Sorry folks. Charlie White just grates me because he typically reviews video stuff as in Final Cut Pro and the like and his reviews have a strong slant to him. He's definitely a "personality" you don't always read his reviews for balanced objectivity but he does give you both barrels.
I admit I had a bone to pick with him. Not every A1 seems to exhibit the same issues. The slow load times though are fairly consistent. It's basically a computer booting inside.
Anxiously awaiting a firmware update to see how much Toshiba can improve things.
There were, of course, some more recent vintage products on display like the Sony VAIO XL2 Digital Living System but the true stars of last night's event were Blu-ray, a new Blu-ray VAIO (the AR) and a near-pocket-sized "Micro PC," the VAIO UX. The gorgeous, 17-inch laptop not only has a Blu-ray player, but the drive can even burn Blu-ray discs?a true first.
On one table Sony execs proudly displayed two ARs playing early Blu-ray content: The House of Flying Daggers (below). They even had the Blu-ray packaging. So exciting...but WAIT! I went ahead and ejected one of the Blu-ray drives to see my first Blu-ray disc. Instead, I found a crummy, old school DVD+R, complete with the Sharpie-written, House of Flying Daggers. Apparently even Sony can't get its hands on Blu-ray content
That's kind of unny. I don't mean to pick on Sony or the BDA however this points that they are working very hard to make this June launch date.
The premium model comes bundled with one of the first Blu-ray Disc (BD) movies, House of Flying Daggers, which Sony showed side-by-side tonight, along with the DVD version. Contrary to what some have said, the difference in quality is instantly noticeable, and according to Sony, it is even more apparent on movies shot in HD (which HoFD apparently wasn't). AR190G comes bundled with an HDMI cable and an HDMI-to-DVI-D adapter so you can take full advantage of BD movies on your HDTV.
The laptop he ejected evidently was playing the DVD version to show the difference in resolution between DVDs and Blu-ray.
If Sony wanted to hoax they could have silkscreened BR logos onto a normal DVD and likely no one would have noticed.
Heh...I remember one trade show where one of our guys stuck a portable heater into an engineering mockup (complete with blinky lights) so folks poking around would feel real heat coming out of the vents. Worked too...I was working the booth and a number of folks put their hands up to the vent and waved their buddies over and oooh'd and ahhh'd over the thing.
Never mind the control panel I was demo'ing really attached to a Dell behind the curtains...
I'm amazed this discussion is still going on. I suspect that's because a certain HD-DVD supporter among us keeps rattling the sabre.
I haven't been deeply involved in the hype lately, but nonetheless I have read plenty about Blu-ray in the mainstream and tech press (that is, EE magazines) and not much about HD-DVD other than the occassional sidebar. If I didn't know better, I would have thought the HD-DVD camp had already given up.
This post could be construed as a "troll," but it's hard to look at HD-DVD and convince yourself that they're not fighting the uphill battle in this race. With the amount of media blitz behind Blu-ray, it's hard to imagine a 2H2007 with any HD-DVD in it.
I'm amazed this discussion is still going on. I suspect that's because a certain HD-DVD supporter among us keeps rattling the sabre. . . .
Since Apple went with Intel, we lost one of the best sources of good debates. There were feverish discussion proposing Intel chips as better for the Mac than the PPC, with most of us protesting. The BluRay discussions seem to catch a little of that old fervor at least.
This post could be construed as a "troll," but it's hard to look at HD-DVD and convince yourself that they're not fighting the uphill battle in this race. With the amount of media blitz behind Blu-ray, it's hard to imagine a 2H2007 with any HD-DVD in it.
I don't think your post is a troll at all. In fact I think it hightlights the eerie feeling that I have. Blu Ray is so well marketed that it's scary. The sizzle smells awfully good but the problem is with the steak.
The best format doesn't always win. However "best" is a very subjective term. Technically both formats are more than sufficient for the distribution of HD movies. So the reality is we're basically yammering on about the extras. I'll own both platforms but my heart tells me that HD-DVD is the more "logical" solution when it comes to satisfying the needs of producers and consumers.
