I'd also like to know about DRM with HD movies on either format. Am I going to need a 'sanctioned' TV in order to use them? Is ripping software even a possibility? [/B]
Ripping should be no problem, provided you have a blu-ray / HD-DVD burner, someone will write a fairly simple piece of software that litterally reads every pit on the disc and makes a copy of it onto another disc. The software doesn't even need to know what's on the disc, it just blindly makes an exact duplicate. This is how applications like Alcohol work, I'm sure there's a good mac equivalent.
Think of this scenario you may have a barcode on a piece of paper with a zillion bit encryption, you can still copy it with any dumb old photo copier.
In any case, I'm sticking by word; if I want HD quality movies, I'm going to download them. No way I'm dropping money on a single format blu-ray or HD-DVD DVDR only to be limited by physical media.
Wiki said something about the LED's being different--HDDVD's use smaller lasers.
Also, if HDDVD uses mpeg 4, that means more information/size... I might need to go back to wikipedia
Slughead let me give you the truth.
Both formats "are" more similar than they are dissimilar. The quality of both should be the same at a given rate and codec. MPEG2 is the easiest to encode/decode but it doesn't offer the same quality as VC-1 or AVC at reasonable bitrates(under 20Mbps)
HD DVD uses the same disc structure as DVD so pressing plants can either be upgraded to support HD DVD or a new line can be purchased that stamps both discs. The lens assembly is smaller on an HD DVD because it shares a very similar numerical aperture(how close the laser is to the disc and its focusing area) so supporting both in a single assembly is easier.
Blu-Ray has a higher Numerical Aperture which means the laser is much closer to the disc. The recording layer was moved up closer to the surface of the disc so that the laser would be strong enough to penetrate the first layer and access the second without moving to a more powerful and costly laser. This is what may allow Blu-Ray to support 4 layers of data in the future.
DRAM
Both employ 128-bit encryption in the form of AACS. Unlike DVD if a key is found it can be revoked. This will prevent ripping of the content. Blu-Ray adds BD+ which is another layer of DRM that Fox Studios really pushed for. They also have a feature called ROM Mark.
Managed Copy
Are you a bit peeved that you can't rip HD DVD or Blu-Ray? Well fear not. Mandatory Copy is a feature of AACS that allows you to store a digital representation of your movie on a HDD. For all intents and purposes it is allowing you to RIP content to you drive the only catch is that that content will have limited usage rights and may cost you a bit extra. For those who just want the easy access of streaming media from a HTPC that just may be the ticket they need to fall in love with the formats. Here's the rub. Microsoft and Intel were interested in supporting Blu-Ray as well but with Fox Studios pushing BD+ inclusion it became clear that BD+ could usurp the right to Mandatory Managed Copy and Microsoft and Intel realized that this would hamper their respective forays into media with Media Cenntre PC and viiv technology. HD DVD offers no extra DRM so Mandatory Managed Copy will be there once it's ready.
Price
Because the lens assembly on HD DVD is so close to DVD and because the disc structure is the same it is said that HD DVD should be the overall cheaper format to produce. Time will tell here but Toshiba looks like they're going to press the issue on price so I expect myself that HD DVD will generally be slightly cheaper in future incarnation.
Hope this filled in some gaps. Both formats are incredible and offer huge potential. Which one the consumers decide to go with en masse will depend on a variety of factors.
Quote:
In any case, I'm sticking by word; if I want HD quality movies, I'm going to download them. No way I'm dropping money on a single format blu-ray or HD-DVD DVDR only to be limited by physical media.
Neither format is limited to physical media. Both specs have the ability to attach a HDD drive and dynamically update content that can be sync'd to the physical media. No more video stagnation. You will not be able to copy either format without their imposed restrictions. HD DVD may be able to be hacked but I doubt it. Blu-Ray is nigh impossible with BD+ added in.
Both formats "are" more similar than they are dissimilar. The quality of both should be the same at a given rate and codec. MPEG2 is the easiest to encode/decode but it doesn't offer the same quality as VC-1 or AVC at reasonable bitrates(under 20Mbps)
...
Because the lens assembly on HD DVD is so close to DVD and because the disc structure is the same it is said that HD DVD should be the overall cheaper format to produce.
But Blu-ray has much more space, so it can afford the higher bit rate of MPEG2. You don't need to limit yourself to <20 mbps, unlike the space-constrained HD-DVD.
The lower processing requirements should make blu-ray players much physically cooler, smaller, and cheaper than HD-DVD.
It almost makes one root for HD-DVD. I use a backup disk of all the CD's, and DVD's that I absolutely don't want hurt, and I keep the originals in a safe area for storage just in case. But If I have to buy a Hard drive for every few High Definition disks I feel the need to archive this will cost me an arm and a leg.
