Blu-ray or HD-DVD?

[Gatorgod]

Which of the new DVD formats will win in the end?
Explain, or just place your bets, ..or both! 8-)

[barts friend]

Keep what we got for at least another 5 years. Dvds just became popular.

[TheGunslinger]

Keep what we got for at least another 5 years. Dvds just became popular.

They JUST became popular? Uh huh....

[barts friend]

They JUST became popular? Uh huh....
Dvds became popular in the late ninties early millinium even though they have benn around a few years longer.Vhs has been around for over 20 years.

[blueguy]

DVDs really did just become popular within the last 2-3 years. VHS tapes are finally going to stop being made (some studios have already stopped).
Regardless, DVD doesn't fit our current video needs. Blueray is where it's at. Bigger right off the bat and has more room for growth (setting itself up for long life) and will be in millions of homes within the next 2 years thanks to PS3. And it has huge support from the markets that matter.
HD-DVD's only chance was if it was going to be a part of the X-Box 360. The fact that MS supports HD-DVD and didn't include it with the 360, seems to indicate that MS's support is wavering.

[jim]

Neither, I think they'll both go the way of the laserdisk and minidisk.

The average person just has no reason to upgrade. Only about 1% of the population has a home theatre and TV expensive enough that will make any noticeable difference between current DVD and Blu Ray or HDDVD. The average person making up the bulk of the DVD market watching their DVDs on a 60cm TV wont be able to see any difference. And will people pay to upgrade to something thats barely any different to them? No. How many people have any problem with current DVD? I think they look fantastic and are so good already that I could not see how any higher resolution could look any different on anything other then a massive plasma TV.

Look at the history of entertianment technology - People upgraded to CD because it had massive advantages over vinyl and cassettes. Minidisk failed because it only had slight advantages over CDs. People upgraded to DVD because it had huge advantages over VHS. People will not upgrade to HDDVD when the average person will not notice any real difference. History has shown that when a format becomes popular it takes a very long time for people to go to a new one, and it is a total revolution, not something thats only slightly better then what is already established.

My prediction - DVD players will be made capable of playing the new format as well as DVD, but DVD will remain the standard medium. Only a small number of movies will be made for the new format, something like current Superbit DVDs. DVD's will be the standard format for many years to come, and the next revolution will be a move to downloading and streaming movies. And I think that will be a long time off because people still like to have a physical object when they buy something.

[Gatorgod]

I hope ONE format wins out quickly!! I read an article that said the best industry analyst see no way out of a "Format War". ..This I Hate!
I wouldnt want to be left with the modern version of the BetaMax like my Pappy did :P

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/gatorgod/GatorGoof.gif (http://gatorgod3000.tripod.com/SimpWalls/index.album?i=2)

[Moose of Doom!]

The average person just has no reason to upgrade. Only about 1% of the population has a home theatre and TV expensive enough that will make any noticeable difference between current DVD and Blu Ray or HDDVD. The average person making up the bulk of the DVD market watching their DVDs on a 60cm TV wont be able to see any difference. And will people pay to upgrade to something thats barely any different to them? No. How many people have any problem with current DVD? I think they look fantastic and are so good already that I could not see how any higher resolution could look any different on anything other then a massive plasma TV.

Let's put it this way...

Would you rather buy (random season #) of (random TV show you really really like) in a multi-disc boxset, or on one DVD with the same (or better) picture quality and extras?

[StrideR]

Aside from the fact that most studios are going in blu-ray's direction, the fact that the PS3 is going to support Blu-ray and regular DVD is a big factor in all this.

The rate at which people are recording and downloading TV Shows, it just makes sense to move up to the next standard.

Still, I doubt Netflix will eagerly lap this up.

[blueguy]

My prediction - DVD players will be made capable of playing the new format as well as DVD, but DVD will remain the standard medium. Only a small number of movies will be made for the new format, something like current Superbit DVDs. DVD's will be the standard format for many years to come, and the next revolution will be a move to downloading and streaming movies. And I think that will be a long time off because people still like to have a physical object when they buy something.
AFAIK, both Blueray and HD-DVD players are capable of reading and playing both current DVDs and CDs. Essentially backwards compatible. It isn't so much of a replacement for DVD, but an upgrade. DVDs will certainly be used and supported for many years to come, but there is a need for something with more storage space.
Superbit won't catch on because it drops extra features to support the better quality.

[Red Right]

woah woah, people still use Laserdisk?

[jim]

Let's put it this way...

Would you rather buy (random season #) of (random TV show you really really like) in a multi-disc boxset, or on one DVD with the same (or better) picture quality and extras?
Having a TV season over multiple disks is certainly nothing Im losing sleep over.. And how will the picture quality of TV shows be better when they dont even take advantage of current DVDs?

Im sure that there will be uses for HDDVD and Blu Ray for things like stuff downloaded or recorded, but I dont think they will ever replace the DVD as the standard. My guess is that the DVD will be superceded by an entirely digital form.

[Jolly Bengali]

I can buy jim's argument here pretty easily. No one really wants this yet except the technophiles and videophiles, and there are not a whole lot of them.

Microsoft's "HD-DVD" support is not "wavering", but they're smart enough to realize they dont really need HD-DVD, can add in support for it later if they need to, and that they aren't a movie studio and don't have a tremendous amount of disc clout. BlueRay appears to be getting more support (this is not objectively, just my vague feeling here) and the PS3 will help it a lot, so I'm guessing it will win out... but not for a few years, since no one wants these yet.

[DotheBartman]

I think Jim is correct. I'm someone who's started collecting dvds, who likes to have my movies/shows in pristine condition and has even bought a few dvds of movies I've already owned for the sake of having them in widescreen (including a replacement for something I already had on dvd), but I still couldn't give two shits about blu-ray or HD-DVD because there just isn't much need for it. Now go out there and ask the types of people who are even less likely to care about increased disc space and better picture quality, and especcially the types that keep the market for full-screen dvds thriving. Do you really think these kinds of people are going to jump on the chance to replace their dvd players? Even a lot of the people who eventually bought dvd players did so reluctantly, because they saw the benefits or just realized that VHS was on it's way out. Everyone else bought them because the upgrade was significant compared with VHS, and Blu-Ray and HD-DVD simply do not offer significant improvements that anyone without a really expensive high-definition tv is even going to come close to caring about.

The only one of the two with any kind of ace up it's sleeve is Blu-Ray, in that it'll be standard with the PS3, but even that's working under the possibly faulty assumption that the PS3 will be a huge smash hit (and I think it will do well, but historically no game company has held control of the industry for more then two console generations. If history repeats itself, PS3 could be the Nintendo 64 to the 360's original Playstation.) Plus, there's really no guarantee that anyone would care about Blu-Ray outside of the PS3, and the majority of consumers would probably just find it confusing outside of the PS3 itself.

[jim]

Thats exactly right Bartman. People on sites like this forget that they are a minority in these sorts of things. The sort of person who uses an internet forum is generally also going to be the type of person interested in new technology and other nerdy pursuits. But we are a small minority, the people who are keeping the DVD industry going are the majority and most of them are perfectly happy and will see no reason to upgrade.

The industry is going to have to convince millions and millions of people who have just upgraded after 20 years of VHS to DVD and are perfectly happy with it that they need to upgrade again to another format that 99.9% of them will not be able to see any difference in. Brother, thats not a job I would want!
I honestly dont think its going to happen. Blu Ray or whatever format wins will become a niche market for people with all the high end equipment and will probably get only blockbusters released on it. DVD will be around until the next big revolution.

Really, video games are alone in that they are the only technology that people continually upgrade after a few years. Everything else takes a massive revolution for people to upgrade, see the current popularity of Ipod after a several superior challengers to CD came and failed over the years.

[Jamie]

Would Bluray/HD-DVD discs work in regular DVD players? Because both can suck it if I have to buy another player.

[Otis P Jivefunk]

I'm a consumer and fear change, especially expensive change for minor improvement...

If people really cared about getting the best picture quality, would they go out and buy cheapie £30 DVD players from Argos and DIY stores? No, yet the vast majority of people do. If people really cared about picture quality so much, would they leave their existing poor quality scart leads which they get free with their TV/DVD player or would they go out and buy decent quality cables? Most people stick with the cheap ones, and most people don't even fully benefit from the quality DVD can offer, let alone paying large sums of money for an alternative which they will never see the full potential picture quality of because they don't even make use of DVD's full potential, but they're still happy just how they are...

I'm not like that, and I have an expensive DVD player and expensive scart leads. Yet even someone like me who does care about picture quality a lot doesn't care for a new format, what does that say?...

[Jolly Bengali]

Would Bluray/HD-DVD discs work in regular DVD players? Because both can suck it if I have to buy another player.

Blue-Ray would not. HD-DVD has a similar "red light" system (unlike the incompatible "blue light" for reading Blue-Ray discs) so it is possible that they could be played on regular dvd players, just not with the video being anything above current DVD levels.

[H Thompson]

Yeah I'd echo others except I'm not a technophile anyway although maybe slightly more than the average person. Their introducing this way too soon and besides better picture quality only really affects films but the additional data storage won't really benefit because even with all the extra features you can usually get it onto one disc.
And T.V shows will benefit from the additional data storage but not so much from the quality.
Not to mention a lot of people won't want to splash out until you have a definite format winner anyway

[Patriot]

I'm not really sure what I would pick if I had the option of Blu-ray or HD-DVD. I probably would go with the Blu-ray disks, but for no particular reason.

[gravymaster]

As long as I can still watch my old dvds in the new players, I'll be all for this. I have a 60 inch HD Tv in my house with surround sound. If the movies will look a lot better on it, I would be perfectly happy to go the Blu-ray route.

[Gatorgod]

Im not that thrilled at having to jump into anything new either. I made this thread based on my fears that the new formats would leave me in the dust. My cool old DVD's worthless before their time! :confused:

[ehren]

I've already posted way too much here concerning HDDVD/Bluray so I'll just say these couple things.

