I wouldn't say my logic is warped. You're building your cost premise based on some mythical majority that Blu Ray will have. I'm not convinced that EVERY PS3 sale equals an enthusiastic movie purchaser. The PS2 had a minimal effect on DVD sales despite the fact that it was a rather inexpensive yet poor performing player. What Webmail is pointing out is the bleeding that Sony is willing to do for their partners to succeed.
I'm well aware of the codecs being used for both platforms, my point is that overall data capacity isn't quite the issue that people are making it and that it's ironic that Sony is going to use MPEG2 for initial releases(possibly)
Hey man Redmond's a nice place minus Bill LOL. Don't worry man it's all good and respectful debate going on here.
Hey man the endgame is getting good HD into folks home. As much as I hate Comcast I'm in awe everytime I see the HD pic on my buddies tube. It's like someone pumped the color and clarity up 10 fold.
It sounds similar to what Apple supports in DVD Studio Pro. From their DVDSP page:
"Showcase your HD content with integrated, scalable H.264 encoding that allows you to fit HD content on DVDs using existing drives and existing media."
That is like the opposite of what Blu-Ray is launching with, using the new disc format and sticking with the old codec.
On the other hand, Apple is using existing disc technology and an advanced codec to deliver HD on today's media. This is more akin to HD-DVD, which must use a advanced codec since disc space is more of a premium.
Of course you could fill a multi layer Blu-Ray disc with loads of H264 content, but nobody will do this.
Does Apple cut you a break when their cost go up? If memory serves me correct they indeed raised prices when their component cost rose
Nice that you provide an example of a company with a minority of market share so that it works with your warped logic. When you get down to the facts, BDA isn't just Sony. It is the MAJORITY of consumer electronic companies that make up the MAJORITY of the market. Economies of scale will dictate that no matter what HD-DVD will come out with cost wise for discs, Blu-Ray will undercut them because the majority of the market can afford to do so (see webmails post). Again they will recoup their costs. So again I'll say cost for the manufacturer in this instance is a non-issue. However, if you are still real concerned about how much the manufacturers save and thinking it will lead to higher Blu-Ray disc costs, so be it. We'll just have to see won't we.
I think it make far more sense to keep the data structure and numerical aperture closer to RL DVD and utilize the Advanced Codecs for your improvement gains. However let us compare Blu Ray. Sony gives us a new format that
1. Initially required a Caddy
2. Requires special spincoat or film to prevent scratches from destroying disc.
3. Requires a more expensive lens assembly for backwards compatibility.
For starters, Blu-Ray will be able to utilize the same advanced codects as HD-DVD (H.264 and VC1). As far as "improvement gains" are concerned, I'm not sure what you mean. "Improvement gains" as in more efficiently using disk space, both will, so HD-DVD has nothing better to offer. If you mean "improvement gains" by claiming that MGEG4 is better than MPEG2 from a codec standpoint, I think that is really still up to debate. Or, if by "improvement gains" you mean cost again, well I think I covered that in the initial paragraph, it is a non-issue.
Also,
1. Blu-Ray doesn't require a caddy now, welcome to the present. This point is irrevalent.
2. You're darn right because there is a lot more data as stake and it is about time the companies (Blu-Ray's are)do something about scratches and potential damage. HD-DVD was doing what concerning this?...Oh yeah they weren't. Good luck with your data on HD-DVD.
3. You are saying that it requires a more expensive lens assembly, but I have yet to see any article proving that that is fact. Let's just say, I'm not taking your word for it Redmond boy. Relax, I'm joking here, not about proof, but about the Redmond boy comment.
Think about it. BD-ROM has a .85 NA HD DVD has .65. Thus the laser on BD-ROM is closer to the surface. Now imagine what the laser assembly must look like. You have the blue diode protruding closer to the surface for BD and the red diode further back. Red diodes were recently added via engineering. HD DVD has had blue/red diodes in the same assembly by design from day one.
Again who cares if HD-DVD had red diodes since day one. Does that make them better now in the present? Nope, because Blu-Ray has backward compatibility too. I'm not disputing the fact that the fierce competion between the two formats have improved both specs on both sides, but when you look at the present, Blu-Ray is the better format.
Ok you'd get laughed at saying that over at AVS. Spincoats are cheaper but blue laser tolerances are high enough that spincoats cause the edges to be thicker with coating and this causes playback issues. Film can be applied evenly across the surface but this cost more than spincoats naturally. Now ask yourself this. CD pressing plants have to yield on cycle. Thus if I'm pressing DVDs that simply require stamping and bonding of the two .6 mm plastic halves how is BD-ROM going to be the same to produce when it requires a spincoar or Film application? Yes boys and girls the correct answer is the disc takes longer which increases costs.
Pahhhhhdon meeeeeeee, I guess we here at AppleInsider just aren't up to snuff. Or we don't get spoonfed information from Microsofties over at AVS, depending on you perception. To counter, economies of scale, and improvements in developmental facilities, easy. Read this article...