At this point I think the studios need to take responsibility, and start an electronic key cataloging system as to where you can store your catalog information online at their site, and your disc becomes damaged they should be replacing it. Because that is the sole purpose of my backup system, and it is cheap, and worth it. But I don't think I should spend a dime more for it. Not with the money these cock knockers are making. Not after buying all these disks on DVD once, seeing most of them in the theaters, and now having to upgrade that catalog again. I should be able to send my DVD in for a coupon for the original price of the disc, and get a coupon for the exact same movie that works on it's upgraded High Definition version. THATS WHAT I WANT!
But Blu-ray has much more space, so it can afford the higher bit rate of MPEG2. You don't need to limit yourself to <20 mbps, unlike the space-constrained HD-DVD.
The lower processing requirements should make blu-ray players much physically cooler, smaller, and cheaper than HD-DVD.
"Why" though is the question. If I can maintain the same quality at half the bitrate why would I choose MPEG2. Please explain your logic here. Come on you do do better than "feign ignorance" like you are here. When the equivalent quality can be delivered using less storage then it makes sense on multiple levels to choose the more efficient storage and codec.
As for your last point don't forget to add "at the expense of delivering the best HD quality"
Come on you can do better.
Onlooker-
I agree. Think of it in terms of License/Media. The physical disc in essence becomes the media for a license. Should the disc be destroyed It would be nice for the studios to have a policy of replacing the disc by the consumer paying for a mailer to return the broken disc for an exchange. Future players could have HDD included so that your favorite movies reside inside the player ready for access sans disc.
There are lots of new options that both formats have. We could see some fundamental chances next year in how we consume HD media.
I agree. Think of it in terms of License/Media. The physical disc in essence becomes the media for a license. Should the disc be destroyed It would be nice for the studios to have a policy of replacing the disc by the consumer paying for a mailer to return the broken disc for an exchange. Future players could have HDD included so that your favorite movies reside inside the player ready for access sans disc.
There are lots of new options that both formats have. We could see some fundamental chances next year in how we consume HD media.
I agree on all counts. I'm not sure that you caught this so I'll say it again. I was also talking about from DVD to HD DVD. I want a coupon for my previous purchase. I'm not saying an exact exchange, but I I should get at least 50+% off if I've already bought the movie depending on the price of the new media IMO.
The US has always been behind in implementing technology. The government moves at a snails pace.
The government doesn't implement this. The service providers do. And right now, they have very little competition, so there's very little incentive to upgrade. You basically have two options for broadband. DSL which is slower but cheaper, or cable which is faster but more expensive. And both are essentially monopolies for any given area; there's one cable company and one phone company. They're all more interested in whatever profit they can squeeze out of customers without upgrading infrastructure. Verizon is oh, so slowly rolling out FiOS, but that won't be a major player for years and is still much slower and much more expensive than what's offered in Japan or South Korea.
Quote:
Originally posted by onlooker
Criticize all you want, but if you need to download at 2.5GB per second that bad go ahead and move to France. Fuckin A.
Where did this come from? Kupan did not engage in personal attacks and namecalling. Try to control yourself. This isn't a schoolyard.
Quote:
Originally posted by onlooker
Not after buying all these disks on DVD once, seeing most of them in the theaters, and now having to upgrade that catalog again. I should be able to send my DVD in for a coupon for the original price of the disc, and get a coupon for the exact same movie that works on it's upgraded High Definition version. THATS WHAT I WANT!
You're probably too young to remember this, based on your language and lack of anger management, but when we transitioned from records to CDs, no company ever offered to replace our LPs with CDs for free or even reduced cost. It's always been if you want a better version, you buy it. You can't even trade CDs and DVDs for "special editions" that came out later. Nobody's forcing you to buy Blu-ray or HD DVD and nobody's taking your DVDs away. There's no reason you have to buy the movies again. I wouldn't mind if companies kept giving me credit on new computers for the old ones I used for years, but that's not going to happen. Welcome to Capitalism 101. So ease up.
"Why" though is the question. If I can maintain the same quality at half the bitrate why would I choose MPEG2.
Disk space is not the only cost, processing power is also a cost.
HD-DVD uses less disk space and bandwidth, at the expense of processing power. HD-DVD players will always be hotter, bigger, and probably more expensive than blu-ray players.
Blu-ray uses less procesing power, at the expense of disk space and bandwidth. Since Blu-ray has plenty of disk space to use, and movies will never be longer than a few hours, this is an intelligent decision. You get less expensive players, lower heat output, smaller chassis, etc.
