The more storage space argument is a dated one. There was a triple-layer HD DVD disc that beat the BD counterpart but everyone forgot it.
When I eventually get a 1080p HDTV, it'll be a while before I get a player.
I have a 1080p TV, but all the players that can output to 1080p are still $300+. I'm waiting for $150 or less before taking that plunge.
IIRC, neither of the formats currently support 1080p content. Your TV already has internal scalers that upconvert lower-res content to 1080p, so there's really no reason for you to pay for it twice.
No. I know my copy of Planet Earth specifically says 1080p on the back of the box.
The more storage space argument is a dated one. There was a triple-layer HD DVD disc that beat the BD counterpart but everyone forgot it.
When I eventually get a 1080p HDTV, it'll be a while before I get a player.
I have a 1080p TV, but all the players that can output to 1080p are still $300+. I'm waiting for $150 or less before taking that plunge.
IIRC, neither of the formats currently support 1080p content. Your TV already has internal scalers that upconvert lower-res content to 1080p, so there's really no reason for you to pay for it twice.
Am I reading this totally wrong or are you saying that neither Blu-ray or HD DVD supports 1080p?
khain on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
edited January 2008
I might be wrong about it, but what I stated was my understanding. It would definitely be worth trying to dig through the posts of those gut-wrenchingly pretentious but knowledgable geeks at avforums.
Even though things have been sliding toward BluRay for a while now, and HD-DVD can't make any ground, I just can't believe BluRay can win. History has taught me to always bet against Sony in any format war.
Oh? History like the CD? Hell, even Beta was a success - while it lost out in the home market, it won the professional one.
I guess adding to the mix is the "online streaming/downloading movies" aspect. What with XBox Live and other services allowing you to download movies for a fee, and depending on the service, keeping it, or having it invalidated x days later, is there really much of a market for buying physical movies?
Or will there be a market for physical movies in the near future?
Not even an issue, and it won't be an issue for at least 10-15 more years.
You may have phat pipes and a computer/360 to show these without downloading for 5 days, but the majority of the country is still on 56k.
JCRooks in the G&T thread on this topic says broadband is at 50%.
You, sir, are seriously behind the times. Broadband adoption in the US just hit 50% this year. This is for ALL households. Want proof? You can start here. Want more? Heck, just Google the terms: broadband penetration US 2007.
Why was it so fast? Well gee whiz, the Internet is popular, slow downloads suck, and there's already plenty of infrastructure to support it (cable TV->cable Internet, phone lines->DSL). Not to mention plenty of people got used to fast speeds at their work places, and just wanted it for their own homes.
Okay, now that we've got that settled, let's talk about digital distribution again. Since half of the US homes have bandwidth, it's certainly makes it financially possible (if not smart) for media companies to start selling their shows/movies/etc. on-line. The biggest issue I see right now is that high-definition movies are still really large, and that takes a lot of space to store, as well as bandwidth. We're not quite there for HD, although things like Verizon's FIOS makes it possible, and is becoming increasingly available in many cities.
We're not even really there for SD video. since most ISPS have a clause that states they can cut you off if you use enough bandwidth to adversely affect the network it wouldn't take them long to start doing so once the number of people downloading even DVD size files skyrockets. FIOS has a clause like that too and i can guarentee they'd do something if downloading 25 gig hd movies became commonplace. So FIOS doesn't even really make HD streaming possible.
Wait, why is DSL still considered broadband? I mean, it's better than using dial-up, but that really isn't saying, well, anything really. Plus if you want digital distribution you're going to need a massive overhaul of the infrastructure due to the new stresses that near constant 1 gig downloads would entail.
I'm not sure why this is unheard of. My Cable company has Video-On-Demand, where you can watch whatever the hell video you want RIGHT NOW.
If we expand this out to "Streaming/Downloaded video" and don't put the "download from the internet" constraints, then I think it's entirely reasonable that physical movies could be put to pasture in the near future (~5-10 years).
I might be wrong about it, but what I stated was my understanding. It would definitely be worth trying to dig through the posts of those gut-wrenchingly pretentious but knowledgable geeks at avforums.
