Blu-ray lost out to the DVD standards body. So there are two competeing formats, Blu-ray (backed by I think 9 big companies) and HD-DVD (backed by the DVD forum now as the true HD-DVD standard). I am 99% sure that both use MPEG2.
I'll take more storage over more compression any day so Blu-Ray it is. Standard DVDs are overcompressed as it is. Besides, Blu-Ray has massive support behind it. Sony. Philips. Matsushita. Why settle for the cheapest way to go when we are talking about high-definition? Isn't the point to have the best image possible?
I'll take more storage over more compression any day so Blu-Ray it is. Standard DVDs are overcompressed as it is. Besides, Blu-Ray has massive support behind it. Sony. Philips. Matsushita. Why settle for the cheapest way to go when we are talking about high-definition? Isn't the point to have the best image possible?
HD-DVD has more support, as it has the backing of the entire DVD forum. Blu-Ray is backed by 9 companies.
The thing that pretty much won it for HD-DVD is the fact it is backwords compatible, and wont hardly cost much to manufacture. I think we will have a beta vs vhs battle on our hands. The storage difference is only 10GB on a double sided disk (40GB vs 50GB). And a 40 GB disk could hold a 4 hour movie in HD format (19mbps), with a bit of space to spare for extras. But, if we had a normal movie (2 hours or less), you have plenty of space for the extars on that same disk. So there is no worry of over compression, because at full bitrate, on a hd-dvd, you could fit a 4 hour movie.
Who makes up the DVD forum? I know there are only a few supporters of HD-DVD format itself. Originally HD-DVD was to use a red laser and more compression as opposed to Blu-Ray which uses a blue laser for more storage capacity. Now it seems HD-DVD will also use a blue laser so where is this cost savings now?
Microsoft cheered today when an industry body DVD Forum made a decision to support Microsoft's Windows Media 9 format in upcoming HD-DVD standard.
Based on the decision, all HD-DVD players will have to support three different types of video encoding -- MPEG-2 (the one that current DVD-Video discs and digital TV use), H.264 (latest standardized video encoding layer of MPEG-4) and VC-9 (the video technology behind the Windows Media 9 format).
Decision is obviously a huge boost to Microsoft's efforts to get into big boys' movie business. DVD Forum also approved a near-ready specs for rewritable HD-DVD discs -- it has previously already approved specs for read-only discs.
HD-DVD is based on blue-laser technology and competes directly against the other blue-laser optical technology, Blu-Ray. Blu-Ray is supported by virtually all the consumer electronics companies and there are already Blu-Ray discs and devices available in Japanese markets so the fight over the next generation of optical storage format is only beginning...
So again, why would HD-DVD cost less than Blue-Ray? Is it the media not the components? It seems that HD-DVD is backed by a NEC and Toshiba while Blu-Ray is backed by virtually every other electronics manufacturer in the industry. I suppose it's the movie studio's support that will decide its fate. I don't know where they stand.
So what if we have gotten off topic. We are in the middle of a discussion about relevant material, isnt that what forums are all about? Im more interested in what people's opinion are on certain topics than just reading pure speculation all the time. But thats just me.
Logic Pro isn't even shipping yet. An order the day it was announced they say will ship Next week. So, I sure hope they don't upgrade yet, because they aren't even shipping Logic Pro 6 yet.
Logic Pro is shipping. Tbere are plenty of people on Sonikmatter who have it running now. Not much changes other than access to the full line of plugins.
Ahhhh yes MS was able to weasle their way in. Now all they have to do is buy the rights to distribute a large current release in VC-9 and look for a way to "embrace and extend" the wheels are turning.
As for Blu-Ray I was happy with Blu-Ray until they made it clear that MPEG2 would be the only compression codec allowed. MPEG2 has served us nicely but h.264 and VC-9 are superior and more efficient. Thus BR "requires" another 10GB of space to keep up with the efficiency of h.264 and VC-9. The ideal situation would be the have BR hardware and VC-9 or h.264 support. That would most likely give us 5 freakin' hrs of HDTV!!!