"Having multiple compnies involved with each step has contributed to process imprvements and cost efficiencies that bring the long-term cost of manufacturing BD-ROM discs in line with current DVD replication costs."
I guess I'll be the one laughing when Blu-Ray undercuts HD-DVD and HD-DVD meets its inevitable demise.
Dude Durabis was "scratched" months ago due to cost. It works but it's too expensive to apply. TDK will use it for their Recordable discs but I haven't read about one studio planning to use it for pre-recorded content.
Dude! Dude. Duuuuude. Durabis hasn't been scratched due to cost. Looky here, huuh, my gosh what is the date on this article? Speak of the devil, December 13th, 2005...
Seriously, the above is really a good article. Check it out everyone. Besides I didn't claim that Durabis will be used by all movie studios, I said either Durabis or some sort other "coating equivalent." Furthermore, I haven't seen any articles stating that they (studios) weren't using Durabis because of costs either. So, who knows, they (studios) still maybe planning on using it.
2. I think this is open to debate still
3. A solution in seach of a problem.
4. Not in todays specification. DVD had a lot of features that never got used (automatic pan and scan) Sometimes the future ain't what it used to be. I'm not banking on pipe dreams for a format.
5. See the below pdf. Page 36
2. What is there to debate? Blu-Ray will be offering extra coating protection of some kind and HD-DVD will be offering nothing. Your HD-DVD will scratch just as easily as a current DVD. End of Story.
3. This is debatable. As I for one like consolidation and would love to see the whole Matrix and Star Wars Trilogies on one disc. Most likely when the 100GB discs come out.
4. Speaking of 100GB discs that are most certainly not a "pipe dream"...
Notice in the article, it states that they have "working prototypes." Notice the date on this article, it was back in June. I think they are a lot farther than most people realize to making 100GB discs a reality quite soon.
5. Your link didn't work for me. As far as the 1080i resolution issue with HD-DVD, I've posted two articles in this thread and of the many articles related to this, I've read saying HD-DVD will only have 1080i resolution in their players. I believe one of them was from C\\Net not to long ago. Now, if they've since changed that, that would be news to me. So, in this case there just must be multiple slopply writers out there printing the exact same information, right?
Anyhow, the pipe dream is really the chances of HD-DVD winning in this format war. Right now, as another poster put it, Blu-Ray is a juggernaut. And, I'm afraid for your sake HD-DVD will be that flattened contender when the train (Blu-Ray) comes through.
Come on guys. It looks like the first Columbia/Tristar movies will be MPEG2 Single Layer. I've said this before and I'll say it again. Blu Ray fans are fans because of the the "dream" that Sony has laid out in front of you. They came out with guns blazing talking about 4 layer discs and 200GB discs and you all jumped hook line and sinker in the standard geek tradition. Reality is the tolerances requirements will jump exponentially with each new layer so if 50GB discs are tough today a 4 layer disc is a ways off. Note that sometimes it makes financial sense to ship two or four 50GB sics in lieu of a 100GB or 200GB discs. We see this today with DVD. Rarely are multi disc sets shipped on DVD-18.
Blu Ray is rife with compromises and if HD DVD wasn't a competitor you'd have even less. Win lose or draw HD DVD has been good for everyone.
i agree with you 100 percent.
it still baffles me that people always bite into sony and their bullshit.
how many fucking times have they done this?
i have to say they are really good at it.
they hype hype hype and promise the world but rarely deliver.
Well that'd be a great argument if the majority of the consumer electronics market wasn't backing solely Blu-Ray. They obviously see something of worth within the technology themselves that isn't in HD-DVD. Not all of them have royalty money to gain.
Hey man the endgame is getting good HD into folks home. As much as I hate Comcast I'm in awe everytime I see the HD pic on my buddies tube. It's like someone pumped the color and clarity up 10 fold.
I think you just explained why you US folk are so very excited about HDTV - analogue NTSC really is very poor. I wonder if Europe will be so keen with digital PAL/SECAM being very clear already.
Will 720p look that much better than 625? I'll let you know, I just bought my girlfriend a 27" HDTV.
Decisions about encoding are likely cost driven. Most production houses will have equipment to make a very nice MPEG2 HD transfer, so they'll use it. As we move along, we'll see MPEG4/H.264 encoded material -- whole seasons on one or two discs, more extras/special features and all that. None of it matters from an end-user perspective, so long as you drop the disc in the player, and it plays. And it also doesn't matter whether that disc is HD-DVD or Blueray, so long as the format you buy is the one that ends up being supported.
As I've written before, I don't care who wins, so long as the victory is quick and decisive. One thing's for certain, I won't buy either an HD-DVD or Blueray player untill one of the combatants is standing triumphantly over bloody carcass of the other.