I'm not sure what you mean, though. If I have a PS3 with an HDMI cable (I do) with a Blu Ray disc that has a 1080p main feature (I do) and a 1080p DLP HDTV (I do) and all of these things function together simultaneously, you're saying that I'm still not watching something in 1080p?
I'm just trying to understand your comment up there...I don't know what you mean exactly.
Well I'm glad I didn't pick a side and look forward to seeing the prices of all things Blu-Ray skyrocket 'cause there's no competition. Yay?
Just like DVDs are insanely expensive because they have no competition?
Prices of players will plummet as more manufacturers get into the arena once the format war is officially over. It's a much safer investment, and sales should ramp up as the confusion over two formats lifts.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Don't own either, surprised by the move, was expecting HD-DVD to win actually.
Also, hoping all companies involve suffer for being retarded and doing this in the first place.
My thoughts exactly.
I have no interest in buying a BR player, and considering the current price that I'm seeing for BR movies, I probably won't for some time.
And that's part of the problem. How many people are willing to re-buy their current movie library when an upconverting DVD player looks almost as good... short of having an insanely expensive TV and sound system?
or you could just get netflix
geckahn on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
I might be wrong about it, but what I stated was my understanding. It would definitely be worth trying to dig through the posts of those gut-wrenchingly pretentious but knowledgable geeks at avforums.
I'm not sure what you mean, though. If I have a PS3 with an HDMI cable (I do) with a Blu Ray disc that has a 1080p main feature (I do) and a 1080p DLP HDTV (I do) and all of these things function together simultaneously, you're saying that I'm still not watching something in 1080p?
I'm just trying to understand your comment up there...I don't know what you mean exactly.
The basic question is whether the content on the disk is actually 1080p - that is that it contains 1080x1900 pixels of three 16-bit color channels at 60 hertz. My understanding of the bitrate through blue lasers was that this kind of data rate was just not possible (though I could be mistaken or my information could be dated). The HD industry is well-known for cutesy claims like "1080p compliant" and that kind of shit.
What it would possibly mean is that a 1080i/24 data stream is being upscaled and pulled down and so forth and output at 1080p by your PS3.
HALLELUJIAH! BluRay is, from what I can tell, a better format, the discs hold more data, and due to a lot of work on Sony and their partners, about the same price as HD players/discs.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
Also, BR players have been considerably more expensive (like, twice the cost) since the formats debuted. Sony isn't going to win on the merits of their tech, they're going to win because they were able to finagle better backroom deals than the competition.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
HALLELUJIAH! BluRay is, from what I can tell, a better format, the discs hold more data, and due to a lot of work on Sony and their partners, about the same price as HD players/discs.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
Also, BR players have been considerably more expensive (like, twice the cost) since the formats debuted. Sony isn't going to win on the merits of their tech, they're going to win because they were able to finagle better backroom deals than the competition.
I might be wrong about it, but what I stated was my understanding. It would definitely be worth trying to dig through the posts of those gut-wrenchingly pretentious but knowledgable geeks at avforums.
I'm not sure what you mean, though. If I have a PS3 with an HDMI cable (I do) with a Blu Ray disc that has a 1080p main feature (I do) and a 1080p DLP HDTV (I do) and all of these things function together simultaneously, you're saying that I'm still not watching something in 1080p?
I'm just trying to understand your comment up there...I don't know what you mean exactly.
The basic question is whether the content on the disk is actually 1080p - that is that it contains 1080x1900 pixels of three 16-bit color channels at 60 hertz. My understanding of the bitrate through blue lasers was that this kind of data rate was just not possible (though I could be mistaken or my information could be dated). The HD industry is well-known for cutesy claims like "1080p compliant" and that kind of shit.
What it would possibly mean is that a 1080i/24 data stream is being upscaled and pulled down and so forth and output at 1080p by your PS3.
