MS and Intel back HD DVD over Blu-ray - Page 4

hmurchison- I know you like HD-DVD, but now Intel is backing away from their support. I'm sorry, but M$ and a few electronic makers will not beat out BRD if this jumping ship continues, regardless of cost.

Intel has the weakest of influence. Microsoft's impact dwarfs Intel's but I like the fact that they are holding out for Managed Copy.

Paramount suprised me and it's definitely a gamble. I'd like to see a BD content provider do the same because what Paramount could be doing is either helping the cause or really screwing things up.

I will have both formats because I don't want limitations with my movie choice but HD-DVD is clearly the format that intrudes the least upon my fair use rights. I don't really value the extra space of Blu-Ray and I don't trust the skimpy spincoat to prevent scratches.

Blu-Ray appeals to the worst in content providers to whom the consumer is an afterthought as well as the Geek that views "more" as synonomous with better.

Simply give me HD 1080p capability with 3 hours of video per disc and I'm a happy camper. Both formats exceed that requirement so price is the next issue and HD-DVD is going to be cheaper.

Is 3 hours per disk sufficient?

I hate how DVDs put bonus material on a second disk or even a third disk...or how Lord of the Rings Extended Edition is split into 2 disks.

I want 1 disk for everything...swapping reminds me of the Mac 128k days.

50GB should be good enough for 3+ hours of 1080p and 2 hours of bonus footage. 30GB wouldn't be sufficient for more than a full length HD movie.

I'd be extremely disappointed if HD-DVD won and didn't solve the current problem that DVDs are facing.

Hmmm let's see

Say VC-1/AVC is VBR 14Mbps

14Mbps * 60 seconds= 840Mbps per minute
840Mbps * 60 minutes = 50400 Mbps per hour

50400 / 8= 6300 MB per hour

assuming they use 1GB= 1000MB

6.3GB per hour

30GB DL HD-DVD= 4.76 hours of HD content. 3 hrs easy with Dolby or DTS lossles audio. Put the extras on a second disc or hybrid DVD side.

Triple Layer 45GB will be there for 2nd generation HD-DVD barring any production problems. I wouldn't be surprised to see TL 45GB and BD DL 50GB ship within 6 months of each other in volume.

Hey I'll take both formats if the price is right.

While I agree that it would be really annoying to have to switch discs in order to view an entire movie, I don't think it matters if the bonus materials are on a different disk.

Besides, what are you watching that even has worthwhile bonus material? I've seen the bonuses off maybe 20 disks (both run-of-the-mill discs and so-called "special editions"), and none of the extras was worth the time that went into watching them.

There won't be a second generation, because it would create compatibility problems. Once the first player hits the market in the US, the format is frozen and can't realistically be changed for 8-10 years.

Also don't forget.

AACS content copy protection has a featured called Managed Copy that would allow you to store your HD films on a hard drive with the proper rights. This would ameliorate any disc switching problems.

The hangup.....HD-DVD is in...the BDA is still non-committal on Managed Copy. I believe support should be mandatory.

We have to look at 5 years from now when the average home will have a 2TB Network Storage device serving out media. Do we really want to kill this wonderful opportunity in its infancy?

Link from Semi-OT more Microsoft vs. Blu-Ray - Good DRM read:

Warner Near Closing Deal to Support Blu-ray

if the first HD-DVD discs that come out are "only" 720p and then bluRay pops onto the market a few months later (with PS3 debut) supporting full 1080p, that would be the "flawless victory" type finishing blow to HD-DVD. just some random thoughts and memories of mortal kombat on sega. FINISH HIM !!!

720p won't be supported in either format. You're going to get 1080i/p or 480i from component outputs.


That's a distinct possibility. I would like to see them get it into the 1st generation but there may not even be a need for a TL disc. AVC and VC-1 truly look great at bitrates as low as 12. As much as I like extras I'd prefer the whole disc be used for the best mix of video and audio. If the extras warrant it put it on a second disc.