//4) BD movies on single layer discs will result inferior PQ than HD-DVD. Just the codec itself can explain why... MPEG2 vs. H264/MPEG4/VC-1 on 25GB space..... do the math.//
maybe im thick but what IS this crap???
i thought single layer BD was 25GB and HD-DVD was 15GB
giving BD 10 GB MORE for extra "bits" and so the potential for better PQ ..???
NO, I think it's your lack of a brain that tells you this.
Yes, I am trolling.
Well if you're ever in Seattle and you want to kick my ass just let me know. Anything to make you feel better man
Trendannoyer
VC-1 gives approximately an equivalent picture at around 16-18Mbs than MPEG2 does at 20+. I think if HD-DVD movies were trying to squeeze feature length films onto 15GB discs we'd see poor movies. However 30GB DL discs seem to be the norm so right now until the BDA is pressing 50GB discs or using VC-1 (rumor has it that MPEG2 and 25GB SL discs will dominate the launch) the advantage truly is with HD-DVD right now at launch.
Well if you're ever in Seatle and you want to kick my ass just let me know. Anything to make you feel better man
Trendannoyer
VC-1 gives approximately an equivalent picture at around 16-18Mbs than MPEG2 does at 20+. I think if HD-DVD movies were trying to squeeze feature length films onto 15GB discs we'd see poor movies. However 30GB DL discs seem to be the norm so right now until the BDA is pressing 50GB discs or using VC-1 (rumor has it that MPEG2 and 25GB SL discs will dominate the launch) the advantage truly is with HD-DVD right now at launch.
At 25 Mb/s MPEG-2, a single layer Blu-ray disk can fit 133 minutes of movie on it. Even if they were restricted to a single layer at launch, worst case for long movies is that they would have to downgrade to one of the other two supported blu-ray codecs (h.264, vc-1) rather than use MPEG-2.
It is like you are saying "Rumor has it that the marathon runner will wear dress shoes, so we think he won't win".
Many Blu Ray proponents have been screaming from the rooftop that Blu Ray is superior in every way and that HD-DVD should pack it in.
However
When the rubber meets the road we see that:
A. Blu Ray is launching a very limited 50GB DL set of movies (Ultraviolet and a few moe) that are virtually guaranteed to have fairly low demand.
B. Sony is pushing a CODEC (MPEG2) this is inferior to both VC-1 and AVC/h.264.
Proponents of HD-DVD like myself have seen this coming from a ways away thanks to the reports of people in and close to the industry.
Thus we come back to Splinemodel's comment. Blu Ray is exceptionally marketed however their engineering is coming in a distant second in execution.
Launching 25GB SL with MPEG2 makes no sense. Some BD may actually launch with deficient audio as well. I'll have to check into this but there seems to be a lot of people beginning to feel like Sony and the BDA have tried to pull the wool over their eyes.
Most movies are less than 133 minutes, and single layer disks are fine. There is no marketing advantage to a second layer with nothing on it - it just adds cost with no purpose.
And MPEG-2 is the best of the three codecs - because it gets good quality video while demanding the least work from the player. The Toshiba's HD-DVD player probably sucks so bad in the noise department because of the extra work (= extra heat, extra fan noise) caused by the harsher compression.
was also part of my point, in that, one can only assume that given the same codec on both formats, the disc with the most capacity will result in the need for LESS compression and so therefore better PQ.
i cannot see how anyone could argue otherwise.
and YES i do realise that there seems to be 2 different codecs being used on the same format...
thanks for the detail guys
so whats to stop Sony changing to the same compression as the HD-DVD is using, resulting in the same PQ and/or more room for extras?????
was also part of my point, in that, one can only assume that given the same codec on both formats, the disc with the most capacity will result in the need for LESS compression and so therefore better PQ.
If it was only that simple. Every codec has a point of diminishing returns. In audio there is a large and perceivable jump from 16bit to 20bit audio. The delta between 20bit and 24bit is harder to perceive.
Video is no different. MPEG2 looks great above 20Mbps. 20-25Mbps is probably the "sweetspot"
The newer codecs like VC-1 and AVC, however, are technically superior. They look good starting out at about 12Mbps and look really good at 16-18Mbps.
You could toss more datarate at the codecs but your performance improvements will likely not improve on a linear scale.
Sony will swing the advantage back to Blu Ray when they begin to use the advanced codecs. But right now MPEG2 and 25GB discs will produce enough time to contain a feature length film but it's actually providing less overall compared to 30GB VC-1 or AVC on HD-DVD.