BluRay (and HD-DVD) are fully capable of outputting an actual, real-life 1080p signal. You aren't going to be watching any 1080p/60 movies though, because they don't exist. Films are recorded at 24 fps, which is why 1080p/24 is a big deal - it elimantes the stutter created by 3:2 pulldown.
That said, the difference between a 1080i and a 1080p signal displayed on a 1080p television is pretty much nil, assuming the TVs deinterlacer is competent. For movies, that is. Little different for, say, HD gaming.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
I'm not sure why this is unheard of. My Cable company has Video-On-Demand, where you can watch whatever the hell video you want RIGHT NOW.
If we expand this out to "Streaming/Downloaded video" and don't put the "download from the internet" constraints, then I think it's entirely reasonable that physical movies could be put to pasture in the near future (~5-10 years).
My parents have the same thing. Aside from the selection sucking copious amounts of ass, I've never, not once, gotten a movie to actually play through that thing.
HALLELUJIAH! BluRay is, from what I can tell, a better format, the discs hold more data, and due to a lot of work on Sony and their partners, about the same price as HD players/discs.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
Also, BR players have been considerably more expensive (like, twice the cost) since the formats debuted. Sony isn't going to win on the merits of their tech, they're going to win because they were able to finagle better backroom deals than the competition.
Learned their lesson from the Beta days.
Basically, this sort of market asshattery is why I wanted Sony to lose.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
I might be wrong about it, but what I stated was my understanding. It would definitely be worth trying to dig through the posts of those gut-wrenchingly pretentious but knowledgable geeks at avforums.
I'm not sure what you mean, though. If I have a PS3 with an HDMI cable (I do) with a Blu Ray disc that has a 1080p main feature (I do) and a 1080p DLP HDTV (I do) and all of these things function together simultaneously, you're saying that I'm still not watching something in 1080p?
I'm just trying to understand your comment up there...I don't know what you mean exactly.
The basic question is whether the content on the disk is actually 1080p - that is that it contains 1080x1900 pixels of three 16-bit color channels at 60 hertz. My understanding of the bitrate through blue lasers was that this kind of data rate was just not possible (though I could be mistaken or my information could be dated). The HD industry is well-known for cutesy claims like "1080p compliant" and that kind of shit.
What it would possibly mean is that a 1080i/24 data stream is being upscaled and pulled down and so forth and output at 1080p by your PS3.
No, no, from the HD-DVDs and Blu Ray discs I have, it's quite clear that the data on the disc is "1080p" data. It'll even state that some features are not, but the main feature is 1080p. I'm pretty sure both Blu Ray and HD-DVD discs have tru 1080p content that play without upscaling, if all your peripherals are 1080p.
Maybe I've been hoodwinked. Though I'd be entirely surprised if that were true.
I mean, I can tell the difference between an HD-DVD playing at 1080i (my HD-DVD player doesn't support 1080p - it's a first gen model) and a Blu Ray disc playing in 1080p on the same set.
HALLELUJIAH! BluRay is, from what I can tell, a better format, the discs hold more data, and due to a lot of work on Sony and their partners, about the same price as HD players/discs.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
It's not irrelevant, Jeffe - because there's more to the next-gen format than just movies (which is what I think killed HD-DVD.) Though MS has been pretty good about covering it up, there's been enough noise to show that the limits of DVD-9 are starting to hamper 360 devs. (For example, in PGR4, tracks are locked to a specific time of day.) In comparison, PS3 devs get 50GB to use. Ultimately, the only real advantage that HD-DVD had was price, and as we've seen, Sony and the BD consortium took smart moves to alleviate that issue.
HALLELUJIAH! BluRay is, from what I can tell, a better format, the discs hold more data, and due to a lot of work on Sony and their partners, about the same price as HD players/discs.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
It's not irrelevant, Jeffe - because there's more to the next-gen format than just movies (which is what I think killed HD-DVD.) Though MS has been pretty good about covering it up, there's been enough noise to show that the limits of DVD-9 are starting to hamper 360 devs. (For example, in PGR4, tracks are locked to a specific time of day.) In comparison, PS3 devs get 50GB to use. Ultimately, the only real advantage that HD-DVD had was price, and as we've seen, Sony and the BD consortium took smart moves to alleviate that issue.