It looks like that victor will be Blueray. More manufacturers are on side, (players, recorders, video cams), good studio support, PS3, superior spec (even if it tops out at just 2 layers). However, it could just as easily be HD-DVD for all I care.
Please come back to this thread when you have something constructive to say about the topic at hand.
Hmurchison and I are cool. We like to have constructive banter back and forth. 8) Hmurchison has a lot of spunk and makes a lot of good points. However, I just happen to disagree with him on a lot of those points regarding this topic.
So, I don't know if you're mad because I had a counter to most of his points, or if you didn't like the delivery. In any case, you'll have to deal with it.
P.S. Hmurchison, I too like Washington. I have two sisters living in Seattle. Just thought I'd give you a hard time living near Bill and all. One of them works for Fox Sports Northwest as the Sports anchor.
Another opinion while I'm rambling, I feel it good from a consolidation perspective that Blu-Ray can provide extras and possibly sequels on one disc so that you don't have to get up, take the disc out, put another one in. I mean, how annoying is that. If all were on one disc, you pop it in and you have everything you need. No need to pop in an extra bonus disc later or anything.
Also, even if studios don't use the Durabis protection on their movie discs, we as consumers could still take advantage of such protection by utilizing managed copy onto a Durabis protected disc, making our source disc just that--a source disc and not the everyday use disc.
Color me impressed if Panasonic/Matshushita really does have the process for 50GB discs down.
I'll have both formats anyways. I'm usually never an early adopter but I have no problem buying into both formats as soon as I can. With ebay and craigslist anything you don't want is quickly sold off.
My eventual goal would be to have a kickarse HTPC. Sad thing is that that almost means having an Apple could be an issue.
2. What is there to debate? Blu-Ray will be offering extra coating protection of some kind and HD-DVD will be offering nothing. Your HD-DVD will scratch just as easily as a current DVD. End of Story.
What is there to debate? End of story?
Blu-Ray without a protection coating is far more susceptible to error-producing damage than HD-DVD, hence the need for the protection. The unanswered question here is this: Once a protective layer is applied, how much better off is Blu-Ray than HD-DVD? Close but still not as good? Equal? Better?
You're implying that Blu-Ray's protective coating will automatically make Blu-Ray more durable than HD-DVD, but I see no reason to suppose that's true. The important measure of durability here is not how much physical scratching actually occurs, but what effect that scratching has on the ability of a playback device to accurately retrieve data.
If the same rough treatment leaves an HD-DVD moderately scratched, and a Blu-Ray disc lightly scratched, but the HD-DVD still plays back better through its moderate scratching than the Blu-Ray disc does through its light scratching, that would hardly be a win for Blu-Ray in my book.
That is like the opposite of what Blu-Ray is launching with, using the new disc format and sticking with the old codec.
On the other hand, Apple is using existing disc technology and an advanced codec to deliver HD on today's media. This is more akin to HD-DVD, which must use a advanced codec since disc space is more of a premium.
Of course you could fill a multi layer Blu-Ray disc with loads of H264 content, but nobody will do this.
It's up to the studios what codec they want to use. Sony will use MPEG2 at least initially. Others will use MPEG4. It depends on what they're comfortable with.
What Apple is using now is a way of storing HD content on existing media until Blu-Ray arrives. It's closer to WMV-HD than anything else. You will see Blu-Ray drives in Macs in 2006.
It still baffles me that people always bite into sony and their bullshit.
You mean Sony and virtually every major manufacturer save Toshiba then. This isn't some niche format like Memory Stick were talking about here. It is an industry standard like the CD (which was developed by Sony and Philips by the way) so I fail to see the logic. No one is arguing that Sony has done some stupid things but Blu-Ray is not one of them.
I was "mad" because you were acting like a cock. I thought I was pretty clear.
Obviously, you thought so too, or you wouldn't have changed your tone in your subsequent post.
Ahh, did I hurt your feelings? Allow me to put the kiddy gloves on for you then.
I believe I made myself perfectly clear as well regarding your inablility to contribute to the topic at hand. Also, since when did you become an expert in gauging tone within a post or telling me what I think. I personally believe in content communication, ever hear of it? It means I say what I mean and I mean what I say. In other words I don't pay much attention to "tone" which is virtually impossible to gauge correctly when communicating over a medium in which you type.
So when your through behaving like a chonch, come debate on the topic for which I doubt you have anything to contribute to; either because you don't have any points of your own, or because you just wish to verbally spar with someone. You tell me, which is it? Or is there some other reason you refuse to talk on topic? Then do it, and leave the clarity of "tone" for those whom you speak to face to face. In fact, please contribute something to the topic of the thread, I really encourage it.
On ANOTHER note, to let shetline know where I'm coming from from a durability perspsective, the simple fact is that HD-DVD will be using the same protective measures currently used in DVD. Quite frankly, DVDs scratch like hell, and to have a HD-DVD with a higer density of data = more damage from a simple scratch.