1) Bluray has more storage capability, meaning better picture, but HDDVD will be backward compatible, where if an HDDVD is played in a regular player it'll output a conventional DVD picture

2) most studios are either in the HDDVD camp exclusively (Universal, Disney) or will back both formats (Paramount, Time Warner), so bets are being hedged against Bluray. Samsung is the only manufacturer to publicly announce a universal HDDVD/Bluray player but because of the aforementioned differing laser specs, it will probably be a behemoth of a unit and will certainly have two single disc drawers

3) HDDVD's are cheaper at this time to make than Blurays. they will also be first to hit market. Bluray was announced like, six years ago but because of delays in the development and organization of the trade group it will be hurt by the late launch

4) conventional DVD's will not be obsolete once these players launch. all DVD's are capable of reproducing the 480p picture required for EDTV certification. in addition, HDDVD players would most likely be able to upconvert the 480p signal to the HDTV-benchmark 1080i/720p resolution.

[blueguy]

Blue-Ray would not. HD-DVD has a similar "red light" system (unlike the incompatible "blue light" for reading Blue-Ray discs) so it is possible that they could be played on regular dvd players, just not with the video being anything above current DVD levels.
wrong and wrong. HD DVD also uses a blue laser (http://www.dvdforum.org/hddvd-tech-intro-eng.htm). And there's no way an HD-DVD or Blueray disk would work in a current DVD player. The other way around though, yes.

Im not that thrilled at having to jump into anything new either. I made this thread based on my fears that the new formats would leave me in the dust. My cool old DVD's worthless before their time!
Not at all. Like I already said, both HD-DVD and Blueray players are capable of reading and playing DVDs and CDs. Your current DVDs will have a long life. But when it comes time to get a new DVD player, you can spring for the upgrade.

1) Bluray has more storage capability, meaning better picture, but HDDVD will be backward compatible, where if an HDDVD is played in a regular player it'll output a conventional DVD picture

2) most studios are either in the HDDVD camp exclusively (Universal, Disney) or will back both formats (Paramount, Time Warner), so bets are being hedged against Bluray. Samsung is the only manufacturer to publicly announce a universal HDDVD/Bluray player but because of the aforementioned differing laser specs, it will probably be a behemoth of a unit and will certainly have two single disc drawers

3) HDDVD's are cheaper at this time to make than Blurays. they will also be first to hit market. Bluray was announced like, six years ago but because of delays in the development and organization of the trade group it will be hurt by the late launch

4) conventional DVD's will not be obsolete once these players launch. all DVD's are capable of reproducing the 480p picture required for EDTV certification. in addition, HDDVD players would most likely be able to upconvert the 480p signal to the HDTV-benchmark 1080i/720p resolution.
1) I don't believe that's the case. The data on HD DVDs is smaller then a normal DVD. I don't see how it's possible a current DVD player would be capable of reading that data without the finer blue laser that HD-DVD uses.

2) Absolutely wrong. HD-DVD support (http://www.hddvdprg.com/about/member.html) and Blueray support (http://www.bluraydisc.com/Section-13469/Index.html)
Support for HD-DVD is decreasing. People are leaving the HD-DVD camp to go to Blueray. Of the six largest Hollywood movie studios, not a single one of them supports HD-DVD exclusively. Even Universal is in both camps now and Disney does not support HD-DVD at all.

3) Blueray is more expensive, yes. There's no arguing that. However, it also offers much more room for growth with the possibility of many multiple layers. I've heard 16 layers may be possible. At the very least, it should be capable of 8. Imagine a 200 GB disk. HD-DVD might get 4 layers. IMO, I'd rather spend a little extra and go with the product that has greater potential for a longer life. Will HD hit the market first? Yeah, probably. But who's going to buy it? Demand will be minimal. When PS3 hits next year, there will be millions of Blueray players in people's homes quickly. Games will need to be produced in mass which will in turn drive production costs down. I still contend that the only hope HD had was to be a part of the 360. That way it could have gotten into people's homes and production would be underway in enough quantities to make it viable and put up a fight. Because they didn't, HD's only real benefits are being a bit cheaper and available a few months sooner. Without the support, I just don't see how it has a snowball's chance in hell.


No offense guys, but really. A lot of you need to read up on this and find out how things really are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD-DVD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc

[morbot]

People on sites like this forget that they are a minority in these sorts of things. The sort of person who uses an internet forum is generally also going to be the type of person interested in new technology and other nerdy pursuits. But we are a small minority, the people who are keeping the DVD industry going are the majority and most of them are perfectly happy and will see no reason to upgrade.
...
I honestly dont think its going to happen. Blu Ray or whatever format wins will become a niche market for people with all the high end equipment and will probably get only blockbusters released on it. DVD will be around until the next big revolution.. Those are the exact same arguments people used when DVD started to replace VHS. Only the select few would use it. No one cares about a little bit of picture/sound increase.

Yes, the change will seem "smaller", especially with backward compatability. You could buy a new player and still play your old collection, which you couldn't do with VHS.

Even non-techie people are now concerned with being on the cutting edge of media technology. If they came out with a new DVD player that said: "Better picture. Better sound. More extras! And it plays all your old DVDs too!" that was reasonably priced, people would flock to it.

[ehren]

wrong and wrong. HD DVD also uses a blue laser (http://www.dvdforum.org/hddvd-tech-intro-eng.htm). And there's no way an HD-DVD or Blueray disk would work in a current DVD player. The other way around though, yes.


Not at all. Like I already said, both HD-DVD and Blueray players are capable of reading and playing DVDs and CDs. Your current DVDs will have a long life. But when it comes time to get a new DVD player, you can spring for the upgrade.


1) I don't believe that's the case. The data on HD DVDs is smaller then a normal DVD. I don't see how it's possible a current DVD player would be capable of reading that data without the finer blue laser that HD-DVD uses.
from the DVD Consortium webpage (http://www.dvdforum.org/hddvd-tech-intro-eng.htm)

HD DVD shares the 12cm diameter and 1.2mm thickness of the current generation of DVD discs, yet is able to deliver eight hours of High Definition video on a dual-layer, single-sided disc.... a double-sided HD DVD-R disc can hold up to 30GBytes of data.... Although the data density is much greater in HD DVD discs, the structure is very similar to existing DVDs. Discs may be single or double-sided, giving a total storage potential of 60GB on a single disc.

2) Absolutely wrong. HD-DVD support (http://www.hddvdprg.com/about/member.html) and Blueray support (http://www.bluraydisc.com/Section-13469/Index.html)
Support for HD-DVD is decreasing. People are leaving the HD-DVD camp to go to Blueray. Of the six largest Hollywood movie studios, not a single one of them supports HD-DVD exclusively. Even Universal is in both camps now and Disney does not support HD-DVD at all.
sorry, I got the participant lists wrong. I don't think support for either format is 'decreasing' per se, but the content providers and manufacturers are keeping their options open rather than choosing sides stubbornly a la DVD v. DIVX.

3) Blueray is more expensive, yes. There's no arguing that. However, it also offers much more room for growth with the possibility of many multiple layers. I've heard 16 layers may be possible. At the very least, it should be capable of 8. Imagine a 200 GB disk. HD-DVD might get 4 layers. IMO, I'd rather spend a little extra and go with the product that has greater potential for a longer life. Will HD hit the market first? Yeah, probably. But who's going to buy it? Demand will be minimal. When PS3 hits next year, there will be millions of Blueray players in people's homes quickly. Games will need to be produced in mass which will in turn drive production costs down. I still contend that the only hope HD had was to be a part of the 360. That way it could have gotten into people's homes and production would be underway in enough quantities to make it viable and put up a fight. Because they didn't, HD's only real benefits are being a bit cheaper and available a few months sooner. Without the support, I just don't see how it has a snowball's chance in hell.I'm not ragging on the format; I love the format. in fact, I've pointed out its almost limitless possibilities. the PS3 however isn't the end-all be-all of the next generation of formats. while the console itself and games will be ready next year, consumer standalone players and studio content may not be available until next fall. it will be even longer before Bluray's full potential can even be realized outside of a trade-show prototype. HDDVD has standalone players launching in spring '06 at the latest, capable of playing consumers' entire conventional DVD libraries out of the box. HDDVD content will launch at about the same time, and will have a layer of SD content that can play back in current DVD players. in addition, I doubt serious home theater people will use the PS3 as a component in their entertainment systems, because it is first and foremost a game console and almost certainly won't have the feature set of a standalone Bluray unit. and if you think that the PS3 will carry the Bluray format, look at the Playstation Portable and its UMD movie format. it probably ain't gonna happen.

also, Sony has a proven track record of choosing the wrong horse in format wars. just this past spring, they stopped producing the Super Audio CD format which they developed to compete with DVD Audio. they are still trying to make Memory Stick a player against the market-standard CompactFlash. they developed MiniDisc while Philips and Pioneer created CD-R, then later unsuccessfully tried to position MD as an alternative to harddrive based MP3 players. they tried to compete against VHS-C camcorders with their Super8 format, then tried to repurpose that to go up against MiniDV. hell, they invented both the VHS and Betamax standard, then sold the VHS patent to JVC which licensed the hell out of it then thoroughly dominated the home-video market. it's nothing against Sony, it's just that they try to foist proprietary formats on an unwilling consumer electronics market. in each of these cases, the product they had was superior (except for Memory Stick), but they just implemented and marketed these technologies improperly, or they were just plain late to the dance. this will ultimately be Bluray's downfall, because even though it's a better product, it won't have the wide exposure or ease-of-migration that HDDVD will have.

[gravymaster]

Nerd fight!

[ehren]

rowr.

[Run CMB]

HD DVD because I don't know what Blu-ray is.

[Gatorgod]

The Polls are closed!
Stick with what we got already! Won out.
The Runner up format is Blu-ray! ....now to wait and see how this format war plays out in the real world :uhh:

[kupomog]

Blu-ray and HD-DVD packaging.

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/ces2006/gallery01.html

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/ces2006/gallery/bluraydiscs02boxopen01.jpg

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articles/ces2006/gallery/hddvddiscs01.jpg

EH.

Red vs. Blue.

[skittlebrau]

Blue packaging for Blu-ray is obvious. I mean, you can't have a Blu-ray disc in a pink case...

[gravymaster]

I bet you a penny HD DVDs win out because they have the letters "DVD" in the name and the same symbol. Sometimes it is that easy. People won't be ask scared to take the plunge because they look like regular dvds.

[skittlebrau]

Maybe, maybe not. Look at the Beta vs. VHS wars all those years ago. Two semi-different formats with consumers left to choose which one will win. VHS won over Beta because it was cheaper, even though Beta had superior sound and picture quality. This is pretty much the same thing.

Cheaper of the two formats will win, regardless of branding or quality.

[gravymaster]

I know its been gone over a million times, but is it really THAT much of an upgrade? If not, neither will florish.