The PGR4 thing is the ONLY rumble and it's nothing more than propaganda. That could have been easily overcome if the developers chose a different development tactic. That tracks are locked into a single time of day is their failing, not the limitation of DVD, and even if you took it as such, it proves nothing in the struggle between HD-DVD and Blu Ray. Even if you blindly accept the PGR4 thing as a disc space problem, all it means is that DVD was inadequate; this has zippidoodah to do with HD-DVD versus Blu Ray.
Currently, the difference in capacity between Blu Ray and HD-DVD is entirely irrelevant. So far, the additional capacity potential in Blu Ray offers nothing to consumers. Nothing at all. After so many discs on the market, there is no difference whatsoever between HD-DVD and Blu Ray discs. And if Sony had embraced HD-DVD instead of going off with this Blu Ray business, their games would not be suffering either.
I'm not sure why this is unheard of. My Cable company has Video-On-Demand, where you can watch whatever the hell video you want RIGHT NOW.
If we expand this out to "Streaming/Downloaded video" and don't put the "download from the internet" constraints, then I think it's entirely reasonable that physical movies could be put to pasture in the near future (~5-10 years).
My parents have the same thing. Aside from the selection sucking copious amounts of ass, I've never, not once, gotten a movie to actually play through that thing.
That's... unfortunate. I love having that option. I don't even use Blockbuster anymore, save for trying out xbox games that I think I will enjoy before buying them.
HALLELUJIAH! BluRay is, from what I can tell, a better format, the discs hold more data, and due to a lot of work on Sony and their partners, about the same price as HD players/discs.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
Also, BR players have been considerably more expensive (like, twice the cost) since the formats debuted. Sony isn't going to win on the merits of their tech, they're going to win because they were able to finagle better backroom deals than the competition.
Learned their lesson from the Beta days.
Basically, this sort of market asshattery is why I wanted Sony to lose.
That and it further encourages them to avoid making quality games for PS3, because now they can keep pointing to it as a "cheap" BluRay player.
HALLELUJIAH! BluRay is, from what I can tell, a better format, the discs hold more data, and due to a lot of work on Sony and their partners, about the same price as HD players/discs.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
It's not irrelevant, Jeffe - because there's more to the next-gen format than just movies (which is what I think killed HD-DVD.) Though MS has been pretty good about covering it up, there's been enough noise to show that the limits of DVD-9 are starting to hamper 360 devs. (For example, in PGR4, tracks are locked to a specific time of day.) In comparison, PS3 devs get 50GB to use. Ultimately, the only real advantage that HD-DVD had was price, and as we've seen, Sony and the BD consortium took smart moves to alleviate that issue.
The PGR4 thing is the ONLY rumble and it's nothing more than propaganda. That could have been easily overcome if the developers chose a different development tactic. That tracks are locked into a single time of day is their failing, not the limitation of DVD, and even if you took it as such, it proves nothing in the struggle between HD-DVD and Blu Ray. Even if you blindly accept the PGR4 thing as a disc space problem, all it means is that DVD was inadequate; this has zippidoodah to do with HD-DVD versus Blu Ray.
Currently, the difference in capacity between Blu Ray and HD-DVD is entirely irrelevant. So far, the additional capacity potential in Blu Ray offers nothing to consumers. Nothing at all. After so many discs on the market, there is no difference whatsoever between HD-DVD and Blu Ray discs. And if Sony had embraced HD-DVD instead of going off with this Blu Ray business, their games would not be suffering either.
The most misquoted quote of geeks everywhere:
"64K of RAM ought to be enough for just about anybody." ~Bill Gates, 1981
Now, I know that's not EXACTLY relevant to this discussion, but if one type of disc holds more than another, I'm choosing that one by default.