Are you sure about that?

http://www.digital-digest.com/highde...aq.html#faq306

"There is also 720p resolution (1280x720, progressive), which is the current native resolution of many home theatre displays"

http://www.blu-raydisc.com/Section-13627/Index.html

"All consumer video resolutions are available:
- 1920 x 1080 HD (50i, 60i and 24p)
- 1280 x 720 HD (50p, 60p and 24p)
- 720 x 576/480 SD (50i or 60i)"

I would expect that there won't be 1080p/i or 720p from component outputs unless someone hacks the player.

I personally would expect that the players be able to rescale the image to the display's native resolution, so there's no need to include a 720p data stream if a 1080p datastream is available.

While I'm glad there's going to be early adopters like hmurchison, I think I'll sit the HD/BR battle out until there's a clear winner, assuming that most consumers will even move from the well established "good-enough" DVD standard.

Please pardon my ignorance on this, but this brings up a question: how are the content providers going to try and force HD/BD down consumers' throats? Will new movies only be released in a hybrid disk, which I'm assuming will contain both HD and stardard DVD, with I'm also sure a coresponding price increase of say $5.00-10.00, or will there be both an HD and a seperate DVD release?

As long as what ever format wins or even both, don't get thrown into some obscure corner of the store like SACD/DVDA, then they'll have a chance eventually.

Both formats will be niche markets for at least 2-3 years. Look at DVD, how long did that take to win over from VHS? THe advantage here are the hybrid disks containing both formats and players being backwards compatible. Those with 300+ DVD collections won't be out in the cold. They can gradually build up a HD collection. Or if you have an older DVD in the other room, you don't need to buy two copies of the same movie.

However, does that mean you buy either regular DVD, or hybrid DVDs? Whatever format wins, they should just go solely/exclusively with hybrids (dropping current 480p DVDs). Make every DVD that comes out with 480p and 1080i versions. Hell, if there's room, put a 480p 4:3 version as well. I'd keep prices the same.

I will be an early adapter once PS3 comes out. I will not be buying a player without a clear winner. AND I will not be buying a player or enormous amount of disks until the format has planted itself permanently. My SACD/DVDA disks are collecting dust.

e1618978

Thanks for the correction. I should have checked my sources. I don't think we have to worry about 720p version 1080i/p because I doubt you will see discs recorded at 720p. The internal scaler will likely just scale the output to 720p if that is all your display will handle.

For those doubting if Blu-Ray will have notebook drives ready...

http://www.panasonic.co.jp/corp/news...n051005-3.html

Exactly! This is the point that I bring up whenever someone uses the phrase "whichever format ends up winning."

It wouldn't be too much of a suprise if neither format "wins". I'm not predicting that both will be failures... but it certainly isn't out of the question.

Copy prevention schema is what I think will determine industry support as well as consumer adoption rates.

I wonder how these two technologies will fare regionally.

Japan: A first adopter nation. They'll buy what is available first, are not very cost conscious, and do not wait for massive amount of content before buying players. They are a Sony stronghold, and if a HD XBox comes out I think it'll face the same wall than XBox has. Furthermore, the Japanese are historically fine with not using the same technology with rest of the world. I'd bet on Blu-Ray winning here and that the Japanese will continue to use it for quite a while even if the rest of the world happened to lean in the HD-DVD direction.

Finland: Our total-flop digital television initiative is molded around screwy "interactivity" - apparently the decisionmakers never heard of the Internet. HD is not even on the list of their concerns. No idea if we'll have HD television even five years from now. This means there is little motivation to buy HD screens, and consequently little motivation to buy HD players. On the other hand this means we'll go with whatever has won by then. On the other hand it means HD in consoles matters more. When a person doesn't have a HD screen, they definitely won't buy a HD player, but they will buy the consoles. So when HD screen market penetration goes over the critical limit, the vast majority of existing HD players on the market will be consoles.