I pesonally think Blu-Ray will be more durable in that I've seen the demos (for Durabis) where they've applied a steel wool pad to the disc, smashed the disc into dirt, applied ink to the disc, and put multiple fingerprints all over. Yet, the disc still played flawlessly. My challenge to you then, is to go ahead and give that a try to a regular DVD now since that will be the protection in and HD-DVD and you get back with me on how well it plays. The answer will be reason of enough to "suppose that's true." Again, I can't speak for those Blu-Ray discs that will be using coating equivalents to Durabis, but for those that will use Durabis, they are quite impressive. By the way, please read the link I posted on TDKs Durabis2 discs. This article should give you an idea of the durabliliy of the new Durabis discs and hopefully their coating equivalents from other vendors.
That would make for a great commercial. Two babies abusing two different discs. At the end of the commercial, the discs are put into different players, where one plays and the other doesn't. It would resonate with a lot of parents.
The lengths at which Microsoft will go to get their proprietary iHD technology onto the next generation HD format...who knows. Or is this just a ploy from HP to get a better deal from the BDA? Don't know, but I think HP is bluffing. We'll see, just hope there is a winner...and soon.
I don't think HP is bluffing. They have one of the more complete Media Centre lineups in the industry. I wondered why they were hyping Blu Ray in the first place considering their consumer line relies heavily on MS MCE XP.
iHD makes sense to me. I don't think BD-Java is bad but Java is a fairly large class and I think that if iHD, which was co-developed with Disney, beat out Flash, Java and all other comers then it must be a good tech. In fact Apple itself voted for iHD. Alas iHD lost the total vote.
I'm thinking that Dell will be the next computer company to slide on over and dip their toes in the HD DVD pool.
I don't think HP's new stance makes that much of a difference yet. Time will tell.
iHD makes sense to me. I don't think BD-Java is bad but Java is a fairly large class and I think that if iHD, which was co-developed with Disney, beat out Flash, Java and all other comers then it must be a good tech. In fact Apple itself voted for iHD. Alas iHD lost the total vote.
Which vote? I'm confused. First you mentioned that iHD beat out Flash, Java, and all other comers (according to whom?), in some vote where even Apple voted pro iHD (when?), but then in the very next sentence you mention that iHD lost the total vote. So, my questions would be, what vote in what forum? And, how do you supposedly beat other technologies and then lose the total vote? Clarification would be greatly appreciated.
Personally, I just think Microsoft's iHD is simply a technology they want revenue from on the next HD format, they've built it into their upcoming OS, Vista, and it is their way of
1) Trying to monopolize yet another market segment, that is, the entertainment segment.
2) Trying to stick it to Sony with the PS3 and Sun Microsystems with Java.
Other questions I have and maybe someone here can explain stems from this comment from HP's new stance...
"HP, which had asked in October that Blu-ray support iHD, said that technology would have lower development costs, since Microsoft is building it into the next version of the Windows operating system."
How so? Lower development costs to who? Microsoft? Because they would have to bundle their OS with Java Runtime Environment(which is a free download off of the Internet) but maybe just maybe have to pay Sun Microsystems to have it bundled? Or is it they, Microsoft, just don't want Java to be on their next OS, thus representing competing software? Just curious, how will iHD garner less developmental costs? Or, is it because Microsoft decided to build iHD in their next OS, they would have to scrap it, and start over with Sun's Java implementation to support Blu-Ray, thus increasing their, Microsoft's, developmental costs?
And finally, another question. Blu-Ray has planned to implement Java and HP was fine with that for a couple of years now. In fact they have been exclusively pro Blu-Ray up until this point claiming dual support. So why, when Microsoft finally decides to complain about Blu-Ray because of false information about their capacity (they claimed 50 GB Blu-Ray discs weren't a reality when if fact they are), features (claiming they didn't have hybrid discs which Blu-Ray does and claiming they wouldn't support Mandatory Managed Copy when Blu_Ray does support it but at the time hadn't committed either way), and true information regarding that they won't support iHD for interactivity on the disc, does HP all of a sudden request support for iHD? What leverage does Microsoft have on HP that would force them to support iHD. If Microsoft is not forcing HP to support iHD, then why all of a sudden the change in stance when Blu-Ray hasn't been supporting iHD for years now? Why the change in stance only after Microsoft's complaints?
I don't know if getting those answers is possible but I think HP perhaps took a step back and looked at their course and what their needs require and realized that MMC and iHD are functions that a computer company can profit from. Not to say you can't profit from BD-Java but it's obvious that Microsoft is simply not going to support Java as a standard install in Vista yet the tech to run iHD will be there in time.
As for the vote the BDA just as the DVD Forum have committe votes to establish parameters of the spec. BD-Java did in fact win however Disney and Apple were two iHD proponents. I think that a computer company realizes the ramifications of a programming language like Java versus a static markup language like XML more so than a strictly CE company that works with firmware mainly.