HALLELUJIAH! BluRay is, from what I can tell, a better format, the discs hold more data, and due to a lot of work on Sony and their partners, about the same price as HD players/discs.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
It's not irrelevant, Jeffe - because there's more to the next-gen format than just movies (which is what I think killed HD-DVD.) Though MS has been pretty good about covering it up, there's been enough noise to show that the limits of DVD-9 are starting to hamper 360 devs. (For example, in PGR4, tracks are locked to a specific time of day.) In comparison, PS3 devs get 50GB to use. Ultimately, the only real advantage that HD-DVD had was price, and as we've seen, Sony and the BD consortium took smart moves to alleviate that issue.
DVD-9 != HD-DVD. Also, games != movies.
For actual movies, the advantage was irrelevant. The size of an HD-DVD was sufficient to make an extremely long movie look really fucking good. That's what's important to Joe Consumer, not theoretical format size dick-waving.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
0
Options
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
edited January 2008
Does anyone think that xbox will offer a rebate discount when they eventually offer a blu-ray add on dvd player to their 360?
HALLELUJIAH! BluRay is, from what I can tell, a better format, the discs hold more data, and due to a lot of work on Sony and their partners, about the same price as HD players/discs.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
Also, BR players have been considerably more expensive (like, twice the cost) since the formats debuted. Sony isn't going to win on the merits of their tech, they're going to win because they were able to finagle better backroom deals than the competition.
Learned their lesson from the Beta days.
Basically, this sort of market asshattery is why I wanted Sony to lose.
Because they're the only company in the world to take part in that, right?
HALLELUJIAH! BluRay is, from what I can tell, a better format, the discs hold more data, and due to a lot of work on Sony and their partners, about the same price as HD players/discs.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
Also, BR players have been considerably more expensive (like, twice the cost) since the formats debuted. Sony isn't going to win on the merits of their tech, they're going to win because they were able to finagle better backroom deals than the competition.
Learned their lesson from the Beta days.
Basically, this sort of market asshattery is why I wanted Sony to lose.
Because they're the only company in the world to take part in that, right?
No, but wouldn't it be nice if the more market-suitable format had won? Not the one belonging to the company that had the coffers to buy out the content producers?
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
I also heard that BluRay is harder to pirate, which would go a long way in explaining why studios besides Sony would be more interested in it. Again, it's not the consumer deciding, but still a valid concern for the studios.
One major advantage that HD-DVD has over Blu-Ray is that whole problem with Blu-Ray's specs. Blu-ray has three specs: 1, 1.1, 2. Each mandates a certain set of features and you don't get the full set until 2. The problem is 1.1 players are just starting to come out, so a lot of Blu-ray movies don't have a lot of content that they could. On the other hand, HD-DVD started out with a full spec, so things like picture-in-picture commentary, internet connectivity, etc. already exist in HD-DVD, but won't exist in Blu-ray for a while longer.
Let's take it a step further and move past movies. TV show box sets. With more capacity on Blu-Ray, less DVD's for each TV show set, or more space for extras, bonuses, etc.
HALLELUJIAH! BluRay is, from what I can tell, a better format, the discs hold more data, and due to a lot of work on Sony and their partners, about the same price as HD players/discs.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
Also, BR players have been considerably more expensive (like, twice the cost) since the formats debuted. Sony isn't going to win on the merits of their tech, they're going to win because they were able to finagle better backroom deals than the competition.
Learned their lesson from the Beta days.
Basically, this sort of market asshattery is why I wanted Sony to lose.
Because they're the only company in the world to take part in that, right?
To the degree with which they have pursued and tried to foist on the public proprietary formats, yes they are.
No, but wouldn't it be nice if the more market-suitable format had won? Not the one belonging to the company that had the coffers to buy out the content producers?
How are we measuring suitability? And besides, weren't there a handful of different companies involved in the making of BD, and hasn't Sony been liscensing it out like mad lately?
I might be wrong about it, but what I stated was my understanding. It would definitely be worth trying to dig through the posts of those gut-wrenchingly pretentious but knowledgable geeks at avforums.
I'm not sure what you mean, though. If I have a PS3 with an HDMI cable (I do) with a Blu Ray disc that has a 1080p main feature (I do) and a 1080p DLP HDTV (I do) and all of these things function together simultaneously, you're saying that I'm still not watching something in 1080p?