Most movies are less than 133 minutes, and single layer disks are fine. There is no marketing advantage to a second layer with nothing on it - it just adds cost with no purpose.
And MPEG-2 is the best of the three codecs - because it gets good quality video while demanding the least work from the player. The Toshiba's HD-DVD player probably sucks so bad in the noise department because of the extra work (= extra heat, extra fan noise) caused by the harsher compression.
I'm well aware that SL BD-ROM with MPEG2 is suitable for a movie. However, I never argued that it wasn't. I simply argued that HD-DVD is the more logical choice for movies based on the legacy support for DVD ROM file structure and disc production.
Wow e1618978. You're starting to sound logical like a HD-DVD proponent. So answer me this. If 25GB is fine for MOST movies and both HD-DVD and Blu Ray meet these requirements explain to me again why we need Blu Ray? HD-DVD went through the DVD Forum process and met all design goals for the nextgen DVD replacement.
As for MPEG2 vs the newer codecs. MPEG2 is the best if you want an easy load but it's certainly not better than the AVC or VC-1 if quality is your goal. ATI, Amberella and other companies are developing products to speed up the newer codecs so I doubt processing issues will be a factor beyond the 2nd generation units.
I'm well aware that SL BD-ROM with MPEG2 is suitable for a movie. However, I never argued that it wasn't. I simply argued that HD-DVD is the more logical choice for movies based on the legacy support for DVD ROM file structure and disc production.
Wow e1618978. You're starting to sound logical like a HD-DVD proponent. So answer me this. If 25GB is fine for MOST movies and both HD-DVD and Blu Ray meet these requirements explain to me again why we need Blu Ray? HD-DVD went through the DVD Forum process and met all design goals for the nextgen DVD replacement.
As for MPEG2 vs the newer codecs. MPEG2 is the best if you want an easy load but it's certainly not better than the AVC or VC-1 if quality is your goal. ATI, Amberella and other companies are developing products to speed up the newer codecs so I doubt processing issues will be a factor beyond the 2nd generation units.
Even though 25gb is enough for a HD movie, these kinds of disks aren't only used to store movies. People use dvd-r to store data. I really dont think we need more than one high capacity disk format and Blu-Ray holds more data per layer so it is better.
Blu Ray is exceptionally marketed however their engineering is coming in a distant second in execution.
Do you really think so? I don't think I've seen any marketing actually made by Blu-ray. It's all just excitement from the potential user base. This is especially true of the technical communities, who are especially excited since Blu-ray has much more powerful hardware and software (thus, engineering) than DVD or HD-DVD.
So I'd say that HD-DVD is a distant second as far as pure engineering and no better off as far as execution. As everyone seems to find, the HD-DVD players are poorly engineered, and that doesn't really make up for the fact that they may have hit the shelf sooner.
The ONLY advantage HD-DVD has, as you mentioned, is cost. I'd go so far as to narrow this down to disc cost, since silicon ICs drop in cost very fast once volume can pay off the R&D. Hence HD-DVD and Blu-ray Players will end up being priced similarly in the very near future. So the focus moves to disc manufacturing. If it proves to be cheaper to manufacture a single layer BD than for a dual layer HD-DVD, nothing will be able to save HD-DVD.
Many Blu Ray proponents have been screaming from the rooftop that Blu Ray is superior in every way and that HD-DVD should pack it in.
This is because it is logically true. Go figure.
Quote:
However
When the rubber meets the road we see that:
A. Blu Ray is launching a very limited 50GB DL set of movies (Ultraviolet and a few moe) that are virtually guaranteed to have fairly low demand.
Says who? According to Hi-Def digest, all Sony Picture releases will be on 50GB media. Whose to say other studios won't do the same? Virtually guaranteed to have fairly low demand by whom? Guaranteed by you? We'll given your track record of FUD regarding just about everything Blu-ray, I'll take your guarantee for what it is,...crap.
Quote:
B. Sony is pushing a CODEC (MPEG2) this is inferior to both VC-1 and AVC/h.264.
Proponents of HD-DVD like myself have seen this coming from a ways away thanks to the reports of people in and close to the industry.