[Gatorgod]

I was looking to buy a DvD recorder with some of my Christmas cash/ certificates, ...asked the guy at Bestbuy if i should wait till the upgraded burners came out. He said their already out but cost Thousands$$$ and will take 3 to 5 yrs to come down to normal consumer prices :ashamed:
.........Bring it On!.......http://www.kingdom-hearts2.com/zerov/animation/wheel.gif

[blueguy]

I know its been gone over a million times, but is it really THAT much of an upgrade? If not, neither will florish.
That's like asking if an HDTV is that big of an upgrade.

[blueguy]

bump with interesting news. Seems Microsoft's faith in HD-DVD is even wavering.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6142137.html
Xbox marketing chief says Microsoft could release peripheral for the Sony-backed disc if HD-DVD loses format war.
At Microsoft's big CES keynote address last week, Bill Gates announced that the company will release an add-on peripheral to read HD-DVD discs on the Xbox 360. Considering that console rival Sony is a primary backer of the competing Blu-ray format of high-capacity discs, it came as little surprise that Microsoft would side with Toshiba's HD-DVD standard. The company's support for the HD-DVD camp has been apparently strong, with reports from late last year suggesting the company is offering cash incentives to PC makers that adopt HD-DVD drives into their systems.

However, despite the obvious preference for HD-DVD, it seems Microsoft isn't willing to completely tie its fate to the format just yet. During CES 2006, Microsoft's Xbox corporate VP of worldwide marketing and publishing Peter Moore told Japanese site ITmedia that a Blu-ray Xbox 360 peripheral could appear for the system if the need arises. Moore admitted that Microsoft isn't sure of the next-generation format war's outcome, with the worst-case scenario being a repeat of the Beta vs. VHS war of the '80s.

However, he suggested that whatever the outcome of the HD-DVD/Blu-ray war, the Xbox 360 can adopt the dominant format since its uses an external drive. He also suggested that it's a weak point for PlayStation 3, saying Sony's system is stuck with Blu-ray. Microsoft hasn't announced how the HD-DVD peripheral will connect to the Xbox 360, but it's most likely going to use one of the system's USB ports. While the PS3 may come with Blu-ray out of the box, there's no apparent reason an external HD-DVD drive couldn't be hooked up through that system's USB ports.

Moore once again confirmed that the HD-DVD add-on for the Xbox 360 is only for watching movies, and there are currently no plans to use it for games, nor are there plans to release an Xbox 360 with an internal HD-DVD drive.

cut off a bit about the 360 and it's games as it isn't relevant.

[Kamerica]

Don't count on that packaging being around for too long.

The cheaper disc will be the victor. price wins win over quality, just look at vhs and beta.

[kupomog]

Sony prices Blu-ray discs at $30 (http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6305651.html)

[DotheBartman]

I would not buy a (single) movie for 30....I really don't know how they expect this to go over well with consumers.

[kupomog]

I don't even like to buy video games for $30.

[DotheBartman]

^Me neither...I officially decided to "stop" buying games for over maybe 20 (maybe 30) bucks a while ago, because any more than that on one game just seems ridiculous. The only exceptions are the rare games that I must own when they come out, like a Zelda title. Everything else I wait on.

[ehren]

sure, they're being listed at $30 per now, because they're launching a new technology. when I first started buying DVDs in 1998, they were $30 per, mostly, with a few 20-25 dollar titles scattered around. would I pay $30 for a DVD now? fuckno, but that's because software prices took a hardcore nosedive once hardware numbers started to increase. the same thing will happen with Bluray, whose chances for success look better everytime I open a trade mag.

[DKsimpson2]

it should be like the other CDs out, the 5.1 CDs, where not all the movies are on the new disk but the big ones are. like your star wars, lord of the rings.

The movies that were fillemed in HD are only going to be put on these. (right?) so we wont see them selling us the Godfather, or movies older then that.

It would be nice to get your favorite movies and TVshows on the HD disk but not time to replace all the DVDs.

With all the TV stations going to HD in a few years, (by law) we will see more hit shows sell the HD disk.

With the PS3 playing the bluray, that should be the best way to go. if im goinging to get a new player it better play games.

[kuumuus]

That's like asking if an HDTV is that big of an upgrade.

(it's not)

regular dvds 4life

[blueguy]

it should be like the other CDs out, the 5.1 CDs, where not all the movies are on the new disk but the big ones are. like your star wars, lord of the rings.

The movies that were fillemed in HD are only going to be put on these. (right?) so we wont see them selling us the Godfather, or movies older then that.

I'd guess any movies filmed, key word here, filmed in the last 50 years would be capable of higher resolutions then we can get even with HDTVs. Film doesn't have resolutions. Get better clarity over the years perhaps. It's going to capture every little detail it can, up to a certain point.

[ehren]

case in point: 'Knight Rider' on HDNet.

[J.Re*]

With all the TV stations going to HD in a few years, (by law) we will see more hit shows sell the HD disk.they're not going HD. they're going digital. (people with analog sets will be able to buy a convertor to figure out the signal)

[Toli]

I have been researching this for a little while. Hd-dvd is meant to be cheaper because the disk holds a lot less space while the blue-ray can hold up to 70gb. I'm not sure which format I'll side with nor whether I'll buy one. After all I didn't purchase a dvd player until they became a lot cheaper in about 2002. Another thing is I'd like to see which one turns out to be better all round and which one is supported and stocked more so I'll give it time. Dvd is still great in my book.

[Adamm R)))]

Sony prices Blu-ray discs at $30 (http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6305651.html)
And in the UK they'd be even more ridiculously overpriced. DVD will in, few people will give a shit about paying twice as much since the general public aren't too concerned with more extras.

[Green_Peaness]

I know what HD looks like so I know the image quality would be worth about $400 or whatever it is. But does anyone know how common HDDVDs are? When new movies come out, do most of them come out in HD also?

[skittlebrau]

Merged your thread with this older one, Bear. Should get all the answers you're looking for here.

[Brad Clarke]

HD-DVD is uported by less production companys, and blueray is suported by even more production companys (about 85%) and one of these will atke over my guess is blueray. Blue ray is not that expensive, if you buy a playstation 3, the $499 playstation 3 even come with blueray, which is a pretty good freaken deal when blue players can coast more than that, especially since the ps3 can play almost everykinda video cd (dvds and more) blue ray seems the way togo, and face it or not peopel in the next 10 years Your Are all gonna own HDTVs because the goverment is changing the all broadcast the broadcast signals to hdtv around 2010, whihc the price of hdtvs will go straight down since so many peopel will be buying them just liek dvd players, when they first came out they where in the $500's and now you can go out and buy a dvd player for $30

look how much the sony blueray play coast
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7763823&type=product&id=1142288677966

and the sony playstation 3 will coast $499 (november 2006)

And also when dvds first came out they coast $25-$30 Im not suprissed that teh blue discs are in the same price range, once they start getting more popular companys will be able to make them cheaper. probally the same price as dvds.

[grissom]

I'm not going for either yet. The picture quality is probably better, but it's way too expensive for an upgrade that's not that incredible. Not even close to the difference between VHS and DVD. I'm fine with DVD quality stuff for now.

[kevin]

not starting my collection over. regular dvds are where it's at

[Jake]

Besides, Blu-Ray Players can supposedly upconvert a DVD's picture quality on an HDTV, I think.

I think Blu-Ray will walk all over HD-DVD when the PS3 comes out.

[grissom]

I don't think the switch to Blu-Ray for all DVD releases will be quick anyway. Maybe for movies, but for box sets the companies that release them will put it off for as long as possible. With a compacity of 54 gigs, a Blu-Ray disc can hold an entire four disc DVD set. They can't charge $40 for a single disc, people won't buy it. Even with movies, they won't be able to cash in on two disc special edition sets anymore.

[Wonderboy]

If anything I'll be going with HD now since I have a 360, and if the add on for HD-DVDs is affordable then I'll probably jump on that, but otherwise I'm going to wait this out and see which one ends up the winner...if either. I'd honestly rather just stick with DVDs (improvements aside), but I guess I'm just living in the past now.

[Cerpin Taxt]

I don't know about the packaging for these...and yeah, price is only an issue now. There are people who bought Star Wars in 1982 for $80.

I'm trying to figure out how these are that much better than DVDs.

[jim]

Besides, Blu-Ray Players can supposedly upconvert a DVD's picture quality on an HDTV, I think.
So can regular DVD players with progressive scan now. Even the Xbox 360 does that.

I've heard nothing bad bad things about Blu Ray. I think HD DVD will be the clear winner. Heres an interesting head-to-head review of Blu Ray and HD DVD. The cheaper HD DVD outperforms the much more expensive Blu Ray:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/lounge/view/63680
Thanks to Ars Technica for pointing us in the direction of the first ever head-to-head comparison of HD-DVD and Blu-ray. High Def Digest took a look at Training Day, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and Rumor Has It ... side-by-side on HD-DVD and Blu-ray, and the results are a bit surprising. Although in hindsight, I suppose they shouldn't be.

While their reviewer had wonderful things to say about the overall quality and the richness of the color palettes (particularly in Kiss Kiss Bang Bang), High Def did notice some unnerving problems with ... wait for it ... Sony's Blu-ray, in particular, an unusual cropping problem.

I estimate that about three to four percent of the area on the sides of the picture is lost on Blu-ray. Note that I also switched the outputs on both players to make sure it wasn't a problem with one of my set's HDMI or component inputs, but to no avail -- the Blu-ray remained cropped. Unfortunately, with no other Blu-ray players available with which to do a comparison, there is no way of yet telling if the altered aspect ratio on the Blu-ray is inherent to the encoded material itself, or a fault of the Samsung player's internal circuitry.

In addition to the cropping, "comparisons of three complete scenes on both discs, one after the other" showed other differences between the formats, which seem to give the lead in the technology race (so far) to HD-DVD.

The picture quality differences between [HD-DVD and Blu-ray] is often quite apparent. For example, during the very first shot of the film [Training Day] -- a zoom in on a red-hot, rising sun -- there was some posterization was visible on the Blu-ray, with the banding of colors obvious as the picture faded in. Looking closely at the HD DVD I could also spot some posterization, but it was not nearly as severe.

The review also revealed this little bug:

Once again, he Blu-ray disc is a bit darker. Though not as obvious as on 'Training Day,' whites look only ever-so-slightly brighter on the HD DVD, while black levels appear rock solid on both.