I'm just trying to understand your comment up there...I don't know what you mean exactly.
The basic question is whether the content on the disk is actually 1080p - that is that it contains 1080x1900 pixels of three 16-bit color channels at 60 hertz. My understanding of the bitrate through blue lasers was that this kind of data rate was just not possible (though I could be mistaken or my information could be dated). The HD industry is well-known for cutesy claims like "1080p compliant" and that kind of shit.
What it would possibly mean is that a 1080i/24 data stream is being upscaled and pulled down and so forth and output at 1080p by your PS3.
No, no, from the HD-DVDs and Blu Ray discs I have, it's quite clear that the data on the disc is "1080p" data. It'll even state that some features are not, but the main feature is 1080p. I'm pretty sure both Blu Ray and HD-DVD discs have tru 1080p content that play without upscaling, if all your peripherals are 1080p.
Maybe I've been hoodwinked. Though I'd be entirely surprised if that were true.
I mean, I can tell the difference between an HD-DVD playing at 1080i (my HD-DVD player doesn't support 1080p - it's a first gen model) and a Blu Ray disc playing in 1080p on the same set.
He has no idea what he's talking about. All current HDDVD and Blueray movies are 1080p. If you TV has poor deinterlacing there is a noticeable difference between 1080i vs 1080p, although mostly during fast panning scenes, or sports.
Let's take it a step further and move past movies. TV show box sets. With more capacity on Blu-Ray, less DVD's for each TV show set, or more space for extras, bonuses, etc.
Much of which is out, none of which is actually being used in such a manner. For instance, there are no additional extras on Blu Ray discs. At all. As many extras as exist exist on both formats (and CAN exist on both formats).
Furthermore, I've yet to see a serious decrease in the number of discs between larger movie/tv series sets, between HD-DVD and Blu Ray versions.
I also heard that BluRay is harder to pirate, which would go a long way in explaining why studios besides Sony would be more interested in it. Again, it's not the consumer deciding, but still a valid concern for the studios.
Naw. Same difficulty pretty much, it's easy either way.
Let's take it a step further and move past movies. TV show box sets. With more capacity on Blu-Ray, less DVD's for each TV show set, or more space for extras, bonuses, etc.
Having fewer disks doesn't matter. Having one disk, maybe, though for something like TV shows, which people don't typically watch all in a sitting, I'm skeptical.
Either way, not even BluRay can fit an entire 16+ hour season on a single disk. So instead of having 6-7 disks, you have 3-4. Whoop-dee-do.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Your point is? My father-in-law is on broadband, and it would still take a week for him to download 2 gigs. Broadband doesn't instantly equal blazing fast connection.
The US-defined term for broadband is horrible. This has been pointed out several times by folks in the field. Saying broadband has 50% penetration doesn't really tell us anything but 50% of online Americans are just over 56k speeds. Just over isn't the fat cable pipes that (what seems to be) the majority of us are on.
"64K of RAM ought to be enough for just about anybody." ~Bill Gates, 1981
Now, I know that's not EXACTLY relevant to this discussion, but if one type of disc holds more than another, I'm choosing that one by default.
Then why did you quote it? Not to mention, the size difference between the two doesn't matter because HD DVD already made up for it and honestly it wasn't that big of a deal in the first place. You need to apply that argument to gaming, not film. This has been brought up previously and I think argued well so I won't expound on it here.
Does anyone think that xbox will offer a rebate discount when they eventually offer a blu-ray add on dvd player to their 360?
I'm starting to wonder-- do you do anything but troll threads? What is the point to this comment beside "lol MS is gonna be wrong"? I'm having a hard time seeing how this was constructive to the discussion.
I also heard that BluRay is harder to pirate, which would go a long way in explaining why studios besides Sony would be more interested in it. Again, it's not the consumer deciding, but still a valid concern for the studios.
Naw. Same difficulty pretty much, it's easy either way.