Rest of Europe: No idea, but if they also have no HD television or poor HD television, the same arguments apply than with Finland.

US: No idea.

Good point.

In the states, minidisc is almost non-existant and is considered a complete 100% failure. Yet, travelling abroad I came to realize that this isn't the case everywhere.

It's possible that we'll see a geographic splintering between the two camps.

Not only that - we might see areas that we would otherwise assume to be level playing grounds fall to one side due to influence of another area where that technology has an advantage.

My pal has a portable minidisc player.

I loved my minidisc home recorder. I still want one because I have plenty of prerecorded and blank discs. I'll probably grab one off of ebay.

I'm your man for failed formats.

Minidisc owner x2 and DCC owner x2.

If either BR or HD-DVD fail I'll add to the list hehehe.

Well, this should either muddy the waters, or make everything crystal clear.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...1868032,00.asp

Another good article. I can totally see Bill Gates getting fired up...hehehe.

http://www.businessweek.com/technolo...9074_tc024.htm

Yes, very good.

I find it interesting that Blu-Ray fans are supporting the format that wants them to have the least amount of flexibility.

AACS encryption isn't enough for the BDA hey want BD+ on top. Managed Copy is an excellent feature that suits BDROM yet the BDA is noncommital.

Yet I hear cheers from many that seem impervious to these issues. What Fox, Disney etc want is wholly different than what you want.

Is an additonal 5GB worth giving up Managed Copy or potentially pay more money? I guess that's a question for each person to decide.

It's very telling that Toshiba is the only choice for an HD-DVD player while Sony, Panasonic, Philips, JVC, Pioneer... well, pretty much everybody else is supporting Blu-Ray. I feel secure in knowing that if I don't like one particular player or if it gets bad reviews I can choose another.

The Blu-Ray disc structure has much greater potential for higher capacity discs far exceeding the 5GB difference. Great for box sets of movies and tv series as well as the retailers who value precious shelf space. Great for those who are interested in recording HD programs off TV and I can't imagine many people buying an HDTV set only to record in SD. Great for those interested in portable computer storage too.

Speaking of which, is this a slot-loading Blu-Ray drive I see from Apple's favorite OEM supplier? Why yes it is and it records to BD-R and BD-RE media as well as DVD±R, ±RW and -RAM. They are so far ahead of HD-DVD it's difficult to image why we are still discussing it.

This is not about what we want or don't want, in fact - I doubt that there are any "blu-ray fans" here (on the other hand, you are definitely a HD_DVD fan).

We just see the chess pieces on the board, and are predicting a checkmate that is totally out of consumer control.

Originally posted by e1618978
This is not about what we want or don't want, in fact - I doubt that there are any "blu-ray fans" here (on the other hand, you are definitely a HD_DVD fan). We just see the chess pieces on the board, and are predicting a checkmate that is totally out of consumer control.

agreed. from a personal view i like the word bluRay and have some emotional affinity for sony (i'm looking at a nice sony 17" lcd as i type this). so while my basic sensory perceptions have a "curious and interested" feeling about bluRay more than HDDVD which sounds lame, my heart and mind tells me that like you said, we are really just watching from the sidelines..... or, just to spice up the chess analogy further, it's like we're hanging out at compton LA behind semi-bulletproof glass watching a shootout between two rival gangs. you wanna join but you know you're going to get hurt along the way.

Managed Copy, emphasis on "Managed". I just don't trust anything with DRM enough to consider it much better than something else with DRM. Therefore, giving it up is no big deal either.

While I think the situation is far from clear, the technologies are very similar and I'm not a "fan" of either, personally I would welcome a Blu-Ray win. Why?