Sony may be using the MPEG2 codec, but this doesn't prove that Warner, Paramount, Fox, Walt Disney / Pixar, Lionsgate, and MGM will be doing the same. It will be up to the studios, and I'm sure a lot of them will be indeed using the h.264/MPEG4 codec. Besides, in regards to compression, yes h.264 and VC-1(Puke Microsoft) are superior, but in regards to picture quality, this is not a definite. So please, spare us the whole HD DVD is somehow superior routine, we know it is FUD.
Like what people close to the industry, Amir, your buddy from Microsoft? Wow, that will be real unbiased insider info, I'd love to hear it. Or is it the same crap you've been spewing? By the way, where is China again? Hmm?
Quote:
Thus we come back to Splinemodel's comment. Blu Ray is exceptionally marketed however their engineering is coming in a distant second in execution.
Launching 25GB SL with MPEG2 makes no sense. Some BD may actually launch with deficient audio as well. I'll have to check into this but there seems to be a lot of people beginning to feel like Sony and the BDA have tried to pull the wool over their eyes.
Blu-ray hasn't even launched yet, but somehow they are coming in a distant second in terms of execution for engineering? How is that? I think I'll reserve full judgement when it launches in June, but as for know, given what we know of Blu-ray's specs and what they've been releasing so far, we know in terms of engineering it is executing all over the place.
Deficient audio? Yeah, you better look it up, because no where have I've read this, except maybe it exists in pro HD DVD, FUDtastic forums. Moreover, where is your proof in "a lot of people beginning to feel like Sony and the BDA have tried to pull the wool over their eyes." My gosh man, you deserve a Sony bashing medal if ever one existed. Especially considering your earlier post regarding the Sony Vaio as I knew you and Elixir would just gobble it up as truth, without a moments hesitation or thought. But anything to put Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt in those minds of people thinking about purchasing Blu-ray, right? As this seems to be your main objective, regardless of logic.
Save it for the Micorosft sheeple, HD DVD is inevitable roadkill, with Blu-ray driving the bus.
Comments
I admit I had a bone to pick with him. Not every A1 seems to exhibit the same issues. The slow load times though are fairly consistent. It's basically a computer booting inside.
Anxiously awaiting a firmware update to see how much Toshiba can improve things.
http://gearlog.com/blogs/gearlog/arc.../16/11622.aspx
There were, of course, some more recent vintage products on display like the Sony VAIO XL2 Digital Living System but the true stars of last night's event were Blu-ray, a new Blu-ray VAIO (the AR) and a near-pocket-sized "Micro PC," the VAIO UX. The gorgeous, 17-inch laptop not only has a Blu-ray player, but the drive can even burn Blu-ray discs?a true first.
On one table Sony execs proudly displayed two ARs playing early Blu-ray content: The House of Flying Daggers (below). They even had the Blu-ray packaging. So exciting...but WAIT! I went ahead and ejected one of the Blu-ray drives to see my first Blu-ray disc. Instead, I found a crummy, old school DVD+R, complete with the Sharpie-written, House of Flying Daggers. Apparently even Sony can't get its hands on Blu-ray content
That's kind of unny. I don't mean to pick on Sony or the BDA however this points that they are working very hard to make this June launch date.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Oops Sony gets caught in a bit of deception.
http://gearlog.com/blogs/gearlog/arc.../16/11622.aspx
That's kind of unny. I don't mean to pick on Sony or the BDA however this points that they are working very hard to make this June launch date.
oooh good ole' sony up to its usual tricks.
The premium model comes bundled with one of the first Blu-ray Disc (BD) movies, House of Flying Daggers, which Sony showed side-by-side tonight, along with the DVD version. Contrary to what some have said, the difference in quality is instantly noticeable, and according to Sony, it is even more apparent on movies shot in HD (which HoFD apparently wasn't). AR190G comes bundled with an HDMI cable and an HDMI-to-DVI-D adapter so you can take full advantage of BD movies on your HDTV.
http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=2939
The laptop he ejected evidently was playing the DVD version to show the difference in resolution between DVDs and Blu-ray.
If Sony wanted to hoax they could have silkscreened BR logos onto a normal DVD and likely no one would have noticed.