Who makes up the DVD forum? I know there are only a few supporters of HD-DVD format itself. Originally HD-DVD was to use a red laser and more compression as opposed to Blu-Ray which uses a blue laser for more storage capacity. Now it seems HD-DVD will also use a blue laser so where is this cost savings now?
The DVD forum is made up of 220 companies. Blu-Ray is backed by, I believe, 12. So the "support" argument is moot. If what you were getting at is that HD-DVD (originally called AOD) was proposed by 2 companies, then yes that is true. But now that it was chosen by the DVD forum, and it is the HD-DVD standard, it is backed by the whole forum.
Quote:
So again, why would HD-DVD cost less than Blue-Ray? Is it the media not the components?
It costs less because aproximatly 80% of existing DVD houses can make HD-DVD disk with their existing equipment. The same can't be said for Blu-Ray.
Quote:
It seems that HD-DVD is backed by a NEC and Toshiba while Blu-Ray is backed by virtually every other electronics manufacturer in the industry.
HD-DVD is the OFFICAL standard adopted by the DVD forum. So it is "backed" by 220 companies. AOD (which was the proposition name for what is now known as HD-DVD) was proposed by NEC and Toshiba. Blu-Ray was proposed and now backed by 11 companies (Dell, HP, Hitachi, LG Electronics, Matsushita, Pioneer Corporation, Royal Philips Electronics, Samsung, Sharp Corporation, Sony, and Thomson Multimedia). So if you are looking at "backing" then HD-DVD wins. But...
Quote:
I suppose it's the movie studio's support that will decide its fate. I don't know where they stand.
This whole thing will be another Betamax vs VHS (not sure if you were old enough to remember that). Basicly it is up to the consumers to see what they choose. Which ever gets to market first, and at resonable prices will win. Last I read Blu-Ray still hasn't set an offical disk specification (yea I know, Sony has produced some units already, but it isn't running off the offical disk spec just yet, rather what Sony feels the final spec will be).
I think a big thing will be that HD-DVD playes are backwords compatible with existing DVDs. So a consumer can upgrade to HD-DVD, and still play all their old disks. Blu-Ray drives wont be able to offer this feature. That is, unless they include a second optical pickup, which would greatly increase the cost, as that is the most expensive piece in one of these devices.
This whole thing will be another Betamax vs VHS (not sure if you were old enough to remember that).
Yeap, I was there, We had both in my house. When you went to the video store you might rent 5 new releases and 3 were BETA and 2 VHS because almost no one had BETA around me.
The PRO's just recently finally gave up BETA. (TV Broadcast)
I suspect the fight will be more in Japan than the US.
HD-DVD is the OFFICAL standard adopted by the DVD forum. So it is "backed" by 220 companies. AOD (which was the proposition name for what is now known as HD-DVD) was proposed by NEC and Toshiba. Blu-Ray was proposed and now backed by 11 companies (Dell, HP, Hitachi, LG Electronics, Matsushita, Pioneer Corporation, Royal Philips Electronics, Samsung, Sharp Corporation, Sony, and Thomson Multimedia). So if you are looking at "backing" then HD-DVD wins. But...
Well, those 11 companies that have backed Blu-Ray represent pretty much every major manufacturer. Look at that list! Hitachi. Panasonic. Pioneer. Philips. Sony. I suppose most of the 220 companies that have backed HD-DVD are those we may never have heard of. Probably lots of computer drive manufacturers and low-end DVD manufacturers like Apex? While both are HD it seems that Blu-Ray is built from the ground up to be a new HD format while HD-DVD is an extention of DVD shades of Windows 3.1/95/98 etc. I'm not sure I like the fact that Blu-Ray uses MPEG2 though. What is better, MPEG2 at 36mbits or MPEG4 at 19mbits? I already think DVD is garbage.