Do they still do that thing in Japan where they make you fall on those short, little swords when you make a big boo-boo? I ask because if they do A) that'd be awesome and B) they should probably start drawing straws over at Sony.

Not only is their new (as yet unreleased) console much more expensive than their competitor's machine and nearly impossible to manufacture it's also too expensive for many developers to make games for, and the proprietary video format they were counting on to sell the machines to game-wary consumers might just be losing the war with the cheaper, more readily available and now apparently better-looking HD-DVD format. Seriously. Straws, guys. Straws.

And people are looking at it the wrong way, thinking its the successor to DVD. It isnt, its just an alternative. Theres no way it will ever replace DVD as the standard format. It will never have the same range. Theres so many old movies out there that never even took advantage of DVD, can you imagine the studios spending money mastering, for example, an old movie like Plan 9 From Outer Space in HD? What would be the point? Can you imagine them doing the Boris Karloff Frankenstein on HD DVD? Or older TV Shows like MASH? It wouldnt happen.
These formats arent a replacement for DVD, they will coexist. New movies and well known older movies will come out on it. The huge majority of consumers wont buy it. Its solely limited to people with HD TV's anyway.

I'll be getting HD DVD, but only because I have a big HD TV I want to take advantage of and even then it will only be big blockbusters and movies like Star Wars. Otherwise regular DVD is more then good enough or me.

[blueguy]

And people are looking at it the wrong way, thinking its the successor to DVD. It isnt, its just an alternative. Theres no way it will ever replace DVD as the standard format. It will never have the same range. Theres so many old movies out there that never even took advantage of DVD, can you imagine the studios spending money mastering, for example, an old movie like Plan 9 From Outer Space in HD? What would be the point? Can you imagine them doing the Boris Karloff Frankenstein on HD DVD? Or older TV Shows like MASH? It wouldnt happen.
These formats arent a replacement for DVD, they will coexist. New movies and well known older movies will come out on it. The huge majority of consumers wont buy it. Its solely limited to people with HD TV's anyway.

I'll be getting HD DVD, but only because I have a big HD TV I want to take advantage of and even then it will only be big blockbusters and movies like Star Wars. Otherwise regular DVD is more then good enough or me.
I whole-heartedly disagree that it will never replace DVD. I do think they'll co-exsist for a long time, but whichever format winds up winning, there's no logical reason why it would need to be upgraded within the next 20-30 years. The only reason DVD needs a replacement is because of HD. It's not like they're going to raise the TV resolution standards again anytime soon. While it is only an impact for those with an HDTV, there's going to come a day when that's all that's going to be on the store shelves.

I think it would be foolish for HD-DVD/Blueray players to drop DVD support anytime in the future, because people will have a large collection of DVDs they won't want to replace. But I see no reason to continue to produce video on standard DVDs. Even with older TV shows, they can easily stick more episodes on a single disk, which is always a plus.

As far as old movies go, I pose a question. Do they still have usable film originals or are the masters all encoded for standard def? If they still have usable film, they can always make a new version for HD. Film will always have a higher resolution then anything our TVs will ever produce. Just because a movie is old or only in black and white doesn't mean some people might not want to see it in HD at some point.


With the whole HD-DVD/Blueray debate over which will win, I side with Blueray. Yes, there are problems right now, there's no denying that. But as mentioned above, the new format should be the standard for many years to come. They will work out the problems with Blueray and costs for the players will drop to reasonable levels. The cost of the disks themselves are already comparable to those of HD-DVD, which is a bit of a surprise.
More storage space = less compression needed = even better image/sound.

[Jim Jones]

HD-DVD. There is more titles, it's cheaper, and has less copy protection.

[Cerpin Taxt]

It's cheaper now, only because both of the formats are pretty much new to the public.

Besides, their player will be more expensive now that the PS3 is set to include a Blu-Ray player.

And what is with the whole copy protection thing? Is it so wrong to have to buy movies from people you actually want to watch, enjoy, and therefore, support?

[grissom]

I don't bother with copying movies anymore. Whenever I did the quality came out looking like shit, not to mention that I'm stuck with an ugly disc with a handwritten title and no case.

[box elder]

these are both backwards compatable, right (meaning my old dvds aren't going to be obsolete)? if so, then i really don't care. i'll keep buying regular old dvds until one of them is the clear winner and the price goes down.

[grissom]

I think both Blu-Ray and HD-DVD players are backward compatible, but I'm not sure.

[blueguy]

It depends on the player. They can chose to add a standard DVD laser to the drive to read standard DVDs, but it isn't required or anything.

[Binky]

Theres so many old movies out there that never even took advantage of DVD, can you imagine the studios spending money mastering, for example, an old movie like Plan 9 From Outer Space in HD? What would be the point? Can you imagine them doing the Boris Karloff Frankenstein on HD DVD? Or older TV Shows like MASH? It wouldnt happen.
Uh, actually, there are tons of old movies that would benefit from high definition (and beyond). It all depends on the quality of the film stock that was used. At 720p all movies look excellent, and better than DVD. At 1080p some lower quality film stock will start to get blurrier/grainier. Stuff shot in low-light is always going to be more grainy anyway, in any film. The INHD network airs a lot of old movies from the 50s and 60s and they all look wonderful in high definition. If you have digital cable and an HDTV set, check that out sometime.

But if you really want to see how high 35mm film can go, you'd have to put up two projectors side by side, one optical and one 1080p (or 2K digital cinema, which is roughly the same thing), to see the difference.

As for HD-DVD vs Blu-ray, I'm predicting that by next year, there will be "universal" players on the market that'll be able to read both disc formats, so there won't be any HDDVD vs BD war anymore. Studios will continue to release movies on whatever format they want and everyone will be able to play them. If this does really happen, Sony will feel pretty stupid for only having BD in the ps3.

[Jolly Bengali]

It's been a long time since I posted in this thread, and I honestly cannot remember seeing an ad of any form for Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. Maybe a newspaper article or two. But any concern that this will kill DVD in a few years seems to be unfounded, since there doesn't seem to be anything near the advertising push that would be neccessary to convince Joe Average that this format is going to do anything good for him.

Interesting to read through this and learn that Blu-Ray has problems, though, that can't be good for the PS3.

[Cerpin Taxt]

Yeah, DVD still has several years left, I think.

[blueguy]

Uh, actually, there are tons of old movies that would benefit from high definition (and beyond). It all depends on the quality of the film stock that was used. At 720p all movies look excellent, and better than DVD. At 1080p some lower quality film stock will start to get blurrier/grainier. Stuff shot in low-light is always going to be more grainy anyway, in any film. The INHD network airs a lot of old movies from the 50s and 60s and they all look wonderful in high definition. If you have digital cable and an HDTV set, check that out sometime.

But if you really want to see how high 35mm film can go, you'd have to put up two projectors side by side, one optical and one 1080p (or 2K digital cinema, which is roughly the same thing), to see the difference.

As for HD-DVD vs Blu-ray, I'm predicting that by next year, there will be "universal" players on the market that'll be able to read both disc formats, so there won't be any HDDVD vs BD war anymore. Studios will continue to release movies on whatever format they want and everyone will be able to play them. If this does really happen, Sony will feel pretty stupid for only having BD in the ps3.
Not to mention that HD-DVD/Blueray both use the same encoder, which is FAR better then the current one being used for DVD.


Jolly, I think the PS3 has far bigger issues with the Cell processor then the Blueray drives. With 8 cells, I think they said they're only getting 15% yeild with 7 or 8 working cells. (PS3 only needs/uses 7 cells) I think all the Blueray issues can be cleared up within a year and dual layer disks should be common.

[Jim Jones]

It's been a long time since I posted in this thread, and I honestly cannot remember seeing an ad of any form for Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. Maybe a newspaper article or two. But any concern that this will kill DVD in a few years seems to be unfounded, since there doesn't seem to be anything near the advertising push that would be neccessary to convince Joe Average that this format is going to do anything good for him.

Interesting to read through this and learn that Blu-Ray has problems, though, that can't be good for the PS3.
I saw a Blu-Ray ad. It said something lame like "Experience Blu". Does sony pay its marketing enough? I think not.

And the copy protection is bad on blu-ray because older hd-tvs have a downconverted signal.

Also, on blu-ray disks (NOT hd-dvd ones) there is severe artifacting during the first five minutes of the movies due to poor transfers.

Blu-Ray is lose-lose.

[jim]

Uh, actually, there are tons of old movies that would benefit from high definition (and beyond). It all depends on the quality of the film stock that was used. At 720p all movies look excellent, and better than DVD.
You missed my point. Of course there are hundreds of old movies that would benefit from HD, but they wont get the proper HD treatment, just like they didnt get the proper DVD treatment. In many cases (ie, the Universal Monsters series) the original film is beyond repair, and higher definition will just make it worse. Then theres literally hundreds of old movies that only saw the light of day when put out by budget DVD producers (my own examples include all of Ed Wood's movies, and a lot of 50's and 70's horror movies) and they would never get the HD treatment, and most likely would even be released on HDDVD.

Another example of how HD isnt great for old footage. I have a Johnny Cash DVD which includes a lot of live performances from the 50's and 60's, and obviously the original film wasnt great, but its totally watchable in SD. But last night I was watching it through the Xbox 360 (which upscales the resolution) on my 32 inch HD LCD TV and some of it was almost unwatchable.

With the whole HD-DVD/Blueray debate over which will win, I side with Blueray. Yes, there are problems right now, there's no denying that.More storage space = less compression needed = even better image/sound.
Space isnt an issue with movies. It might be better for games and computer stuff, but not movies. Blu Ray uses MPEG2 for its movies, a format which is inferior to and takes up more space then VC-1, the format that HD DVD uses.

So Sony might talk about Blu Ray having more space, but where movies are concerned its irrelevent as they use an outdated format which uses more space up anyway, and its been widely agreed that VC-1 is a far better format.

[blueguy]

Current Blueray movies are using MPEG-2, but I'm not convinced they'll always use it. And you're sorely mistaken about space not being an issue with movies though. Why do you think there are 2 disk sets on DVD now? Space. Why isn't HD available off of DVDs? Space.

A 480x640 image has 307,200 pixels. 720x1200 is 921,600. That's 3 times the pixels. Up to 1920x1080 and it's 2,073,600. More then double again. All said, it's nearly 7 times as many pixels for every frame. And that's just the video. Sure VC-1 is better, but it isn't that good. Oh, and don't forget audio. With more space the movies get higher quality audio tracks, again taking up more space. Blueray (not sure on HD-DVD) supports Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD, both lossless formats.