Heh...I remember one trade show where one of our guys stuck a portable heater into an engineering mockup (complete with blinky lights) so folks poking around would feel real heat coming out of the vents. Worked too...I was working the booth and a number of folks put their hands up to the vent and waved their buddies over and oooh'd and ahhh'd over the thing.
Never mind the control panel I was demo'ing really attached to a Dell behind the curtains...
Vinea
I haven't been deeply involved in the hype lately, but nonetheless I have read plenty about Blu-ray in the mainstream and tech press (that is, EE magazines) and not much about HD-DVD other than the occassional sidebar. If I didn't know better, I would have thought the HD-DVD camp had already given up.
This post could be construed as a "troll," but it's hard to look at HD-DVD and convince yourself that they're not fighting the uphill battle in this race. With the amount of media blitz behind Blu-ray, it's hard to imagine a 2H2007 with any HD-DVD in it.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
I'm amazed this discussion is still going on. I suspect that's because a certain HD-DVD supporter among us keeps rattling the sabre. . . .
Since Apple went with Intel, we lost one of the best sources of good debates. There were feverish discussion proposing Intel chips as better for the Mac than the PPC, with most of us protesting. The BluRay discussions seem to catch a little of that old fervor at least.
This post could be construed as a "troll," but it's hard to look at HD-DVD and convince yourself that they're not fighting the uphill battle in this race. With the amount of media blitz behind Blu-ray, it's hard to imagine a 2H2007 with any HD-DVD in it.
I don't think your post is a troll at all. In fact I think it hightlights the eerie feeling that I have. Blu Ray is so well marketed that it's scary. The sizzle smells awfully good but the problem is with the steak.
The best format doesn't always win. However "best" is a very subjective term. Technically both formats are more than sufficient for the distribution of HD movies. So the reality is we're basically yammering on about the extras. I'll own both platforms but my heart tells me that HD-DVD is the more "logical" solution when it comes to satisfying the needs of producers and consumers.
maybe im thick but what IS this crap???
i thought single layer BD was 25GB and HD-DVD was 15GB
giving BD 10 GB MORE for extra "bits" and so the potential for better PQ ..???
assuming the same codec on both of course.
somone wanna explain ?
Originally posted by hmurchison
but my heart tells me that HD-DVD is the more "logical" solution when it comes to satisfying the needs of producers and consumers.
NO, I think it's your lack of a brain that tells you this.
Yes, I am trolling.
Originally posted by Eugene
NO, I think it's your lack of a brain that tells you this.
Yes, I am trolling.
Well if you're ever in Seattle and you want to kick my ass just let me know. Anything to make you feel better man
Trendannoyer
VC-1 gives approximately an equivalent picture at around 16-18Mbs than MPEG2 does at 20+. I think if HD-DVD movies were trying to squeeze feature length films onto 15GB discs we'd see poor movies. However 30GB DL discs seem to be the norm so right now until the BDA is pressing 50GB discs or using VC-1 (rumor has it that MPEG2 and 25GB SL discs will dominate the launch) the advantage truly is with HD-DVD right now at launch.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Well if you're ever in Seatle and you want to kick my ass just let me know. Anything to make you feel better man
Trendannoyer
VC-1 gives approximately an equivalent picture at around 16-18Mbs than MPEG2 does at 20+. I think if HD-DVD movies were trying to squeeze feature length films onto 15GB discs we'd see poor movies. However 30GB DL discs seem to be the norm so right now until the BDA is pressing 50GB discs or using VC-1 (rumor has it that MPEG2 and 25GB SL discs will dominate the launch) the advantage truly is with HD-DVD right now at launch.
At 25 Mb/s MPEG-2, a single layer Blu-ray disk can fit 133 minutes of movie on it. Even if they were restricted to a single layer at launch, worst case for long movies is that they would have to downgrade to one of the other two supported blu-ray codecs (h.264, vc-1) rather than use MPEG-2.
It is like you are saying "Rumor has it that the marathon runner will wear dress shoes, so we think he won't win".
Many Blu Ray proponents have been screaming from the rooftop that Blu Ray is superior in every way and that HD-DVD should pack it in.
However
When the rubber meets the road we see that:
A. Blu Ray is launching a very limited 50GB DL set of movies (Ultraviolet and a few moe) that are virtually guaranteed to have fairly low demand.