Just because companies aren't using the additional space Blu-Ray discs provide currently doesn't mean it doesn't reap benefits down the road, is my point.
I'd like to point out that even at real broadband speeds such as 5mps, you're not going to be downloading full quality 30GB movies. We are many years away, probably close to a decade if not longer, from seeing full HD DVD quality broadcasts or downloads.
Just because companies aren't using the additional space Blu-Ray discs provide currently doesn't mean it doesn't reap benefits down the road, is my point.
Posts
No. I know my copy of Planet Earth specifically says 1080p on the back of the box.
Am I reading this totally wrong or are you saying that neither Blu-ray or HD DVD supports 1080p?
Oh? History like the CD? Hell, even Beta was a success - while it lost out in the home market, it won the professional one.
We're not even really there for SD video. since most ISPS have a clause that states they can cut you off if you use enough bandwidth to adversely affect the network it wouldn't take them long to start doing so once the number of people downloading even DVD size files skyrockets. FIOS has a clause like that too and i can guarentee they'd do something if downloading 25 gig hd movies became commonplace. So FIOS doesn't even really make HD streaming possible.
If we expand this out to "Streaming/Downloaded video" and don't put the "download from the internet" constraints, then I think it's entirely reasonable that physical movies could be put to pasture in the near future (~5-10 years).
I'm not sure what you mean, though. If I have a PS3 with an HDMI cable (I do) with a Blu Ray disc that has a 1080p main feature (I do) and a 1080p DLP HDTV (I do) and all of these things function together simultaneously, you're saying that I'm still not watching something in 1080p?
I'm just trying to understand your comment up there...I don't know what you mean exactly.
Just like DVDs are insanely expensive because they have no competition?
Prices of players will plummet as more manufacturers get into the arena once the format war is officially over. It's a much safer investment, and sales should ramp up as the confusion over two formats lifts.
or you could just get netflix
The basic question is whether the content on the disk is actually 1080p - that is that it contains 1080x1900 pixels of three 16-bit color channels at 60 hertz. My understanding of the bitrate through blue lasers was that this kind of data rate was just not possible (though I could be mistaken or my information could be dated). The HD industry is well-known for cutesy claims like "1080p compliant" and that kind of shit.
What it would possibly mean is that a 1080i/24 data stream is being upscaled and pulled down and so forth and output at 1080p by your PS3.
The video and audio quality between BR and HD-DVD is identical. The only advantage of BR was the capacity, which is pretty much irrelevant, as evidenced by the fact that 3+ hour movies on HD-DVD look every bit as good as their BR counterparts.
Also, BR players have been considerably more expensive (like, twice the cost) since the formats debuted. Sony isn't going to win on the merits of their tech, they're going to win because they were able to finagle better backroom deals than the competition.
BluRay (and HD-DVD) are fully capable of outputting an actual, real-life 1080p signal. You aren't going to be watching any 1080p/60 movies though, because they don't exist. Films are recorded at 24 fps, which is why 1080p/24 is a big deal - it elimantes the stutter created by 3:2 pulldown.
That said, the difference between a 1080i and a 1080p signal displayed on a 1080p television is pretty much nil, assuming the TVs deinterlacer is competent. For movies, that is. Little different for, say, HD gaming.
My parents have the same thing. Aside from the selection sucking copious amounts of ass, I've never, not once, gotten a movie to actually play through that thing.
Basically, this sort of market asshattery is why I wanted Sony to lose.
No, no, from the HD-DVDs and Blu Ray discs I have, it's quite clear that the data on the disc is "1080p" data. It'll even state that some features are not, but the main feature is 1080p. I'm pretty sure both Blu Ray and HD-DVD discs have tru 1080p content that play without upscaling, if all your peripherals are 1080p.
Maybe I've been hoodwinked. Though I'd be entirely surprised if that were true.
I mean, I can tell the difference between an HD-DVD playing at 1080i (my HD-DVD player doesn't support 1080p - it's a first gen model) and a Blu Ray disc playing in 1080p on the same set.