Blu Ray has improved significantly because of HD DVD and vice versa.
Comments
I wouldn't say my logic is warped. You're building your cost premise based on some mythical majority that Blu Ray will have. I'm not convinced that EVERY PS3 sale equals an enthusiastic movie purchaser. The PS2 had a minimal effect on DVD sales despite the fact that it was a rather inexpensive yet poor performing player. What Webmail is pointing out is the bleeding that Sony is willing to do for their partners to succeed.
I'm well aware of the codecs being used for both platforms, my point is that overall data capacity isn't quite the issue that people are making it and that it's ironic that Sony is going to use MPEG2 for initial releases(possibly)
Hey man Redmond's a nice place minus Bill LOL. Don't worry man it's all good and respectful debate going on here.
Hey man the endgame is getting good HD into folks home. As much as I hate Comcast I'm in awe everytime I see the HD pic on my buddies tube. It's like someone pumped the color and clarity up 10 fold.
Originally posted by Kolchak
It sounds similar to what Apple supports in DVD Studio Pro. From their DVDSP page:
"Showcase your HD content with integrated, scalable H.264 encoding that allows you to fit HD content on DVDs using existing drives and existing media."
That is like the opposite of what Blu-Ray is launching with, using the new disc format and sticking with the old codec.
On the other hand, Apple is using existing disc technology and an advanced codec to deliver HD on today's media. This is more akin to HD-DVD, which must use a advanced codec since disc space is more of a premium.
Of course you could fill a multi layer Blu-Ray disc with loads of H264 content, but nobody will do this.
Originally posted by marzetta7
Does Apple cut you a break when their cost go up? If memory serves me correct they indeed raised prices when their component cost rose
Nice that you provide an example of a company with a minority of market share so that it works with your warped logic. When you get down to the facts, BDA isn't just Sony. It is the MAJORITY of consumer electronic companies that make up the MAJORITY of the market. Economies of scale will dictate that no matter what HD-DVD will come out with cost wise for discs, Blu-Ray will undercut them because the majority of the market can afford to do so (see webmails post). Again they will recoup their costs. So again I'll say cost for the manufacturer in this instance is a non-issue. However, if you are still real concerned about how much the manufacturers save and thinking it will lead to higher Blu-Ray disc costs, so be it. We'll just have to see won't we.
I think it make far more sense to keep the data structure and numerical aperture closer to RL DVD and utilize the Advanced Codecs for your improvement gains. However let us compare Blu Ray. Sony gives us a new format that
1. Initially required a Caddy
2. Requires special spincoat or film to prevent scratches from destroying disc.
3. Requires a more expensive lens assembly for backwards compatibility.
For starters, Blu-Ray will be able to utilize the same advanced codects as HD-DVD (H.264 and VC1). As far as "improvement gains" are concerned, I'm not sure what you mean. "Improvement gains" as in more efficiently using disk space, both will, so HD-DVD has nothing better to offer. If you mean "improvement gains" by claiming that MGEG4 is better than MPEG2 from a codec standpoint, I think that is really still up to debate. Or, if by "improvement gains" you mean cost again, well I think I covered that in the initial paragraph, it is a non-issue.
Also,
1. Blu-Ray doesn't require a caddy now, welcome to the present. This point is irrevalent.
2. You're darn right because there is a lot more data as stake and it is about time the companies (Blu-Ray's are)do something about scratches and potential damage. HD-DVD was doing what concerning this?...Oh yeah they weren't. Good luck with your data on HD-DVD.
3. You are saying that it requires a more expensive lens assembly, but I have yet to see any article proving that that is fact. Let's just say, I'm not taking your word for it Redmond boy.
Think about it. BD-ROM has a .85 NA HD DVD has .65. Thus the laser on BD-ROM is closer to the surface. Now imagine what the laser assembly must look like. You have the blue diode protruding closer to the surface for BD and the red diode further back. Red diodes were recently added via engineering. HD DVD has had blue/red diodes in the same assembly by design from day one.
Again who cares if HD-DVD had red diodes since day one. Does that make them better now in the present? Nope, because Blu-Ray has backward compatibility too. I'm not disputing the fact that the fierce competion between the two formats have improved both specs on both sides, but when you look at the present, Blu-Ray is the better format.
Ok you'd get laughed at saying that over at AVS. Spincoats are cheaper but blue laser tolerances are high enough that spincoats cause the edges to be thicker with coating and this causes playback issues. Film can be applied evenly across the surface but this cost more than spincoats naturally. Now ask yourself this. CD pressing plants have to yield on cycle. Thus if I'm pressing DVDs that simply require stamping and bonding of the two .6 mm plastic halves how is BD-ROM going to be the same to produce when it requires a spincoar or Film application? Yes boys and girls the correct answer is the disc takes longer which increases costs.