It sounds like the battle is far from over. Blu-Ray has better support, HD-DVD has more support. I guess we'll have to wait to see which has better picture quality. That doesn't mean anything in terms of which one will win however. At the time, Beta was better than VHS but it lost out. It's going to be a mess.
New codec, modified mpeg4 that does sdtv quality at < 350kbps
this would be huge to the industery, and with a codec like that it could have far reachng effects, think how many more digital cable channels could fit into a pipe requiering <350k per feed?
I'm anticipating a major QuickTime upgrade in 2004. NAB wouldn't be a bad place to introduce QT7.
Quicktime is the humble home to some of the messiest legacy code in Mac OS X. Having got such an early start in multi-media, Apple is now dealing with architectural drift. This phenomenon is common for pioneering technologies. If they had entered the game later, then perhaps the API would be cleaner and more managable at this point. Early entrance into a heavily standards-dependent market can give you a headstart but... in a slower vehicle.
The time for a major QT overhaul has come. Just as OS9 was becoming an unmanagle heap of tangled interdependancies, so too is quicktime.
Yep... this would be a very NAB like announcment. Yet somehow, I don't think it's ready yet.
I would like to see After Effects die. But then we would need a photoshop killer as well...
That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard. After Effects and Shake share some of the same tools, but they both also have features not represented by the other.
And the interoperbility between Photoshop and After Effects offers solutions for certain markets (2D animation for one) that work better and cheaper than many other software products or product combinations.
Why do you want to have only Apple software? Do you really want companies to stop developing for the Mac?
Comments
Originally posted by kupan787
Blu-ray lost out to the DVD standards body. So there are two competeing formats, Blu-ray (backed by I think 9 big companies) and HD-DVD (backed by the DVD forum now as the true HD-DVD standard). I am 99% sure that both use MPEG2.
I'll take more storage over more compression any day so Blu-Ray it is. Standard DVDs are overcompressed as it is. Besides, Blu-Ray has massive support behind it. Sony. Philips. Matsushita. Why settle for the cheapest way to go when we are talking about high-definition? Isn't the point to have the best image possible?
Originally posted by TWinbrook46636
I'll take more storage over more compression any day so Blu-Ray it is. Standard DVDs are overcompressed as it is. Besides, Blu-Ray has massive support behind it. Sony. Philips. Matsushita. Why settle for the cheapest way to go when we are talking about high-definition? Isn't the point to have the best image possible?
HD-DVD has more support, as it has the backing of the entire DVD forum. Blu-Ray is backed by 9 companies.
The thing that pretty much won it for HD-DVD is the fact it is backwords compatible, and wont hardly cost much to manufacture. I think we will have a beta vs vhs battle on our hands. The storage difference is only 10GB on a double sided disk (40GB vs 50GB). And a 40 GB disk could hold a 4 hour movie in HD format (19mbps), with a bit of space to spare for extras. But, if we had a normal movie (2 hours or less), you have plenty of space for the extars on that same disk. So there is no worry of over compression, because at full bitrate, on a hd-dvd, you could fit a 4 hour movie.
Based on the decision, all HD-DVD players will have to support three different types of video encoding -- MPEG-2 (the one that current DVD-Video discs and digital TV use), H.264 (latest standardized video encoding layer of MPEG-4) and VC-9 (the video technology behind the Windows Media 9 format).
Decision is obviously a huge boost to Microsoft's efforts to get into big boys' movie business. DVD Forum also approved a near-ready specs for rewritable HD-DVD discs -- it has previously already approved specs for read-only discs.
HD-DVD is based on blue-laser technology and competes directly against the other blue-laser optical technology, Blu-Ray. Blu-Ray is supported by virtually all the consumer electronics companies and there are already Blu-Ray discs and devices available in Japanese markets so the fight over the next generation of optical storage format is only beginning...