Now, back to the MPEG-2 part of this. MPEG-2 can look just fine for HD. Problem is, Blue ray doesn't have the space due to only using single layer disks right now. More space, less compression. I've read what has been said about MPEG-4, VC-1, h.264, all that... The claims are better image quality and lower space requirements. But has any of us seen a side-by side comparison yet? Same movie, different codec. I don't think the same movie has been releaed in both formats yet, and the dual layered Blueray disks should be used to show that the space is what will deliver a better image. If MPEG-2 doesn't work out like they hoped, they can start using MPEG-4 whenever they want to.

Space is a very real issue. Those 20 extra gigs are going to be huge when dual-layer disks come around.

[jim]

Current Blueray movies are using MPEG-2, but I'm not convinced they'll always use it. And you're sorely mistaken about space not being an issue with movies though. Why do you think there are 2 disk sets on DVD now? Space. Why isn't HD available off of DVDs? Space. .
Obviously more space means more stuff you can put on there, but you miss my point... Having extra space will never give Blu Ray an advantage in movies, except for maybe more special features or maybe for box sets, you can fit more episodes on a single disk or whatever,but thats about it. Blu Ray's format requires more space then HD DVD's format anyway, which minimises the difference.
The resolution is always going to be the same, so its not like Blu Ray can up the resolution and take advantage of any extra space. A triple layer HD DVD can hold 45gb, thats far more then even a really long movie in HD with the highest quailty of sound with tons of special features will ever need (thats 6 hours of HD video).

A 25GB Blu Ray disk can hold up to two hours of high-definition video content, exactly the same as a 15GB single layer HD-DVD using VC-1, which most people agree is better.

Most HD-DVD movies released so far have used dual-layer 30GB discs that can hold four hours of high-definition video, while all Blu-ray movies released so far use a single-layer 25 GB disc that can only hold two hours of high-definition video content.

Sony want to match HD DVD's standard and use 50GB dual disks, but so far the cost of producing them is too much. So really it is HD DVD that has the most space at this point in time...

As for a side by side comparison, go to the link I provided at the top of he page. It is a Blu Ray/HD DVD head to head review using the same movies.

To me personally theres no question which is the best. HD-DVD is half the price, the movie quality is marginally better, theres less copywrite bullshit and it hasnt had anywhere near as many faults and bugs.

[Binky]

Wait, why aren't BD movie releases being encoded in MPEG-4? It's always been clear that both disc formats will support all 3 video codecs (H.264, WMV/VC-1, MPEG-2). Is this just studios screwing up for some stupid reason?

Oh and about copy protection, again both formats have always had the same AACS copy protection, including all the down-conversion-if-no-HDCP-support crap (though Warner Bros is the only studio that's actually going to do that). The only issue here is that 20th Century Fox wants to add some extra copy protection crap on their releases, which will be on BD.

And blueguy, I'm pretty sure the audio codec support is the other way around. Dolby Digital Plus and TrueHD support is required in all HDDVD players, optional in BD players. But it's not like that even matters, since all the player would be doing is passing the digital signal through to a receiver.

[blueguy]

Obviously more space means more stuff you can put on there, but you miss my point... Having extra space will never give Blu Ray an advantage in movies, except for maybe more special features or maybe for box sets, you can fit more episodes on a single disk or whatever,but thats about it.
You're not factoring in compression. Compression is what ruins the image quality. More space = less compression = better image quality. Compression is why you can fit a 3 hour and 20 minute long Return of the King (theatrical edition) onto 1 DVD, while far shorter movies still fill up a DVD by using less compression. And it can be taken even further by compressing a movie off of a dual layered disk and copy it onto a single layer disk but you also pay for that tradeoff with a lower image quality.

My whole stance on the battle is thinking for the long term. 5+ years, 10+ years, 20 years, etc... I'm guessing HD-DVDs will be cheap enough to sell at current DVD prices within 2-3 years. After that as costs go down, we still pay the same price, they just make more money. Blue ray is more expensive, but it also will eventually come down to standard DVD costs at some point. The point here is that HD-DVD's price advantage will not last in the long term, so that leaves the technical merits, which Blue ray has the clear advantage.

Wait, why aren't BD movie releases being encoded in MPEG-4? It's always been clear that both disc formats will support all 3 video codecs (H.264, WMV/VC-1, MPEG-2). Is this just studios screwing up for some stupid reason?
You're right, they both support the same codecs, but for some reason Sony is deciding to go with MPEG-2 for now. I've heard some people's explanation on this and it would make sense if they were using dual layered disks, but since they're only using single layer right now, I'm flat out baffled like most people. Once the dual layered disks are available, it probably won't matter much which codec is being used. Blue ray is entirely capable of matching the image quality of HD-DVD.

[Jolly Bengali]

Blueguy, given all that Jim's saying, I really don't think you can say Blu-ray, at least currently, has a "clear advantage" on the technical specs. That's flat-out ignoring the very real data Jim's throwing at you. The theoretical possibilities of a perfectly-made-and-utilized Blu-ray might be higher, but in a practical sense right now it doesn't seem to be cutting it due to Sony's stupidity.

[jim]

Thats right. Blu Ray may have "potential" advantages over HD DVD in the future (though thats open to debate), but that doesnt matter. What matters is now, in which the current HD DVD's are technically superior to Blu Ray, they look better and they are much cheaper.

And Bluguy, it doesnt matter if Sony are able manufacture Blu Ray disks for the same price and match the current quality of HD DVD in a few years time. By then it will be too late. Format wars are usually over fast, as soon as one gets a headstart, everyone puts their money behind that one. I'd be very surprised if a probable "winner" doesnt emerge within the first year.

[Cerpin Taxt]

But that would require the public's general interest, would it not?

[Crazy Leprechaun]

In my opinion, neither is necessary. I love my DVDs, and I don't think an upgrade is necessary. HD-DVD will probably last longer than Blu-ray though.

[sacrelicious]

I've seen both HD-DVD and Blu-ray movies. HD-DVD is clearly the better format as far as quality. That said, Blu-ray will probably win out because of the industry support so far (Sony, PS3). It makes sense. Beta was a much better quality format than VHS, but it was just too expensive. This time around they will both be about the same price, so people will take what is given to them.

[jim]

Well not really. Blu Ray players cost almost twice the price of a HD DVD player.

[jim]

I found this interesting paragraph on MS's xbox site:

Online: All HD DVD players are required to be network capable. Of course, this is already the case for Xbox 360, but what this allows is for not only the player to be updated if needed, but new content to be distributed on the fly. The common example cited in Major Nelson's interview is that of a director recording more commentary. Now, instead of worrying about buying a new disc, that extra content is available to you as soon as you pop in the disc.

Thought that was interesting... Not sure how I feel about it. But instead of buying the re-released Ultimate Special Collectors Edition of a movie you've already got, you'll be able to just download future extra features. Great idea, so long as they dont withhold extra features so we have to download them.

[Gatorgod]

I wonder how Blu-ray is faring in the publics eye now that the PS3 is just released?
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/gatorgod/Wonders6.gif

[jim]

When it comes to sales, HD DVD is absolutely crushing Blu Ray. Sales of disks are about 3:1 HDDVD's way.
If it wasnt for the PS3 Blu Ray would be deader then UMD. But then MS has been getting a lot of good hype about its (very affordable) HDDVD add on, which has been selling out everywhere, so that evens things up.
Heres a few stats, curtesy of Amazon:

Number of movies available:
Blu Ray - 84
HD DVD - 112

Number of movies including confirmed future releases:
Blu Ray - 101
HD DVD - 156

Highest average sales rank of Top 10 in each format in overall DVD market (the lower the number the better)
Blu Ray - 3,091
HD DVD - 682

Number of movies with sales rank above 10,000
Blu Ray - 33
HDDVD - 103

Poor Sony. And latest figures show HDDVD growth is much faster then Blu Ray.

[Enter The Moleman]

I wouldn't bury blu-ray yet. I imagine sales of blu-ray have been so low because so many people have been waiting for the PS3 they had no reason to buy a blu-ray player for a grand or more when they could get the PS3 for close to half of that.

[jim]

Doesnt change the movie release schedule, which if anything seems to be slowing down. Going from a ratio of 84:112 HDDVDs way to 101:156 counting upcoming releases.

[blueguy]

Well sales of both HD-DVD and Blu-ray has been disappointing. They may be holding back a bit.

[Rich Uncle Skeleton]

Although I initially voted Blu-Ray in the poll, I really don't see the point of either format. They will both be replaced by hard disk players in a few years. You can already by music from shops on USB keys. Since you can get keys with gigabytes of storage now, undoubtedly this will crossover to movies soon, with hard disk players/recorders.

[blueguy]

Downloadable content isn't going to replace either for many, many years, if ever.

[Binky]

The only reason why HD-DVD movies are outselling Blu-ray at the moment is because they got a head start and have had more time to release films (for instance, Fox didn't start releaing any BD titles until this month). But BD, on the other hand, has gotten a huge head start in PC data storage (http://www.videohelp.com/dvdwriters.php?DVDname=&cdrs=&cdrws=&dvdrs=&dvdrws=&dvdrsdl=&dvdprs=&dvdprws=&dvdprsdl=&dvdrams=&writebdr=1&bdrs=&bdres=&bdrdls=&bdredls=&buffer=Any&cdrom=&dvdrom=&bdrom=&orderby=Name&hits=50&Submit=Search&Search=Search), where there aren't even any HD-DVD burners on the market yet. It's also a much better disc format for that, since a jump from 4.5GB to 15GB isn't as useful as 4.5GB -> 25GB.

[Comic Book Guy]

blu-ray will win out simply by virtue of the ps3 factor. fact.

[jim]

blu-ray will win out simply by virtue of the ps3 factor. fact.
Rubbish. Not everyone is into videogames. Especially ones at the price of a PS3, which is still more expensive then a HDDVD player. And dont forget the 360 with its already 10,000,000 userbase and the very affordable HDDVD player addon, what do you think those ten million will be going for? Add that to all the huge success of HDDVD and its positive publicity compared to the Blu Ray which has pretty much had nothing buy negative publicity, then factor in the price, the bigger range of movies on HDDVD and the better quality picture on HDDVD, and I will have underestimated the stupidity of the public if Blu Ray is a success.

