Edit: I'm waiting for the day i tap onto apple.com and it reads "We Choose Blu"
Apple has already chosen Blu-Ray over HD-DVD. They fully support Blu
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.
When are we going BluRay or HDDVD
- Thread starter rph105
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple has already chosen Blu-Ray over HD-DVD. They fully support Blu
Apple has already chosen Blu-Ray over HD-DVD. They fully support Blu
Nice, but false.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/apr/17hd.html
"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."
It's also worth mentioning that DVD Studio Pro 4 already supports creating HD-DVDs but not BluRay discs.
So I dunno.
2. I didn't, you know, actually say any of those things you've just "quoted" above. So, you know, maybe you should go have an argument with whoever it was who said those things and not me.
3. Transformers was a terrible, terrible movie and I couldn't care any less about how it looks on HD-DVD or BluRay. I watched it on a plane and still felt like I wasted my time.
BluRay is NOT "far and away" better. In fact, there are many facets of the technology where HD-DVD has the edge over BluRay when it comes to features and capabilities.
Sounds like if you ever encounter one of those people you'll enjoy arguing with them.
2. the majority of your post was describing the technical requirements of hd-dvd, sorry if i took it out of context. i just dont think requirements are in advantage, especially if they arent enforced.
3. it was bad, agreed. and its the biggest selling title for hd-dvd, so it does matter if it was shortchanged due to space. especially seeing it was the formats first flagship release. its sort of pathetic, IMO.
please tell me what facets you think hd-dvd is better in, besides HDi requirements.
ive encountered plenty of them, although it always comes back to the fact that hd-dvd is cheap.
What I was specifically referring to in the earlier post was requirements for player support of the interactive capabilities of the formats. This is one area where HD-DVD is clearly superior. Every HD-DVD player on the market, even the cheap Toshiba one you don't seem to care for, supports the full range of interactive features. The landscape of BluRay players is not even remotely as uniform and as a content producer it is much more challenging to produce discs for BluRay because you can't count on a uniform consumer experience if you want to make use of the more advanced features in the toolkit.
I'm with you 100% on this. 50 GB is unquestionably better than 30 GB. I don't know the specifics of Transformer's disc or why 30 GB wasn't sufficient for a TrueHD audio. They were certainly able to fit 1080p and TrueHD on the Matrix HD-DVD discs. Perhaps it's a byproduct of having chosen the less efficient MPEG4 instead of VC-1 for the Transformers video encoding. No point in my speculation and again, I agree it's a totally valid point.
Well, as I mentioned a few posts back, I'm quite fond of the fact that HD-DVD has no region codes. I think that's a great step in the right direction from the consumer's standpoint. I also like that HD-DVD has (relatively) weaker DRM. They both use AACS but BluRay goes beyond AACS and adds two additional layers of DRM on top of it (ROM-MARK and BD+). As a geek I'd prefer to see the weaker DRM "win" in the marketplace.
Yes, when Apple joined the BDA many people came to that invalid conclusion and it has been repeated in magazines and in online forums. It's a persistent (but incorrect) rumor.
you do realize that region coding is just one of those features that hd-dvd hasnt brought to the table yet? in fact, it was approved in 2006 and is up to the content producer when they will include it.
obviously im a geek as well and like weak DRM and no region coding, but im also smart enough to realize the next generation format WILL have region coding and tough DRM. content producers wouldnt have it any other way, IMO. its not like I am a fan of it, but its a fact Im sure ill have to face.
so from a consumer standpoint on security, hd-dvd has a slight advantage, but how it will affect the outcome of the war is in question.
but you have to admit, they have always been a part of the DVD consurtium or whatever. (the group that developed hd-dvd) and im pretty sure that sony is too!!
the fact that they are developing blu ray and made an effort to "join the club" was definitely a huge factor for me going BLU.
I'm pretty sure, and have always assumed that it's to do with the time it takes the Read-Only consumer appliances to get thru the data (ie a music CD lasts 70/80 min, a DVD can fit 120-odd min of Mpeg-2 encoded video on a disc). So, whilst BD's are 25GB/layer, that's still only about 2-3 hrs of Mpeg4 video at 1080p (have no idea of the stats for either format, whether in terms of duration/codec). The technology keeps making the laser thinner, it's not limited by the speed of the platter, which is prob faster at 16x dvd (4.3 gigs in 7.5 min) than at 32x CD (768MB in 2.5 min...?) or at 1x BD (no idea).