Pahhhhhdon meeeeeeee, I guess we here at AppleInsider just aren't up to snuff. Or we don't get spoonfed information from Microsofties over at AVS, depending on you perception. To counter, economies of scale, and improvements in developmental facilities, easy. Read this article...
http://www.blu-raydisc.com/assets/do...0525-12993.pdf
Note the first paragraph...
"Having multiple compnies involved with each step has contributed to process imprvements and cost efficiencies that bring the long-term cost of manufacturing BD-ROM discs in line with current DVD replication costs."
I guess I'll be the one laughing when Blu-Ray undercuts HD-DVD and HD-DVD meets its inevitable demise.
Dude Durabis was "scratched" months ago due to cost. It works but it's too expensive to apply. TDK will use it for their Recordable discs but I haven't read about one studio planning to use it for pre-recorded content.
Dude! Dude. Duuuuude. Durabis hasn't been scratched due to cost. Looky here, huuh, my gosh what is the date on this article? Speak of the devil, December 13th, 2005...
http://www.tdk.co.jp/teaah01/aah17200.htm
Seriously, the above is really a good article. Check it out everyone. Besides I didn't claim that Durabis will be used by all movie studios, I said either Durabis or some sort other "coating equivalent." Furthermore, I haven't seen any articles stating that they (studios) weren't using Durabis because of costs either. So, who knows, they (studios) still maybe planning on using it.
2. I think this is open to debate still
3. A solution in seach of a problem.
4. Not in todays specification. DVD had a lot of features that never got used (automatic pan and scan) Sometimes the future ain't what it used to be. I'm not banking on pipe dreams for a format.
5. See the below pdf. Page 36
2. What is there to debate? Blu-Ray will be offering extra coating protection of some kind and HD-DVD will be offering nothing. Your HD-DVD will scratch just as easily as a current DVD. End of Story.
3. This is debatable. As I for one like consolidation and would love to see the whole Matrix and Star Wars Trilogies on one disc. Most likely when the 100GB discs come out.
4. Speaking of 100GB discs that are most certainly not a "pipe dream"...
http://www.tdk.com/tecpress/20050606_100gbluelaser.html
Notice in the article, it states that they have "working prototypes." Notice the date on this article, it was back in June. I think they are a lot farther than most people realize to making 100GB discs a reality quite soon.
5. Your link didn't work for me. As far as the 1080i resolution issue with HD-DVD, I've posted two articles in this thread and of the many articles related to this, I've read saying HD-DVD will only have 1080i resolution in their players. I believe one of them was from C\\Net not to long ago. Now, if they've since changed that, that would be news to me. So, in this case there just must be multiple slopply writers out there printing the exact same information, right?
Anyhow, the pipe dream is really the chances of HD-DVD winning in this format war. Right now, as another poster put it, Blu-Ray is a juggernaut. And, I'm afraid for your sake HD-DVD will be that flattened contender when the train (Blu-Ray) comes through.
Why are you such a cock?
Originally posted by hmurchison
Come on guys. It looks like the first Columbia/Tristar movies will be MPEG2 Single Layer. I've said this before and I'll say it again. Blu Ray fans are fans because of the the "dream" that Sony has laid out in front of you. They came out with guns blazing talking about 4 layer discs and 200GB discs and you all jumped hook line and sinker in the standard geek tradition. Reality is the tolerances requirements will jump exponentially with each new layer so if 50GB discs are tough today a 4 layer disc is a ways off. Note that sometimes it makes financial sense to ship two or four 50GB sics in lieu of a 100GB or 200GB discs. We see this today with DVD. Rarely are multi disc sets shipped on DVD-18.
Blu Ray is rife with compromises and if HD DVD wasn't a competitor you'd have even less. Win lose or draw HD DVD has been good for everyone.
i agree with you 100 percent.
it still baffles me that people always bite into sony and their bullshit.
how many fucking times have they done this?
i have to say they are really good at it.
they hype hype hype and promise the world but rarely deliver.
still, no one catches on?
boggles my mind.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Hey man the endgame is getting good HD into folks home. As much as I hate Comcast I'm in awe everytime I see the HD pic on my buddies tube. It's like someone pumped the color and clarity up 10 fold.
I think you just explained why you US folk are so very excited about HDTV - analogue NTSC really is very poor. I wonder if Europe will be so keen with digital PAL/SECAM being very clear already.
Will 720p look that much better than 625? I'll let you know, I just bought my girlfriend a 27" HDTV.
As I've written before, I don't care who wins, so long as the victory is quick and decisive. One thing's for certain, I won't buy either an HD-DVD or Blueray player untill one of the combatants is standing triumphantly over bloody carcass of the other.
It looks like that victor will be Blueray. More manufacturers are on side, (players, recorders, video cams), good studio support, PS3, superior spec (even if it tops out at just 2 layers). However, it could just as easily be HD-DVD for all I care.