B. Sony is pushing a CODEC (MPEG2) this is inferior to both VC-1 and AVC/h.264.
Proponents of HD-DVD like myself have seen this coming from a ways away thanks to the reports of people in and close to the industry.
Thus we come back to Splinemodel's comment. Blu Ray is exceptionally marketed however their engineering is coming in a distant second in execution.
Launching 25GB SL with MPEG2 makes no sense. Some BD may actually launch with deficient audio as well. I'll have to check into this but there seems to be a lot of people beginning to feel like Sony and the BDA have tried to pull the wool over their eyes.
Most movies are less than 133 minutes, and single layer disks are fine. There is no marketing advantage to a second layer with nothing on it - it just adds cost with no purpose.
And MPEG-2 is the best of the three codecs - because it gets good quality video while demanding the least work from the player. The Toshiba's HD-DVD player probably sucks so bad in the noise department because of the extra work (= extra heat, extra fan noise) caused by the harsher compression.
was also part of my point, in that, one can only assume that given the same codec on both formats, the disc with the most capacity will result in the need for LESS compression and so therefore better PQ.
i cannot see how anyone could argue otherwise.
and YES i do realise that there seems to be 2 different codecs being used on the same format...
thanks for the detail guys
so whats to stop Sony changing to the same compression as the HD-DVD is using, resulting in the same PQ and/or more room for extras?????
Rod
was also part of my point, in that, one can only assume that given the same codec on both formats, the disc with the most capacity will result in the need for LESS compression and so therefore better PQ.
If it was only that simple. Every codec has a point of diminishing returns. In audio there is a large and perceivable jump from 16bit to 20bit audio. The delta between 20bit and 24bit is harder to perceive.
Video is no different. MPEG2 looks great above 20Mbps. 20-25Mbps is probably the "sweetspot"
The newer codecs like VC-1 and AVC, however, are technically superior. They look good starting out at about 12Mbps and look really good at 16-18Mbps.
You could toss more datarate at the codecs but your performance improvements will likely not improve on a linear scale.
Sony will swing the advantage back to Blu Ray when they begin to use the advanced codecs. But right now MPEG2 and 25GB discs will produce enough time to contain a feature length film but it's actually providing less overall compared to 30GB VC-1 or AVC on HD-DVD.
Originally posted by e1618978
No - you are making no sense.
Most movies are less than 133 minutes, and single layer disks are fine. There is no marketing advantage to a second layer with nothing on it - it just adds cost with no purpose.
And MPEG-2 is the best of the three codecs - because it gets good quality video while demanding the least work from the player. The Toshiba's HD-DVD player probably sucks so bad in the noise department because of the extra work (= extra heat, extra fan noise) caused by the harsher compression.
I'm well aware that SL BD-ROM with MPEG2 is suitable for a movie. However, I never argued that it wasn't. I simply argued that HD-DVD is the more logical choice for movies based on the legacy support for DVD ROM file structure and disc production.
Wow e1618978. You're starting to sound logical like a HD-DVD proponent. So answer me this. If 25GB is fine for MOST movies and both HD-DVD and Blu Ray meet these requirements explain to me again why we need Blu Ray? HD-DVD went through the DVD Forum process and met all design goals for the nextgen DVD replacement.
As for MPEG2 vs the newer codecs. MPEG2 is the best if you want an easy load but it's certainly not better than the AVC or VC-1 if quality is your goal. ATI, Amberella and other companies are developing products to speed up the newer codecs so I doubt processing issues will be a factor beyond the 2nd generation units.
Originally posted by hmurchison
I'm well aware that SL BD-ROM with MPEG2 is suitable for a movie. However, I never argued that it wasn't. I simply argued that HD-DVD is the more logical choice for movies based on the legacy support for DVD ROM file structure and disc production.
Wow e1618978. You're starting to sound logical like a HD-DVD proponent. So answer me this. If 25GB is fine for MOST movies and both HD-DVD and Blu Ray meet these requirements explain to me again why we need Blu Ray? HD-DVD went through the DVD Forum process and met all design goals for the nextgen DVD replacement.
As for MPEG2 vs the newer codecs. MPEG2 is the best if you want an easy load but it's certainly not better than the AVC or VC-1 if quality is your goal. ATI, Amberella and other companies are developing products to speed up the newer codecs so I doubt processing issues will be a factor beyond the 2nd generation units.