[phil]

I think Blu-Ray's biggest hurdle is explaining to people what a "Blu-Ray" is. HD-DVD is pretty self-evident.

[Binky]

the better quality picture on HDDVD
Uh, what are you talking about? It's just a physical disc format. The picture quality has nothing to do with that. If the picture quality is bad, then it's the fault of whoever's transferring and encoding the movies for the studio.

And as for the whole BD vs HD-DVD thing, I don't see this "war" really going anywhere. The company that recently created the hybrid BD/HDDVD system-on-a-chip predicts that eventually (probably within a few years) most set top players on the market will be hybrid and it won't matter what format studios choose to release their movies on then.

[Adamm R)))]

I think Blu-Ray's biggest hurdle is explaining to people what a "Blu-Ray" is. HD-DVD is pretty self-evident.

Yeah, I was thinking that some people that will be wanting to upgrade will go with HD-DVD simply because it sounds like the DVD's successor more.

[skittlebrau]

Eh, the packaging for Blu-Ray and HD-DVD is practically the same thing. No explanation needed for Blu-Ray once the average consumer sees it and puts two and two together. Even the most technologically clueless person will know what it is.

[Gatorgod]

Excepts from ARS-technica web page
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/hardware/next-gen-dvd.ars/2
the BD format will require an already strained manufacturing base to invest massive amounts of capital in new manufacturing technology even as disagreements about just what that technology is rages around them. If consumer demand for HD is what projections predict, the simple fact is that BD will not allow the manufacturing base to retool fast enough to keep up with the demand curve. Furthermore, there is little in the way of statistical verification of any actual production data for BD. Major disc manufacturers are still far from collecting statistically significant samples with BD production lines that prove that Blu-ray discs can be mass produced in a typical six-sigma (http://www.isixsigma.com/sixsigma/six_sigma.asp) capable process, and there is virtually no previous experience upon which to base manufacturing assumptions. The bigger risk is that high production demand on an unstable manufacturing process significantly increases the risk of consumer failures.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/gatorgod/GatorIcons/Sleeping.gif

[blueguy]

Excepts from ARS-technica web page
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/hardware/next-gen-dvd.ars/2

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/gatorgod/GatorIcons/Sleeping.gif
Which is well over a year old and pretty much proven to be a non-factor at this point.


On a side note, there was early questions about the scratch protection on the Blu-ray disks. So I have my first bit of evidence that the new coating is holding up quite nicely. I have a Blu-ray movie from Netflix. The sleeve is moderately worn, so I'm clearly not the first person to have received this disk, and the surface of the disk is absolutely flawless as if I pulled it out of a case, brand new, from Best Buy or something.

I've received a fair amount of nearly new disks from Netflix in the past that have already had significant scratches on it, so at least with this first disk, it's pretty clear this new coating is living up to it's claims.

My next Blu-ray title in the queue is probably 2-3 weeks out.

[Binky]

Wow dude, you actually spent $1000+ on a blu-ray player?

[blueguy]

got a PS3.

[Rich Uncle Skeleton]

Downloadable content isn't going to replace either for many, many years, if ever.
Erm, I didn't say anything about downloadable content. I was talking about going into a shop and buying a flash drive with a movie on. They do it for music now, won't be long before they're doing it for films.

But actually, since you mentioned it: I don't see downloading movies to be that far in the future. The music download industry is massive right now. Sure it may be a few years until downloading movies (legally) is commonplace, but it's still going to be several years before the new DVD formats would even be popular...

[Jake]

Erm, I didn't say anything about downloadable content. I was talking about going into a shop and buying a flash drive with a movie on. They do it for music now, won't be long before they're doing it for films.

But actually, since you mentioned it: I don't see downloading movies to be that far in the future. The music download industry is massive right now. Sure it may be a few years until downloading movies (legally) is commonplace, but it's still going to be several years before the new DVD formats would even be popular...

No, it'll be quicker. HDTV is becoming all the rage and people will want something to get the best picture quality out of their TVs. I've seen a small segment of "Aeon Flux" blu-ray running off a PS3 on a High-Def tv and it's amazing (the picture, not the movie). ;)

Also, I found this blogging below:

"FORMAT WAR": FACT OR FICTION...?

Just when you thought everyone was settling down for the holidays — the season of "Peace on Earth and Goodwill to Men" — we're bombarded with industry media coverage about "the format war."

Lately it seems like the coverage is reaching a fever pitch with headlines declaring an early victory for either Blu-ray Disc or HD DVD.

In reality, many insiders say there's so much industry support for Blu-ray that discussion about a "format war" will seem irrelevant in the long run.

Blu-ray Disc has the support of nearly every major consumer electronics company, leading computing companies and, as Andy notes below, just about every major studio in Hollywood.

In addition, most experts agree that Blu-ray has the technical advantage (mainly due to its greater capacity for movies, games and other content as well as for data storage and recording).

Given the limitations of the other format — far fewer studios cranking out movies, far fewer manufacturers selling products, far less capacity overall — the whole notion of a "format war" does seem overblown.

In any case, snappy headlines aside, it's still early in the game. Blu-ray Disc hardware has only just hit the shelves, studios are just starting to distribute content and consumers are just beginning to experience what full 1080p Blu-ray high-definition picture quality looks like.

Perhaps the real battle ahead is less of a "format war" and more about helping people understand what the transition to high-definition is all about.

Marty Gordon
Vice President, Philips Hollywood office

http://blogs.zdnet.com/blu-ray/

[Binky]

Well it seems this war is over (or will be very soon):

http://gear.ign.com/articles/753/753206p1.html

I'm so buying a dual format player (and/or computer drive) as soon as they hit sub-$150 prices. And I bet it won't take any longer than a year/year and a half for that to happen.

[blueguy]

Why does everyone say this will end the war? There's still two formats. Dual-format players or disks won't change that. It just means now people will have an option to not take sides and be neutral.

[grissom]

Dual format is certainly a good idea. I still won't buy one yet though, $1000 or more for slightly better picture quality is not worth it. My progressive scan DVD player is still fine for me,

[jim]

I think both are fizzers to be honest. I dont think consumers have been anywhere near as interested in either format as they anticipated.

[MasterMarc]

sticking with DVD.

[Jake]

Universal Pictures, HD-DVDs only major 'exclusive' studio, has had little to no press at the Consumer Electronics Show. In fact, HD-DVD's biggest 'news' was they had mentioned they've picked up new manufarctures from China, like Shinco. (who?) Even more amazing was it was revealed that Universal had a "HD-DVD only" contract and that expired on 12-31-06. IMO, it's quite possible that they might produce movies on both formats at the end of 2007.

None of the Blu-Ray studios announced support for HD-DVD and Warner and Parmaount are still making movies for both formats. Also, Warner is trying to get the word out on "TotalHD", a disc that has HD on one side and Blu-Ray on the other.

Some movies I'll be picking up:

Casino Royale, Pirates 1 and 2, Con Air, Predator, I Robot, ID4, and Silence of the Lambs.

[mayo]

as incredibly lame and "uninformed" as this sounds (yes i haven't read the thread), i just want to say i HATE the name bluray. hd dvd fits so well.

as for dual format... fuck that noise. won't one format just win already. christ.

[jim]

After having recently seen both in action (and the HD DVD looking slightly better then Blu Ray as all the reviewers have noted), I have decided to purchase neither. What the hell are we all wasting our lives talking about here? A slightly sharper picture that the majority of people dont even notice.
My girlfriend and I are going on a trip through Asia, I'll be saving for that instead of wasting hundreds of dollars on a small picture quality increase. I think I've finally seen the light, and Im not wasting my money on crap like this anymore.

[Toli]

At the moment I really don't want to pay an extra $400 just to be able to see a better picture of clint eastwoods cheek or something. Dvd was a way bigger step up from VHS and updating the technology so quickly is just a fucking nuisance. It's becoming like consoles now. I'll stick with dvd for at least 2 more years.

[Jake]

Format 'war' update!

Bill Hunt, editor for digitalbits.com posted his opinion a couple of days ago regarding the HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray state of affairs:

Finally today, I'm tickled to learn that I'm not the only media analyst that's earned the ire of a select group of... shall we say, passionate?... early adopters on the Net. CNet executive editor David Carnoy has apparently been flamed too by HD-DVD enthusiasts online for daring to suggest that HD-DVD may not have a rosy future. You can read his amusing editorial reaction here.

You know, the funny thing about all this is that I really like both HD-DVD and Blu-ray Disc just as video formats. They both deliver fantastic quality and features. But technically and quality-wise, this format war is basically a wash. Therefore, it's reasonable to assume that if this battle is going to be decided by anything, it will be other factors. Like which studios support each format, which manufacturers support each format, what the software and hardware sales trends are, etc. And in each of those areas, Blu-ray has developed a clear edge.

Let's look at these simple facts: Of the 12 major and mini-major Hollywood studios (Fox, Disney, MGM, Sony, Lionsgate, Paramount, New Line, HBO, Warner Bros, Universal, DreamWorks and The Weinstein Company) 9 support Blu-ray, 5 of them exclusively. Only 6 support HD-DVD, just 2 of them exclusively (one studio, DreamWorks, remains uncommitted). Not counting computer hardware or budget brands, Blu-ray Disc has 9 major set-top hardware manufacturers behind it (Sony, Pioneer, Samsung, Philips, Panasonic, LG, Mitsubishi, Thomson, Sharp), while HD-DVD boasts just two (Toshiba and now LG). HD-DVD is an add-on to Microsoft's Xbox 360, while Blu-ray is built into EVERY Sony PlayStation 3. Nielsen VideoScan is reporting that in software sales, Blu-ray has virtually erased the sales lead enjoyed by HD-DVD since the formats were launched, and is now outselling HD-DVD by a 2 to 1 (and growing) margin.

I can understand that some people just love HD-DVD and have had great experiences with it. We have too. I understand that some people hate Sony for perceived corporate arrogance. I'm not a big fan of their tactics either, particularly how they went around the DVD Forum to develop their format. But let's face it - the biggest corporate cheerleader for HD-DVD seems to be Microsoft, which isn't exactly comforting either. All of those issues aside, however, how do you argue with the facts that are clearly becoming obvious - all those things I just mentioned above?