Originally posted by wilco
Why are you such a cock?
Please come back to this thread when you have something constructive to say about the topic at hand.
Hmurchison and I are cool. We like to have constructive banter back and forth. 8) Hmurchison has a lot of spunk and makes a lot of good points. However, I just happen to disagree with him on a lot of those points regarding this topic.
So, I don't know if you're mad because I had a counter to most of his points, or if you didn't like the delivery. In any case, you'll have to deal with it.
P.S. Hmurchison, I too like Washington. I have two sisters living in Seattle. Just thought I'd give you a hard time living near Bill and all.
Another opinion while I'm rambling, I feel it good from a consolidation perspective that Blu-Ray can provide extras and possibly sequels on one disc so that you don't have to get up, take the disc out, put another one in. I mean, how annoying is that. If all were on one disc, you pop it in and you have everything you need. No need to pop in an extra bonus disc later or anything.
Also, even if studios don't use the Durabis protection on their movie discs, we as consumers could still take advantage of such protection by utilizing managed copy onto a Durabis protected disc, making our source disc just that--a source disc and not the everyday use disc.
Anyhow, just some thoughts.
I'll have both formats anyways. I'm usually never an early adopter but I have no problem buying into both formats as soon as I can. With ebay and craigslist anything you don't want is quickly sold off.
My eventual goal would be to have a kickarse HTPC. Sad thing is that that almost means having an Apple could be an issue.
Originally posted by marzetta7
So, I don't know if you're mad because I had a counter to most of his points, or if you didn't like the delivery.
I was "mad" because you were acting like a cock. I thought I was pretty clear.
Obviously, you thought so too, or you wouldn't have changed your tone in your subsequent post.
Originally posted by marzetta7
2. What is there to debate? Blu-Ray will be offering extra coating protection of some kind and HD-DVD will be offering nothing. Your HD-DVD will scratch just as easily as a current DVD. End of Story.
What is there to debate? End of story?
Blu-Ray without a protection coating is far more susceptible to error-producing damage than HD-DVD, hence the need for the protection. The unanswered question here is this: Once a protective layer is applied, how much better off is Blu-Ray than HD-DVD? Close but still not as good? Equal? Better?
You're implying that Blu-Ray's protective coating will automatically make Blu-Ray more durable than HD-DVD, but I see no reason to suppose that's true. The important measure of durability here is not how much physical scratching actually occurs, but what effect that scratching has on the ability of a playback device to accurately retrieve data.
If the same rough treatment leaves an HD-DVD moderately scratched, and a Blu-Ray disc lightly scratched, but the HD-DVD still plays back better through its moderate scratching than the Blu-Ray disc does through its light scratching, that would hardly be a win for Blu-Ray in my book.
Originally posted by Xool
That is like the opposite of what Blu-Ray is launching with, using the new disc format and sticking with the old codec.
On the other hand, Apple is using existing disc technology and an advanced codec to deliver HD on today's media. This is more akin to HD-DVD, which must use a advanced codec since disc space is more of a premium.
Of course you could fill a multi layer Blu-Ray disc with loads of H264 content, but nobody will do this.
It's up to the studios what codec they want to use. Sony will use MPEG2 at least initially. Others will use MPEG4. It depends on what they're comfortable with.
What Apple is using now is a way of storing HD content on existing media until Blu-Ray arrives. It's closer to WMV-HD than anything else. You will see Blu-Ray drives in Macs in 2006.
Originally posted by Elixir
i agree with you 100 percent.
It still baffles me that people always bite into sony and their bullshit.
You mean Sony and virtually every major manufacturer save Toshiba then. This isn't some niche format like Memory Stick were talking about here. It is an industry standard like the CD (which was developed by Sony and Philips by the way) so I fail to see the logic. No one is arguing that Sony has done some stupid things but Blu-Ray is not one of them.
Originally posted by wilco
I was "mad" because you were acting like a cock. I thought I was pretty clear.
Obviously, you thought so too, or you wouldn't have changed your tone in your subsequent post.
Ahh, did I hurt your feelings? Allow me to put the kiddy gloves on for you then.
I believe I made myself perfectly clear as well regarding your inablility to contribute to the topic at hand. Also, since when did you become an expert in gauging tone within a post or telling me what I think. I personally believe in content communication, ever hear of it? It means I say what I mean and I mean what I say. In other words I don't pay much attention to "tone" which is virtually impossible to gauge correctly when communicating over a medium in which you type.
So when your through behaving like a chonch, come debate on the topic for which I doubt you have anything to contribute to; either because you don't have any points of your own, or because you just wish to verbally spar with someone. You tell me, which is it? Or is there some other reason you refuse to talk on topic? Then do it, and leave the clarity of "tone" for those whom you speak to face to face. In fact, please contribute something to the topic of the thread, I really encourage it.