So again, why would HD-DVD cost less than Blue-Ray? Is it the media not the components? It seems that HD-DVD is backed by a NEC and Toshiba while Blu-Ray is backed by virtually every other electronics manufacturer in the industry. I suppose it's the movie studio's support that will decide its fate. I don't know where they stand.
I guess we are way off topic now.
Logic Pro isn't even shipping yet. An order the day it was announced they say will ship Next week. So, I sure hope they don't upgrade yet, because they aren't even shipping Logic Pro 6 yet.
Logic Pro is shipping. Tbere are plenty of people on Sonikmatter who have it running now. Not much changes other than access to the full line of plugins.
Ahhhh yes MS was able to weasle their way in. Now all they have to do is buy the rights to distribute a large current release in VC-9 and look for a way to "embrace and extend" the wheels are turning.
As for Blu-Ray I was happy with Blu-Ray until they made it clear that MPEG2 would be the only compression codec allowed. MPEG2 has served us nicely but h.264 and VC-9 are superior and more efficient. Thus BR "requires" another 10GB of space to keep up with the efficiency of h.264 and VC-9. The ideal situation would be the have BR hardware and VC-9 or h.264 support. That would most likely give us 5 freakin' hrs of HDTV!!!
That would most likely give us 5 freakin' hrs of HDTV!!!
::: face twists up into a ball of shock and awe ::: Holy Jesus, whoever thought the day would come!
8)
The third smiley from the left on the bottom . . .does AI officially support underage smoking? ::: waves finger ::: Naughty, naughty!
8)
Originally posted by TWinbrook46636
Who makes up the DVD forum? I know there are only a few supporters of HD-DVD format itself. Originally HD-DVD was to use a red laser and more compression as opposed to Blu-Ray which uses a blue laser for more storage capacity. Now it seems HD-DVD will also use a blue laser so where is this cost savings now?
The DVD forum is made up of 220 companies. Blu-Ray is backed by, I believe, 12. So the "support" argument is moot. If what you were getting at is that HD-DVD (originally called AOD) was proposed by 2 companies, then yes that is true. But now that it was chosen by the DVD forum, and it is the HD-DVD standard, it is backed by the whole forum.
So again, why would HD-DVD cost less than Blue-Ray? Is it the media not the components?
It costs less because aproximatly 80% of existing DVD houses can make HD-DVD disk with their existing equipment. The same can't be said for Blu-Ray.
It seems that HD-DVD is backed by a NEC and Toshiba while Blu-Ray is backed by virtually every other electronics manufacturer in the industry.
HD-DVD is the OFFICAL standard adopted by the DVD forum. So it is "backed" by 220 companies. AOD (which was the proposition name for what is now known as HD-DVD) was proposed by NEC and Toshiba. Blu-Ray was proposed and now backed by 11 companies (Dell, HP, Hitachi, LG Electronics, Matsushita, Pioneer Corporation, Royal Philips Electronics, Samsung, Sharp Corporation, Sony, and Thomson Multimedia). So if you are looking at "backing" then HD-DVD wins. But...
I suppose it's the movie studio's support that will decide its fate. I don't know where they stand.
This whole thing will be another Betamax vs VHS (not sure if you were old enough to remember that). Basicly it is up to the consumers to see what they choose. Which ever gets to market first, and at resonable prices will win. Last I read Blu-Ray still hasn't set an offical disk specification (yea I know, Sony has produced some units already, but it isn't running off the offical disk spec just yet, rather what Sony feels the final spec will be).
I think a big thing will be that HD-DVD playes are backwords compatible with existing DVDs. So a consumer can upgrade to HD-DVD, and still play all their old disks. Blu-Ray drives wont be able to offer this feature. That is, unless they include a second optical pickup, which would greatly increase the cost, as that is the most expensive piece in one of these devices.
Link
Originally posted by kupan787
This whole thing will be another Betamax vs VHS (not sure if you were old enough to remember that).