As I said earlier, I love both formats. But I just don't see any circumstance in which HD-DVD can evolve into a viable mass market consumer video format. I certainly can't recommend in good conscience that Bits readers commit to HD-DVD right now. I tell most readers who ask me about the format war to just stick with DVD, and wait until it's all over. But if they're prepared to risk their money now, and are eager to do so, I have to tell them that Blu-ray is the better bet.

Today, he posted this follow-up:

Well... as expected, I've received a flood of e-mails over the last day or so in response to my high-def format war comments of yesterday. And as expected, those who have firmly attached themselves to HD-DVD weren't terribly pleased with my arguments. The interesting thing, however, is that none of these people could logically refute my reasoning, and very few even attempted to do so. In fact, while some of the responses from HD-DVD supporters were polite and thoughtful, most were defensive, overly emotional or even downright hostile. A couple e-mails were so nasty that I can only wonder at the mental stability of their authors. All of this suggests to me that even these people are starting to suspect that the writing is on the wall for HD-DVD.

I was pleasantly surprised, however, at how many readers responded to say that they generally agreed with my assessment of the situation. And it wasn't just Blu-ray supporters who reacted positively. A surprising number of retailers and industry insiders expressed relief that we had finally said what they WANTED to say, but weren't in a position to do so. I was also struck by how many people that agreed with my comments said they hadn't yet adopted either format, instead having decided to remain neutral until a choice was more clear. But many of those folks told us that they were now close to jumping into the high-def arena, and Blu-ray was where they were headed. The responses as a whole were certainly fascinating, and they have done nothing but convince me further that this format war needs to end now, before the early adopter market gets even more fractious and divisive.

So what, or who, could end this format war? Simple: Universal. If Universal were to suddenly announce support for Blu-ray Disc in addition to HD-DVD, or if they were to adopt Warner's TotalHD combo disc, that would be the end of it. You would suddenly have every major studio in town releasing Blu-ray titles (except for DreamWorks, and our sources tell us that the studio is simply waiting for one of these formats to start selling serious numbers before getting involved). By the end of the year, cheaper second generation Blu-ray hardware will available, and that's the ballgame. That's not to say that Microsoft and Toshiba would stop pushing HD-DVD anytime soon. And I'm sure some of the HD-DVD supporting studios would continue releasing titles, at least for a while. But why would any average consumer want to buy an HD-DVD player, even a very cheap one, when you can't get Disney movies, you can't get Pixar films, you can't get the Bond films, you can't get the Spider-Man films, etc, etc, etc. Universal has the power to end this format war tomorrow. We certainly hope a lot of people, both inside the industry and film fans as a whole, are making efforts to POLITELY convince them to do so.

^^^^I am totally stoked that someone in the know finally came out and 'declared' one side to be a near-winner. :D

[Comic Book Guy]

blu-ray will win out simply by virtue of the ps3 factor. the catalist has now been lit, the evidence seemingly above and below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu_Ray_Vs._HD-DVD

[coltonwiggum]

Let's put it this way...

Would you rather buy (random season #) of (random TV show you really really like) in a multi-disc boxset, or on one DVD with the same (or better) picture quality and extras?
I actually don't like that idea. Only one disc? It makes it seem so small, especially for such a large purchase. I'll stick with DVD, thank you very much. I still laugh when people tell me how much they spend to get HD and stuff like that, and they come to my house and can't tell the difference.
BTW, if its a war blu-ray will definately win.

[grissom]

I actually don't like that idea. Only one disc? It makes it seem so small, especially for such a large purchase. I'll stick with DVD, thank you very much.
Oddly enough, I feel the same way about it. It would feel really weird to pay $50 for one disc to get a whole season. I would feel a little ripped off actually.

[jim]

Ive decided to get neither. I've thought about it, and realised that it isnt important to me to see every skin pore and blemish on an actors face. I'll be sticking to DVD.

I also agree about the box sets, I love my box sets, they are all the pride of my DVD collection. I'd hate to buy a simpsons season for example and it was just one disk.

[Comic Book Guy]

ideally i'd like to have one disc for each episode in the season.

[blueguy]

that's just it, you're getting ripped off either way. Regardless of how many disks it's on.
For an old show, gimme one disk. I don't want to have to fiddle around trying to find out which disk has which episode on it. I've got enough movies, I don't need a big box just to make my movie-penis feel bigger.

[jim]

Im not one of those people who pay extra for "limited edition" boxes or packaging, but I do like it when you buy a set like the Simpson's that has a really nice box. Makes the extra money you pay over a regular DVD a bit easier to swallow.

[Jake]

Ive decided to get neither. I've thought about it, and realised that it isnt important to me to see every skin pore and blemish on an actors face. I'll be sticking to DVD.

I also agree about the box sets, I love my box sets, they are all the pride of my DVD collection. I'd hate to buy a simpsons season for example and it was just one disk.

The Sixth Season of the Sopranos on HD/BR is a Multi-disc set...

While it is technically possible to put a bunch of stand-def TV shows on a single HD/BR disc, they wouldn't do that.

[jim]

True, which makes it an invalid point about the advantages of HD to begin with. Though why you'd need something like the Sopranos in HD is beyond me.

[blueguy]

Because it looks better. And don't forget, it isn't all about the video. They both offer lossless/uncompressed audio and as time goes on, interactive features will get better. Not that I particularly care for interactive stuff, some seem to get their rocks off on it.

[Jake]

True, which makes it an invalid point about the advantages of HD to begin with.

Yeah...let's put High-Def content onto a five-gig DVD and see how many episodes we can get onto a single disc. You could get maybe one 30 minute program in HD.

[Binky]

Uh, I think the point here is shows that have no source material available at a higher resolution than standard 480i NTSC (i.e. the majority of television created during the 20th century), it would be a major waste of physical space to encode those shows at 1080p and sell them as 4-disc sets long after DVD is gone (because no studio is going to release any of that stuff on HD/BD while DVD is still around). But then again, if studios want to waste space with more discs just to justify a higher price for their box sets, then I'm sure they probably will.

[jim]

I think some shows like Lost and some of the HBO shows have been filmed in HD. But I still dont see the point. I really dont watch the Soprano's thinking "Yeah, its good and all, but if only I could make out every lip hair on Carmela's face..."

Yeah...let's put High-Def content onto a five-gig DVD and see how many episodes we can get onto a single disc. You could get maybe one 30 minute program in HD.
Whoever said anything about putting HD content onto DVDs?? We are talking about putting regular resolution TV shows onto HD disks. Of course HD content isnt going to fit onto a regular DVD. Duh...

[Comic Book Guy]

i don't think thats the point, to be focussing on the intricacies of the subject, its the whole immersion you gain from higher resolution. you gain a step closer overall to being there.

i think you underestimated the public's intelligence in choosing the better, more future proofed format to be the success. who knew.

i'm gonna enjoy watching my complimentary Casino Royal blu-ray on PS3 next month.

[blueguy]

trade you for my free promotional copy of Talledaga Nights.

[Comic Book Guy]

it's the first HD format to reach the aparently all important 100,000 copies milestone with 007, two months faster than DVD did with its showcase title 'The Matrix'. things are looking bleak for HD-DVD.

[blueguy]

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Sony/Disc_Sales/Casino_Royale_Blu-ray_Breaks_100,000_Unit_Milestone/544

actually, the first to hit that on DVD was Air Force One.

Not only that, I think CR hit the 100,000 mark within it's first week on sale.

[Comic Book Guy]

ahh, my bad. air force one it was. getting my DVDs mixed up, i was thinking of the title that everyone quotes as a turning point in DVD.

i just feel sorry for the guys who plunged in early on the HD-DVD side :/ but seriously, the better format won out this time which i always find good being a tech guy. amiright?

[blueguy]

As much as I like Blu-ray, I think it's too early to declare it the winner. But it certainly is putting a big smackdown on HD DVD.

[America: Fuck Yea!]

isn't Blu Ray the inferior of the two?

[blueguy]

no. There isn't really anything HD DVD can do that Blu-ray can't do also. Plus, Blu-ray has more hardware and studio support, more storage space, more options, higher average bitrate, etc...

About the only things HD DVD has going for them is cheaper players and exclusive support from Universal. I might be a bit off, but Blu-ray has support from 90% of the studios, 50% of them exclusive. I don't think there's any denying that if Universal decides to go neutral with their support this year, it will signal the end of HD DVD.

[Timothy]

Sorry for the bump, but for those who own a Blu-Ray, I would just like to know your thoughts on it. I'm thinking of getting one, but the customer and editor reviews at various sites are mixed.

[blueguy]

Love it. But yes, check reviews before you make a purchase. Some get a good transfer and nice extras, some get a bad transfer. It's the same story with HD DVD though too.

[grissom]

I've seen several different Blu-ray players in different stores running demo discs, and they really don't look that great. Hardly worth spending $1000 on in my opinion.

[Binky]

Actually, they've gotten a lot cheaper in the past few months. HD-DVD players go for around $300 now, Blu-Ray for $400-500. Still not worth buying until the hybrid players come down to under $300 though.

[moneychair2003]

i got blu-ray on my ps3 (though i havent bought any movies on blu-ray yet, except talladega nights which came with my ps3), but i think blu-ray is definetly going to win (even though its going through the same pattern that betamax went through). hd-dvd is only backed by one major motion picture studio, Universal/warner brothers, and by most of the porn industry, whilst blu-ray is backed by the rest of the major motion studios.

i'm not going to buy any movies on blu-ray or hd-dvd until im pretty forced to adopt these new formats. i never bought a single dvd until the winter of 2001 when most new movies weren't coming out on VHS anymore.

[Tino]

Blu-Ray is much better. Thats part of the reason why the PS3 is $600.

[grissom]

Just because it's in a PS3 and makes it more expensive doesn't mean it's better. The only reason it's there in the first place is because blu-ray is Sony technology.

[moneychair2003]

IMO blu-ray is technologically better than hd-dvd only because of the unprecedented space one blu-ray disc can hold in comparision to one hd-dvd disc (not that anyone would ever need that much room).

[moneychair2003]

btw, blu-ray is in the ps3 because thats the only format which all its games are on.

[grissom]

btw, blu-ray is in the ps3 because thats the only format which all its games are on.
Again, the games are on blu-ray because it's Sony technology.

[Binky]

not that anyone would ever need that much room
Right, because nobody has more than 50gb of stuff on their computer...

[jim]

I think theres two seperate debates here with two different answers, and people just mix it into one. The first question is which is the better format? The second question is which is the best for movies?