On ANOTHER note, to let shetline know where I'm coming from from a durability perspsective, the simple fact is that HD-DVD will be using the same protective measures currently used in DVD. Quite frankly, DVDs scratch like hell, and to have a HD-DVD with a higer density of data = more damage from a simple scratch.
I pesonally think Blu-Ray will be more durable in that I've seen the demos (for Durabis) where they've applied a steel wool pad to the disc, smashed the disc into dirt, applied ink to the disc, and put multiple fingerprints all over. Yet, the disc still played flawlessly. My challenge to you then, is to go ahead and give that a try to a regular DVD now since that will be the protection in and HD-DVD and you get back with me on how well it plays. The answer will be reason of enough to "suppose that's true." Again, I can't speak for those Blu-Ray discs that will be using coating equivalents to Durabis, but for those that will use Durabis, they are quite impressive. By the way, please read the link I posted on TDKs Durabis2 discs. This article should give you an idea of the durabliliy of the new Durabis discs and hopefully their coating equivalents from other vendors.
http://news.com.com/Try+scratching+t...3-5455621.html
http://news.com.com/HP+backs+both+ri...3-5998824.html
The lengths at which Microsoft will go to get their proprietary iHD technology onto the next generation HD format...who knows. Or is this just a ploy from HP to get a better deal from the BDA? Don't know, but I think HP is bluffing. We'll see, just hope there is a winner...and soon.
iHD makes sense to me. I don't think BD-Java is bad but Java is a fairly large class and I think that if iHD, which was co-developed with Disney, beat out Flash, Java and all other comers then it must be a good tech. In fact Apple itself voted for iHD. Alas iHD lost the total vote.
I'm thinking that Dell will be the next computer company to slide on over and dip their toes in the HD DVD pool.
I don't think HP's new stance makes that much of a difference yet. Time will tell.
http://www.hardwareaccelerated.com/c...disc/index.php
iHD makes sense to me. I don't think BD-Java is bad but Java is a fairly large class and I think that if iHD, which was co-developed with Disney, beat out Flash, Java and all other comers then it must be a good tech. In fact Apple itself voted for iHD. Alas iHD lost the total vote.
Which vote? I'm confused. First you mentioned that iHD beat out Flash, Java, and all other comers (according to whom?), in some vote where even Apple voted pro iHD (when?), but then in the very next sentence you mention that iHD lost the total vote. So, my questions would be, what vote in what forum? And, how do you supposedly beat other technologies and then lose the total vote? Clarification would be greatly appreciated.
Personally, I just think Microsoft's iHD is simply a technology they want revenue from on the next HD format, they've built it into their upcoming OS, Vista, and it is their way of
1) Trying to monopolize yet another market segment, that is, the entertainment segment.
2) Trying to stick it to Sony with the PS3 and Sun Microsystems with Java.
Other questions I have and maybe someone here can explain stems from this comment from HP's new stance...
"HP, which had asked in October that Blu-ray support iHD, said that technology would have lower development costs, since Microsoft is building it into the next version of the Windows operating system."
How so? Lower development costs to who? Microsoft? Because they would have to bundle their OS with Java Runtime Environment(which is a free download off of the Internet) but maybe just maybe have to pay Sun Microsystems to have it bundled? Or is it they, Microsoft, just don't want Java to be on their next OS, thus representing competing software? Just curious, how will iHD garner less developmental costs? Or, is it because Microsoft decided to build iHD in their next OS, they would have to scrap it, and start over with Sun's Java implementation to support Blu-Ray, thus increasing their, Microsoft's, developmental costs?
And finally, another question. Blu-Ray has planned to implement Java and HP was fine with that for a couple of years now. In fact they have been exclusively pro Blu-Ray up until this point claiming dual support. So why, when Microsoft finally decides to complain about Blu-Ray because of false information about their capacity (they claimed 50 GB Blu-Ray discs weren't a reality when if fact they are), features (claiming they didn't have hybrid discs which Blu-Ray does and claiming they wouldn't support Mandatory Managed Copy when Blu_Ray does support it but at the time hadn't committed either way), and true information regarding that they won't support iHD for interactivity on the disc, does HP all of a sudden request support for iHD? What leverage does Microsoft have on HP that would force them to support iHD. If Microsoft is not forcing HP to support iHD, then why all of a sudden the change in stance when Blu-Ray hasn't been supporting iHD for years now? Why the change in stance only after Microsoft's complaints?
As for the vote the BDA just as the DVD Forum have committe votes to establish parameters of the spec. BD-Java did in fact win however Disney and Apple were two iHD proponents. I think that a computer company realizes the ramifications of a programming language like Java versus a static markup language like XML more so than a strictly CE company that works with firmware mainly.
Blu Ray has improved significantly because of HD DVD and vice versa.
1. Added advanced CODECS
2. Came to their senses about MMC
3. PIP in the interactivity layer