- I want the PS3's standard to win because I might buy one. (Okay, this is a nonsensical reason because I'm not going to buy the DRM-laced movie disks anyway. Unless, of course, the PS3 can boot to Linux, whereupon it would be a good thing the PS3 supported the best data media.)
- I want the PS3 to beat a possible XBox360HD. There's no way it's a good thing the convicted monopolist gets a foot in in another market and (this part of their plans is clear) immediately uses it to prop up their desktop monopoly. Unlike the XBox, the XBox360 is designed as an extension of Windows (Media Center).
- The initial added capacity + potential for lots more.
- A more honest whole-new name and brand, instead of play-it-safe name recognition that has the potential to screw an unwary buyer.

Will managed copy even exist on OS X?

I don't see the point of non-Sony Blu-ray players, since they are bound to be near $1,000. Why buy that when you could get a $400 PS3?

We don't know what that exactly means yet.

According to what I've read about it, allowing a copy will be mandatory, unlike with BlueRay where the entertainment companies will decide whether or not to allow it, both as individual companies, and on an issue by issue basis.

Now that sounds good for HD DVD, but we don't know if they will charge for that copy, and if they do, how much. We also don't know what they will allow us to do with that copy. They can control its usage as iTunes and other music services do. It might just be allowed for backup.

With BlueRay, if they allow a copy it might be allowed to be transferred over a network, or loaded to another drive.

Again, who knows?

I can just say that the 10GB (it's not 5) extra per single layer, and the 20 for dual layer disks sounds good. Double sided BlueRay disks will go to 100GB, but HD DVD only 60GB. That sounds good as well. We don't know about it costing more, only HD DVD backers are saying that it will.

How important do you think the issue of whether Managed Copy is mandatory or optional is to those involved in choosing a format? And which seems more "consumer friendly"?

The point is the same as why many buy dedicated DVD players instead of a PS2.

I think that the other points are more important than whether or not it is mandatory.

If I can make a copy that I can only use on one machine, and I have to be on the internet at the time so that they can see what I'm doing when I want to make my copy so that they can charge me almost as much as I paid for the original, then it's worth crap.

Can you tell us that you don't have to be connected when putting it into a computer so that it can "phone home" the way XP does?

I'd rather not be able to make a copy, which almost no one does now anyway, then having them know what I'm doing as a condition.

Almost nobody makes backup copies of movies. Streaming it over a network? Right.

The only reason MS wants that is so they can control what you do with it rather than the studios. They were so eager to get the 360 out before Sony that they screwed up, and didn't wait for an HD DVD drive. Now they're frustrated because BlueRay apparently MIGHT not let them stream to the 360.

That's all this mandatory copy is all about. It's not for the consumer. It's so that MS and Intel can control what goes through the computer.

From Engadget:

Theyve already started showing off prototypes, and now Panasonic is announcing its Blu-ray optical drives for both notebooks and desktops will go into production in March 2006. Theyll also be shipping Blu-ray discs in both 25- and 50-GB capacities around the same time. Four types of discs will be produced, single- and dual-layer (25 and 50GB, respectively) recordable and rewriteables, all at 2X speed.

I reported this earlier.

Sorry

From IMDB:


Looks like HD-DVD is sinking.

Well, for me I'm supporting what I think will be the winner, simply because I want a winner and I want it now. The sooner something happens, the sooner it will fail or take off, prices will come down, equipment options will increase, costs will come down, media library will grow, costs will come down.....

I don't support BRD for what it is, I just see it in the lead, factor in PS 3, spit on M$ and and get used to the idea the BRD will be the one. I just hope it's the one for everyone and is affordable, replaces DVD and doesn't become a niche, etc.

I know that this is going backward in responding, but I would like to point out that there is no triple layer being considered.

The industry, in a burst of enthusium years ago, spoke of CD's with two, three, and as many as ten layers. The same with DVD. They never came out with them because it's simply too difficult and expensive past two.

They haven't even mentioned three here.

So we're talking about 1 sided single layer

15GB=HD DVD, 25GB BlueRay

1 sided dual layer

30GB=HD DVD, 50GB BlueRay

2 sided dual layer

60GB HD DVD, 100GB BlueRay

Nothing else has been suggested.

If I use it as a back up device, I know which I want.