For the first Blu Ray is the better format in general, for things like computer programs and data backup and that sort of thing. I was going to say games, but I seriously cant see any game this generation EVER needing that much space. Any game that actually requires that sort of space will be mostly comprised of filler like high definition cutscenes and the like. The slower load times for Blu Ray disks dont help either.

For the second, imo HDDVD is definately the better format for movies. So far its been pretty much unanimous that every movie released on both formats has looked better on HDDVD then Blu Ray due to the encoding processes each use. A long time ago in this thread I gave the reasons for this, its all back there somewhere. It looks better, has been more reliable with less issues, and is cheaper.

Anyway the whole space issue is increasingly becoming redundand with toshiba bringing out triple layer disks that have about the same capacity as a Blu Ray disk.

[blueguy]

For the second, imo HDDVD is definately the better format for movies. So far its been pretty much unanimous that every movie released on both formats has looked better on HDDVD then Blu Ray due to the encoding processes each use.
Which isn't really the case anymore. Many of the Blu-ray movies are using the same codecs as HD DVD. AVC/MPEG-4 or VC-1. There are still some being done in MPEG-2, but they're beinging fewer and fewer.

[Binky]

The second question doesn't matter, because the physical format doesn't dictate the quality of the video. Both player formats have support for all the same codecs, so if a movie looks better on one disc over another, it's because whoever made it screwed up, plain and simple.

And how would you even know whether one looks better than the other? Do you buy movies that have come out in both formats and watch them on a Blu-Ray and HD-DVD player you have hooked up to the same TV? Somehow I doubt that.

And for the reord, Blu-Ray is easily going to become the preferred choice for data storage, simply for the fact that HDDVD-R isnt even available yet, while BD-R/RE burners are already like $400 with media costing around $10 now.

[blueguy]

And for the reord, Blu-Ray is easily going to become the preferred choice for data storage, simply for the fact that HDDVD-R isnt even available yet, while BD-R/RE burners are already like $400 with media costing around $10 now.
Hell, I saw a Blu-ray burner drive last fall at Best Buy for $500 or $600. Blu-ray is on the ball as far as burnable media goes.

I think HD DVD-R is out now, but it just isn't catching on. I heard a story about the media being ready and shipped, but the burners got delayed so places like newegg and stuff were sitting on stock no one would buy because there wasn't any burners for em.

[Samuel L Bronkowitz]

if this has been already answered, it's been awhile since I read this thread all the way through, so I forgot: how does Blu-Ray or HD compare with typical HDTV broadcasts? 'Cuz if they're close to exact, then I'm in no hurry to abandon my measly progressive-scan DVD player......stuff like Planet Earth do deserve to be watched in HD, but some of the more high-motion HD programs leave alot to be desired IMO. I watched T2 on DVD a few months ago, and not long after that I caught an HD broadcast, and the majority of the time, I think I actually prefered the DVD......

[Binky]

Well yeah, HD broadcasts use the same codec as DVD and are limited to 15mbps, not much higher than DVD's 9mbps limit. 1080i broadcasts usually have massive amounts of "macroblocking" in fast motion scenes or just about any time a camera/shot change happens in anything. If HDTV wasn't so outdated and used an MPEG-4 codec, even in that same 15mbps space it would look a whole lot better.

Blu-ray/HD-DVD don't suffer from any of that of course. If a 25GB disc is supposed to fit 2 hours of content, you get roughly a 28mbps bitrate. With an H.264 codec, even 15-20mbps would be enough to get pretty perfect video quality. In the case of some studios using MPEG-2 for their Blu-ray releases (so they don't have to pay higher royalties I assume), the near 30mbps is pretty much equivalent to what the H.264 codec could do with less. If they do use MPEG-2 though, they're probably not likely to include lossless surround sound, because that would eat up like 5mbps of that bitrate.

[blueguy]

HD DVD actually has a technical limitation on it's bitrate. I don't remember the exact number, but I think it was somewhere around 20 mbps. I may be off on that, but I know for a fact Blu-ray has a higher max bitrate. Although, at least, so far that doesn't seem to be much of an issue. Take King Kong for example. Long movie but still looks flat out awesome.

[Jake]

I

For the second, imo HDDVD is definately the better format for movies. So far its been pretty much unanimous that every movie released on both formats has looked better on HDDVD then Blu Ray due to the encoding processes each use.

I'm begining to think you have a "Sony" bias. No, there's not inherent PQ issues with Blu-Ray, but the "rushing to market" mistakes they've made have all cleared up and the PQ average (based on various Video Review sites) has Blu Ray running a higher average than HD-DVD. Even worse for HD-DVD, Universal's (the only HD exclusive stuidio) latests releases have been no greater than 3 star quality transfers.

[jim]

If you mean an anti-sony bias, then no, every bit of home electronics I have is Sony, my stereo, my LCD TV, my DVD player, even my phone is Sony. I only buy Sony really, apart from my Xbox 360.
But when it comes to movies and music, yes I generally despise Sony. All their anti piracy crap on CDs that makes it hard just to put it on your ipod, all their movies with like 10 unskippable anti piracy and disclaimer screens etc. Even have one Sony movie that wont run on older DVD players because of their encoding crap. But that still doesnt really affect my decision about Blu Ray. Really it comes down to the fact that HDDVD players are way cheaper then Sony players for product that is more or less exactly the same. But to be honest I dont really care, having looked nto both products Ive decided that neither are really worth the money and still more then happy with DVD, even with a HDTV. I wont be buying either until a long way down the track when theyre cheap.

[Gatorgod]

HDDVD just suffered another blow, I recently read that the nationwide Blockbuster Video stores just vowed to only offer Blu-Ray for rental in all of its stores.

[grissom]

I don't see that becoming a huge issue. Movie renting isn't really that big of a business from what I can see. Whenever I go into any of the stores around here, no matter what time of day, there's barely anyone in there. Doesn't seem like very many people are into renting movies anymore since it's such a better deal to just buy them.

[SubSane]

I want Sony to fail miserably.

[Jim Jones]

if this has been already answered, it's been awhile since I read this thread all the way through, so I forgot: how does Blu-Ray or HD compare with typical HDTV broadcasts? 'Cuz if they're close to exact, then I'm in no hurry to abandon my measly progressive-scan DVD player......stuff like Planet Earth do deserve to be watched in HD, but some of the more high-motion HD programs leave alot to be desired IMO. I watched T2 on DVD a few months ago, and not long after that I caught an HD broadcast, and the majority of the time, I think I actually prefered the DVD......

Its better. Most HD Broadcasts are sourced from digital files and look like shit. however HD dvd/blu ray have maximum quality video and look amazing.

[W.P.]

I would go with HD-DVD

I know it is probably going to lose the console-war, but I want to have something in the future that I can show off. I'll be the only one on the street who has the long, lost HD-DVD player. :D

[Jake]

Well, as silly as this needless format is, and when Blu-Ray seems to have taken a 2 to 1 lead in software sales, Toshiba and Microsoft have no reported "brought off" Paramount Studios / Dreamworks for $150 million to be HD-DVD exclusive. :angry:

For the whole story, and Blu-Ray's rebuttle, read here. (http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Blu-ray_Supporting_Companies_Respond_to_Paramount_HD_DVD_Announc ement/877)

The good news for NHC memebers with Blu-Ray players or a PS3 is Fox is back to releaseing High Definition movies on Blu Ray this fall....and maybe "The Simpsons Movie" will be available for Christmas!

[Kiyosuki]

Man I'm still not totally looking forward to the eventual day when I may have to re-buy the DVD's I have now on a more advanced format.

[brancely]

transformers is going to carry the format once it's released.

[kevin]

fuck hd blu ray shit

regular dvds 4 life

[phil]

does this mean all star trek related entertainment will be released on hd dvd?

[Jake]

transformers is going to carry the format once it's released.

Meh...I mean, really, I own both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray, but there never has been ONE title that determined the format war. It'll be the side that has the MOST titles overall.

HD-DVD will have Transformers, the Remastered OS Star Trek, Sherk 3 this year.

Blu-Ray will have: The Simpsons Movie, Die Hard 4, Pirates 3, and Spiderman 3 and Ratatouie (sp) this spring.

I was hoping BR would just "win" this and be the next Disc format before full-blown HD downloading takes over in about 5 years, but Paramount being bribed to go to HD-DVD will keep the Hi-Def disc market fractured and scare off the mainstream consumer base.

does this mean all star trek related entertainment will be released on hd dvd?

Yeah. The only Trek, I think, that will ever be put on Blu-Ray is "Star Trek: First Contact." According to my source, it has Sony listed as the distributor in the US, but that could be a Typo.

Man I'm still not totally looking forward to the eventual day when I may have to re-buy the DVD's I have now on a more advanced format.

While not true HD, the PS3 does a wonderful job of upscaling regualar DVDs to 1080p on a HDTV.

[jim]

You really think Transformers will have an impact? Does anyone even care about that movie anymore?

If either format wins, I want it to be HDDVD because then all I have to do is buy the cheap Xbox 360 drive. But at the moment Im completely happy with DVD. I think the whole situation is fucking ridiculous, two different formats that are basically the same but are incompatibe. Whoever wins, it us who end up the losers.

[Gatorgod]

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y269/gatorgod/GatorIcons/Head-Scratch5.gif Damn! ..I wanted HD to lose fast,
but like most Wars, its bogging down into a quagmire.

[Jake]

You really think Transformers will have an impact? Does anyone even care about that movie anymore?

If either format wins, I want it to be HDDVD because then all I have to do is buy the cheap Xbox 360 drive. But at the moment Im completely happy with DVD. I think the whole situation is fucking ridiculous, two different formats that are basically the same but are incompatibe. Whoever wins, it us who end up the losers.

Why? In the Mid-90's, DVDs were orginally going to be two differernt formats. Sony/Phillips had a spinoff to the CD an Toshiba had the disc (before it combined with Sony/Phillips) that would become the "DVD". IBM saw the importance of the successor to the CD in computers and mediated a format where Sony, Phillips and Toshiba could all come together for a unified format. For that, we all won (except Sony and Phillips).

Also, with players coming down in price, expect either format to have sub 200 dollar players or "dual" format machines under 300 dollars in a year or so.

[jim]

Those are different stories. Those format "wars" were decided very early on and resolved before the average consumer was affected. I never saw any different types of DVD's or