The government doesn't implement this. The service providers do. And right now, they have very little competition, so there's very little incentive to upgrade. You basically have two options for broadband. DSL which is slower but cheaper, or cable which is faster but more expensive. And both are essentially monopolies for any given area; there's one cable company and one phone company. They're all more interested in whatever profit they can squeeze out of customers without upgrading infrastructure. Verizon is oh, so slowly rolling out FiOS, but that won't be a major player for years and is still much slower and much more expensive than what's offered in Japan or South Korea.
Where did this come from? Kupan did not engage in personal attacks and namecalling. Try to control yourself. This isn't a schoolyard.
You're probably too young to remember this, based on your language and lack of anger management, but when we transitioned from records to CDs, no company ever offered to replace our LPs with CDs for free or even reduced cost. It's always been if you want a better version, you buy it. You can't even trade CDs and DVDs for "special editions" that came out later. Nobody's forcing you to buy Blu-ray or HD DVD and nobody's taking your DVDs away. There's no reason you have to buy the movies again. I wouldn't mind if companies kept giving me credit on new computers for the old ones I used for years, but that's not going to happen. Welcome to Capitalism 101. So ease up.
I agree. Think of it in terms of License/Media. The physical disc in essence becomes the media for a license. Should the disc be destroyed It would be nice for the studios to have a policy of replacing the disc by the consumer paying for a mailer to return the broken disc for an exchange.
I know some box sets (like Season X of TV Show Y) offer this. My wife borrowed a friend's "Lost" Season 1 Set and (ironically) lost one of the discs. It cost $4 + S/H ($1.99 IIRC) to replace a single disc from the box set. I can't complain about that. I have no idea if studios have a standard practice like that, but some at least recognize the issue.
I suppose in light of the difficulty they create in creating a backup of your media, they should be required to have a cheap replacement policy.
I wouldn't brag about that. At your age, you should know better. I expect that sort of coarse language and ignorance in online forums from those too young to drink, but not from middle-aged adults.
Quote:
Originally posted by atomicham
I know some box sets (like Season X of TV Show Y) offer this. My wife borrowed a friend's "Lost" Season 1 Set and (ironically) lost one of the discs. It cost $4 + S/H ($1.99 IIRC) to replace a single disc from the box set. I can't complain about that. I have no idea if studios have a standard practice like that, but some at least recognize the issue.
I suppose in light of the difficulty they create in creating a backup of your media, they should be required to have a cheap replacement policy.
I don't expect you can replace more than one or two disks under that policy. As it is, it costs them very little to replace disks like that since the lowest price I can find for a box set is $42, so that's $6 per disc. That means nobody would be able to assemble a full set under the replacement policy for less than the sale price, and you wouldn't have the packaging.
Quote:
Originally posted by ngmapple
Are you kidding me, Verizon's FIOS offers 100Mb service to the home, even a tenth of that is enough for a couple simultaneous HD streams.
I use Cablevision which is up to 15Mb dowstream, still plenty fast.
Verizon offers up to 30Mbps, for a whopping $180/month (with a one year commitment). 15Mbps is a much better deal at $45/mo. Customers who need really high speed for downloading would be better off buying two of the 15Mbps connections for half the price of the 30. Cablevision doesn't give you 30Mbps unless you pay $60/mo and the 15Mbps is still $45/mo, although that's still 3x the speed of crappy RoadRunner for the same price.
MPEG2 is much easier to decode than MPEG4, so I think that you have this reversed - HD-DVD should have the hardware bloat.
Quote:
The lower processing requirements should make blu-ray players much physically cooler, smaller, and cheaper than HD-DVD.
Except for the fact that Blu-ray has to also be able to decode VC-1 and AVC. So if they both have to be able to decode all the formats, they will be roughly the same in processing power. I don't know why you are thinking that Blu-ray will be smaller/cooler because current disks are coming out as MPEG-2. So when the first VC-1/AVC disks come out for Blu-ray I wont be able to play them because my Blu-ray player doesn't have enough processing power? Is that what you are telling me?
Whatever its merits as a film, 'Training Day' has made history by becoming one of the first titles to be released on both the Blu-ray and HD DVD formats. In our first head-to-head comparison, we found the HD DVD to be superior. The unfortunate cropping of the Blu-ray image, coupled with more noticeable compression artifacts and an overall darker cast, can't compete with the more consistently pleasing presentation of the HD DVD. Also a strike against the Blu-ray version is that both the Dolby TrueHD and Dolby Digital-Plus soundtracks have been dropped in favor of plain old Dolby Digital, and even the disc's menu navigation is more clunky and with less interactive functionality. Certainly, this Blu-ray release delivers fine video quality in its own right, but the format's backers will need to step it up if they are going to win the hearts and minds of early adopters over HD DVD.
Interesting indeed. I can't wait for more players to hit the market (for both formats) to see if there are any difference among players (and to see if it is the Samsung that is doing the cropping).