The burner drives can do whatever with that disk space, but in their commercial applications, each disc format serves a purpose, and more importantly follows exact parameters agreed upon by whatever tech company gets the cut, whether by the DVD forum (in the case of DVD, HD-DVD) or sony (in the case of BD). DVD Studio Pro tells me that a DVD can only be 6-7.5 Mbps average bitrate Mpeg2 if you expect every DVD player to read it, so that gives you a pretty firm idea of how long 1x will take on a format with a specific capacity per layer (4.3 GB).
Oh, and would you please stop having this argument. No one really cares except the small fraction of ppl who have bothered to invest in either format. Apple will prob offer blu-ray first just because burners have become available first. The only reason HD-DVD is supported in DVD SP4 is because the format is similar enough to DVD that you can readily burn a disc that meets the parameters necessary to qualify as an HD-DVD to a 4.3 GB disk so easily (albeit sacrificing the 70% of your disk space per layer).
I agree with the poster who said neither technology represents a significant enough increment over DVD to be worthwhile, and I don't buy the 2+ layer disc prototypes making it to market before HVD and any other of the more advanced formats either. I also don't buy the argument that HD-DVD doesn't need the extra space because you can download other audio tracks via broadband. I expect Apple to be delivering HD content to ppl's living rooms before this war is over.
I remember when Bluray was announced, they said not to worry about dvd-r/+r as a new HD format was just around the corner, and the laser was much more conducive to burning. Both format's players have been available for well over a year and I don't see any commercial burners, and only a few ones for computers, and Sony themselves still can't score less than a 50% frisbee ratio.
well, i appreciate the post, an explanation ive never thought I needed!
arguing is a strong word for our discussions! my opinion for what format is better has nothing to do with my opinion on who i think will win, or better yet, who will win.
i dont see why its wrong to "discuss" ;-) the merits of each format seeing there is a good chance we will be living with one of these formats for the next 10 years.
although apple, and others, might be delivering HD content to living rooms, I dont buy the argument that both formats will lose because of this trend. when 30 gb hd-dvd discs are struggling to fit movies and find their way to the consumer, do you really think the people/bandwith are ready for that big of a change? bandwith being the biggest issue! and second I believe people still like having the physical media, not that i need it (hard drive crashes and such)
do you personally have a blu ray burner? or where did you hear the 50% frisbee rate? thats to bad. although im still considering the fasctmac internal blu ray drive, it would be the smartest to wait until apple releases it (a finished product, start to end)
I'd be happy to live without physical media but you're spot on about the bandwidth. Even with a top-tier cable or dsl package that hardly any consumers have you're still looking at 16-20 hour download times for the equivalent of an HD disc. That's just unsupportable.
I'd love to see downloads eclipse physical media, but the bandwidth just isn't even remotely close to where it would need to be for that to occur.
I've said this before- neither format offers anything substantial enough for consumers to jump on either's bandwagon. It would be a mistake for Apple to take sides with either format at the moment. And I also agree that if these formats don't start offering more to distinguish themselves from standard DVDs, they could both fail and be overtaken by whatever format comes next. Remember the LaserDisc? That was killed by the DVD and was never really embraced by consumers.
My school bought tons of LaserDisc's when they came out. Those discs were massive!
So I wonder how you are supposed to be able to burn those HD-DVDs (or even play them)?
personally I wouldn't care if Mac never did. It's kind of silly. "yeah, I know my drive cost hundreds and the movies are like twice as much, but it great, the image is great, even though I can't tell"
Speak for yourself. I think the video (and audio) quality of HD-DVD and BluRay is dramatically better than SD DVD.
Right now, with DVD and in a while even HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, the 1x, 2x, 4x and so on doesn't say anything. At the time when CD-R was all we could burn, the speeds meant how much faster a disc was ready than its length in time was. Meaning this: it's a fact that a CD can hold up to 80 minutes of music, so when it takes your burner 5 minutes to burn, you have a 40x burner. But with DVD, the speeds don't really say a thing, as there's no real limit to how much video one can store on it...
(Am I... Am I making any sense?)
Apple is a lot more tangled in Bluray than DVD (ie Pixar is bluray exclusive). Obviously they will choose bluray over hddvd when the time comes. Their "statement" about HD DVD reeks of PR lies.
I think the ONLY reason they havent started including bluray burners is because they are still very expensive, far too expensive to even bother with trying to bundle with their computers. A bluray drive by itself is already expensive, but a burner is just ridiculous. They will probably start offering upgrades once they dont have to charge $500 for an optical drive.
I think the ONLY reason they havent started including bluray burners is because they are still very expensive, far too expensive to even bother with trying to bundle with their computers. A bluray drive by itself is already expensive, but a burner is just ridiculous. They will probably start offering upgrades once they dont have to charge $500 for an optical drive.
read the prior posts. the problem with no optical drive is the size of HD content and the severe bottleneck that is bandwith when attempting to deliver it to consumers.