Even though 25gb is enough for a HD movie, these kinds of disks aren't only used to store movies. People use dvd-r to store data. I really dont think we need more than one high capacity disk format and Blu-Ray holds more data per layer so it is better.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Blu Ray is exceptionally marketed however their engineering is coming in a distant second in execution.
Do you really think so? I don't think I've seen any marketing actually made by Blu-ray. It's all just excitement from the potential user base. This is especially true of the technical communities, who are especially excited since Blu-ray has much more powerful hardware and software (thus, engineering) than DVD or HD-DVD.
So I'd say that HD-DVD is a distant second as far as pure engineering and no better off as far as execution. As everyone seems to find, the HD-DVD players are poorly engineered, and that doesn't really make up for the fact that they may have hit the shelf sooner.
The ONLY advantage HD-DVD has, as you mentioned, is cost. I'd go so far as to narrow this down to disc cost, since silicon ICs drop in cost very fast once volume can pay off the R&D. Hence HD-DVD and Blu-ray Players will end up being priced similarly in the very near future. So the focus moves to disc manufacturing. If it proves to be cheaper to manufacture a single layer BD than for a dual layer HD-DVD, nothing will be able to save HD-DVD.
Originally posted by hmurchison
I don't think your analogy is correct.
Many Blu Ray proponents have been screaming from the rooftop that Blu Ray is superior in every way and that HD-DVD should pack it in.
This is because it is logically true. Go figure.
However
When the rubber meets the road we see that:
A. Blu Ray is launching a very limited 50GB DL set of movies (Ultraviolet and a few moe) that are virtually guaranteed to have fairly low demand.
Says who? According to Hi-Def digest, all Sony Picture releases will be on 50GB media. Whose to say other studios won't do the same? Virtually guaranteed to have fairly low demand by whom? Guaranteed by you? We'll given your track record of FUD regarding just about everything Blu-ray, I'll take your guarantee for what it is,...crap.
B. Sony is pushing a CODEC (MPEG2) this is inferior to both VC-1 and AVC/h.264.
Proponents of HD-DVD like myself have seen this coming from a ways away thanks to the reports of people in and close to the industry.
Sony may be using the MPEG2 codec, but this doesn't prove that Warner, Paramount, Fox, Walt Disney / Pixar, Lionsgate, and MGM will be doing the same. It will be up to the studios, and I'm sure a lot of them will be indeed using the h.264/MPEG4 codec. Besides, in regards to compression, yes h.264 and VC-1(Puke Microsoft) are superior, but in regards to picture quality, this is not a definite. So please, spare us the whole HD DVD is somehow superior routine, we know it is FUD.
Like what people close to the industry, Amir, your buddy from Microsoft? Wow, that will be real unbiased insider info, I'd love to hear it. Or is it the same crap you've been spewing? By the way, where is China again? Hmm?
Thus we come back to Splinemodel's comment. Blu Ray is exceptionally marketed however their engineering is coming in a distant second in execution.
Launching 25GB SL with MPEG2 makes no sense. Some BD may actually launch with deficient audio as well. I'll have to check into this but there seems to be a lot of people beginning to feel like Sony and the BDA have tried to pull the wool over their eyes.
Blu-ray hasn't even launched yet, but somehow they are coming in a distant second in terms of execution for engineering? How is that? I think I'll reserve full judgement when it launches in June, but as for know, given what we know of Blu-ray's specs and what they've been releasing so far, we know in terms of engineering it is executing all over the place.
Deficient audio? Yeah, you better look it up, because no where have I've read this, except maybe it exists in pro HD DVD, FUDtastic forums. Moreover, where is your proof in "a lot of people beginning to feel like Sony and the BDA have tried to pull the wool over their eyes." My gosh man, you deserve a Sony bashing medal if ever one existed. Especially considering your earlier post regarding the Sony Vaio as I knew you and Elixir would just gobble it up as truth, without a moments hesitation or thought. But anything to put Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt in those minds of people thinking about purchasing Blu-ray, right? As this seems to be your main objective, regardless of logic.
Save it for the Micorosft sheeple, HD DVD is inevitable roadkill, with Blu-ray driving the bus.