It's not irrelevant, Jeffe - because there's more to the next-gen format than just movies (which is what I think killed HD-DVD.) Though MS has been pretty good about covering it up, there's been enough noise to show that the limits of DVD-9 are starting to hamper 360 devs. (For example, in PGR4, tracks are locked to a specific time of day.) In comparison, PS3 devs get 50GB to use. Ultimately, the only real advantage that HD-DVD had was price, and as we've seen, Sony and the BD consortium took smart moves to alleviate that issue.
The PGR4 thing is the ONLY rumble and it's nothing more than propaganda. That could have been easily overcome if the developers chose a different development tactic. That tracks are locked into a single time of day is their failing, not the limitation of DVD, and even if you took it as such, it proves nothing in the struggle between HD-DVD and Blu Ray. Even if you blindly accept the PGR4 thing as a disc space problem, all it means is that DVD was inadequate; this has zippidoodah to do with HD-DVD versus Blu Ray.
Currently, the difference in capacity between Blu Ray and HD-DVD is entirely irrelevant. So far, the additional capacity potential in Blu Ray offers nothing to consumers. Nothing at all. After so many discs on the market, there is no difference whatsoever between HD-DVD and Blu Ray discs. And if Sony had embraced HD-DVD instead of going off with this Blu Ray business, their games would not be suffering either.
That's... unfortunate. I love having that option. I don't even use Blockbuster anymore, save for trying out xbox games that I think I will enjoy before buying them.
The most misquoted quote of geeks everywhere:
"64K of RAM ought to be enough for just about anybody." ~Bill Gates, 1981
Now, I know that's not EXACTLY relevant to this discussion, but if one type of disc holds more than another, I'm choosing that one by default.
DVD-9 != HD-DVD. Also, games != movies.
For actual movies, the advantage was irrelevant. The size of an HD-DVD was sufficient to make an extremely long movie look really fucking good. That's what's important to Joe Consumer, not theoretical format size dick-waving.
Because they're the only company in the world to take part in that, right?
No, but wouldn't it be nice if the more market-suitable format had won? Not the one belonging to the company that had the coffers to buy out the content producers?
To the degree with which they have pursued and tried to foist on the public proprietary formats, yes they are.
How are we measuring suitability? And besides, weren't there a handful of different companies involved in the making of BD, and hasn't Sony been liscensing it out like mad lately?
He has no idea what he's talking about. All current HDDVD and Blueray movies are 1080p. If you TV has poor deinterlacing there is a noticeable difference between 1080i vs 1080p, although mostly during fast panning scenes, or sports.
Much of which is out, none of which is actually being used in such a manner. For instance, there are no additional extras on Blu Ray discs. At all. As many extras as exist exist on both formats (and CAN exist on both formats).
Furthermore, I've yet to see a serious decrease in the number of discs between larger movie/tv series sets, between HD-DVD and Blu Ray versions.
Naw. Same difficulty pretty much, it's easy either way.
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/1073/2
Having fewer disks doesn't matter. Having one disk, maybe, though for something like TV shows, which people don't typically watch all in a sitting, I'm skeptical.
Either way, not even BluRay can fit an entire 16+ hour season on a single disk. So instead of having 6-7 disks, you have 3-4. Whoop-dee-do.
Then why did you quote it? Not to mention, the size difference between the two doesn't matter because HD DVD already made up for it and honestly it wasn't that big of a deal in the first place. You need to apply that argument to gaming, not film. This has been brought up previously and I think argued well so I won't expound on it here.
I'm starting to wonder-- do you do anything but troll threads? What is the point to this comment beside "lol MS is gonna be wrong"? I'm having a hard time seeing how this was constructive to the discussion.
Except for that whole pesky BD+ DRM, yeah. SlySoft got close but it's certainly not ready for prime-time pirating.
BD Capacity: 25 GB (single layer), 50 GB (dual layer)
HD DVD Capacity: 15 GB (single layer), 30 GB (dual layer), 51 GB (triple layer)
We done here? BD hasn't shown any signs that they'll move to triple layer. The space concern is moot right now.