Yeap, I was there, We had both in my house. When you went to the video store you might rent 5 new releases and 3 were BETA and 2 VHS because almost no one had BETA around me.
The PRO's just recently finally gave up BETA. (TV Broadcast)
I suspect the fight will be more in Japan than the US.
Originally posted by vinney57
I would like to see:
Better integration of the IO with other Apple software, not just FCP (DVDSP, Logic, Shake etc.)
A hardware control surface for FCP.
A cheap HiDef monitor solution (the fabled 30" LCD?)
A price cut for Shake (or Shake 'lite'?)
Amen. "Shake Express" would be especially cool. Although they'd probably lose After Effects for Mac eventually.
Originally posted by kupan787
HD-DVD is the OFFICAL standard adopted by the DVD forum. So it is "backed" by 220 companies. AOD (which was the proposition name for what is now known as HD-DVD) was proposed by NEC and Toshiba. Blu-Ray was proposed and now backed by 11 companies (Dell, HP, Hitachi, LG Electronics, Matsushita, Pioneer Corporation, Royal Philips Electronics, Samsung, Sharp Corporation, Sony, and Thomson Multimedia). So if you are looking at "backing" then HD-DVD wins. But...
Well, those 11 companies that have backed Blu-Ray represent pretty much every major manufacturer. Look at that list! Hitachi. Panasonic. Pioneer. Philips. Sony. I suppose most of the 220 companies that have backed HD-DVD are those we may never have heard of. Probably lots of computer drive manufacturers and low-end DVD manufacturers like Apex? While both are HD it seems that Blu-Ray is built from the ground up to be a new HD format while HD-DVD is an extention of DVD shades of Windows 3.1/95/98 etc. I'm not sure I like the fact that Blu-Ray uses MPEG2 though. What is better, MPEG2 at 36mbits or MPEG4 at 19mbits? I already think DVD is garbage.
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...04/report.html
It sounds like the battle is far from over. Blu-Ray has better support, HD-DVD has more support. I guess we'll have to wait to see which has better picture quality. That doesn't mean anything in terms of which one will win however. At the time, Beta was better than VHS but it lost out. It's going to be a mess.
this would be huge to the industery, and with a codec like that it could have far reachng effects, think how many more digital cable channels could fit into a pipe requiering <350k per feed?
Originally posted by Messiahtosh
Quicktime 7 enabled iPods...8)
muwahahahahahahahaha.....
Originally posted by onlyafterdark
muwahahahahahahahaha.....
:::Looks around, holds pinky finger up to lips:::[Dr.Evil Voice]What, what, what?[/Dr. Evil Voice] (It has to come back every now and again)
Amen. "Shake Express" would be especially cool. Although they'd probably lose After Effects for Mac eventually
And the problem with this is where?
I would like to see After Effects die. But then we would need a photoshop killer as well...
Quicktime is the humble home to some of the messiest legacy code in Mac OS X. Having got such an early start in multi-media, Apple is now dealing with architectural drift. This phenomenon is common for pioneering technologies. If they had entered the game later, then perhaps the API would be cleaner and more managable at this point. Early entrance into a heavily standards-dependent market can give you a headstart but... in a slower vehicle.
The time for a major QT overhaul has come. Just as OS9 was becoming an unmanagle heap of tangled interdependancies, so too is quicktime.
Yep... this would be a very NAB like announcment. Yet somehow, I don't think it's ready yet.
Originally posted by tak1108
And the problem with this is where?
I would like to see After Effects die. But then we would need a photoshop killer as well...
That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard. After Effects and Shake share some of the same tools, but they both also have features not represented by the other.
And the interoperbility between Photoshop and After Effects offers solutions for certain markets (2D animation for one) that work better and cheaper than many other software products or product combinations.
Why do you want to have only Apple software? Do you really want companies to stop developing for the Mac?