i think is a moot point. by the time people are really ready to abandon regular dvd, another format will be emerging, with more dramatic differences (the mass market will 'skip a generation', so to speak).
I think this is a bit different from vhs/beta, because then there was no 'current' video media in widespread use, and so the entire market was up for grabs. now there are already DVDs and the advantage of the new technology is, to most costumers, marginal.
Also maintenance of backward compatibility in players will be important, but i think both of them will have it.
finally, my vote goes to whoever abandons the demented regional lockout system first.
Right now I don't think it's worthwhile for consumers to switch to HD because the cost/bennifit isn't there yet, IMO. I also don't think it's worthwhile for businesses to switch to HD unless their client base will support the cost of upgrading. I recenetly read an article where Canadian b'casters were worried about keeping their heads above water because going HD is driving their expenses up, yet ad revenue is going down (as advertisers spend less money for TV commercial slots).
The whole switch in the US is artificially driven anyway. A government mandate to switch to digital b'casting (not necessarily HD, just digital) and electronics makers seeing a windfall as people have to upgrade all their gear are the factors motivating the change, not a market demanding HD. The switch is inevitable in the US, but that doesn't mean it can't be slow and ugly.
Lethal
Blu-ray has a smaller regional lockout (I think it divides the world into three regions), and I don't believe HD-DVD has a region lock at all. IIRC.
porn is bigger than Hollywood. they turn out movies at a rapid fire rate
Intresting mental image.
i think the winner will be whoever the adult entertainment (P0rn0) industry backs, and i have a feeling that they'll back Blue-ray, gos it gives more bang for thier buck (storage space)
It's more like blu-ray is more buck for an equal or lesser amount of bang since blu-ray is more costly and neither format suffers from a lack of storage capacity when it comes to retail movies.
Lethal
Blu-ray is the superior format, but then again so were V2000 and Betamax. So my prediction is that HD-DVD will win because there's too many idiots in society. That's how VHS won in the end.
I'm rooting for Blu-ray though!
What do you mean Blu Ray is superior? Yes, they can hold 50 GB vs. 30 GB, but people don't care, as long as their movies can be stored on it.
Capacity plays a minor role as HD DVD's use VC1 encoding, while Blu Ray still use the old Mpeg 2 encoding, same used by DVD's.
Not only for future benefits, but also the transition itself, which can be made rather smooth with HD-DVD. There are hybrid discs, which are discs which have a HD-DVD one side, and a normal DVD on the other side.
If you don't believe in dual-sided discs, Sony actually invented these, by creating the Dual Disc. Those have a CD on one side, and DVD on the other side. A hybrid is the same, just with each layer bumped a notch.
Beside, HD-DVD has no region lock. No PAL and NTSC and different resolutions clutter anymore. All cheap HD-DVD's from China!
HD-DVD for me.
Neither, DVD players just overtook VCR's in the last year here. People aren't ready for another upgrade when really, there's no need for it. I mean the jump from VHS to DVD was huge in terms of video quality & simplicity. But the new formats are adding very little to the viewing experience and doing nothing but confusing the consumer.
So I personally hope they both fail horribly.
So I personally hope they both fail horribly.