Except for the fact that Blu-ray has to also be able to decode VC-1 and AVC. So if they both have to be able to decode all the formats, they will be roughly the same in processing power. I don't know why you are thinking that Blu-ray will be smaller/cooler because current disks are coming out as MPEG-2. So when the first VC-1/AVC disks come out for Blu-ray I wont be able to play them because my Blu-ray player doesn't have enough processing power? Is that what you are telling me?
I don't think that there will ever be MPEG-4 blu-ray disks, and the heat output is only when you are playing the disk. However, I'll admit that as long as blu-ray still supports MPEG-2, they still need all the same cooling and processing hardware.
I wonder if playing an MPEG-4 HD-DVD movie would noticeably drain the battery of a laptop faster than playing a MPEG-2 blu-ray movie...
The government doesn't implement this. The service providers do You basically have two options for broadband. DSL which is slower but cheaper, or cable which is faster but more expensive. And both are essentially monopolies for any given area; there's one cable company and one phone company.
That's exactly what I was talking about though. The government does nothing about these monopolies. Just look at who's hands the Net Neutrality bill is in. It's all a bunch of tubes to them. If there was competition we would have faster speeds. You should have seen the despicable behavior Comcast showed when a competing municipal broadband service was on the table. They spent millions on a massive misinformation campaign using television, radio, pamphlets, phone calls, etc. They had Comcast employees poising as citizens at the meetings asking loaded questions, made threatening calls to members in favor of the competition, performed bogus surveys claiming to be a third party while pushing their own agenda. It was unbelievable. I had never seen anything more corrupt. Needless to say they won the vote. A month later Comcast jacked up their rates.
"Why" though is the question. If I can maintain the same quality at half the bitrate why would I choose MPEG2. Please explain your logic here. Come on you do do better than "feign ignorance" like you are here. When the equivalent quality can be delivered using less storage then it makes sense on multiple levels to choose the more efficient storage and codec.
You don't have to choose MPEG2. Blu-Ray supports MPEG4 as well. I've seen the demos so it's up to the studios. You can fit considerably more MPEG4 video on a 25/50 GB BD-ROM and not even have to worry about fudging the bitrate. The question is why Warner would use MPEG4 on HD-DVD but not on Blu-Ray when there is no reason not to. It's possible that some within Warner want Blu-Ray to fail so they decided to do a quick and dirty transfer. I also think the Samsung player is unfortunately a dud. It seems to have a lot of video issues which make a direct comparison impossible at this time. There are a whole lot of other manufacturers coming out with Blu-Ray players so we're not going to learn anything valuable for a while. I think we'll be well past page 100 before a "winner" is declared.
I wouldn't brag about that. At your age, you should know better. I expect that sort of coarse language and ignorance in online forums from those too young to drink, but not from middle-aged adults.
I said I can remember them. I didn't say I invented them. I'm no where near middle aged. If middle aged were 50 I'd be just over half of that. And I still like to curse online because I don't do it in person anymore.
I said I can remember them. I didn't say I invented them. I'm no where near middle aged. If middle aged were 50 I'd be just over half of that. And I still like to curse online because I don't do it in person anymore.
Male life expectancy in the US is 72, so middle aged is 36.
Comments
I'd also like to know about DRM with HD movies on either format. Am I going to need a 'sanctioned' TV in order to use them? Is ripping software even a possibility? [/B]
Ripping should be no problem, provided you have a blu-ray / HD-DVD burner, someone will write a fairly simple piece of software that litterally reads every pit on the disc and makes a copy of it onto another disc. The software doesn't even need to know what's on the disc, it just blindly makes an exact duplicate. This is how applications like Alcohol work, I'm sure there's a good mac equivalent.
Think of this scenario you may have a barcode on a piece of paper with a zillion bit encryption, you can still copy it with any dumb old photo copier.
In any case, I'm sticking by word; if I want HD quality movies, I'm going to download them. No way I'm dropping money on a single format blu-ray or HD-DVD DVDR only to be limited by physical media.
Originally posted by slughead
Wiki said something about the LED's being different--HDDVD's use smaller lasers.
Also, if HDDVD uses mpeg 4, that means more information/size... I might need to go back to wikipedia
Slughead let me give you the truth.
Both formats "are" more similar than they are dissimilar. The quality of both should be the same at a given rate and codec. MPEG2 is the easiest to encode/decode but it doesn't offer the same quality as VC-1 or AVC at reasonable bitrates(under 20Mbps)
HD DVD uses the same disc structure as DVD so pressing plants can either be upgraded to support HD DVD or a new line can be purchased that stamps both discs. The lens assembly is smaller on an HD DVD because it shares a very similar numerical aperture(how close the laser is to the disc and its focusing area) so supporting both in a single assembly is easier.
Blu-Ray has a higher Numerical Aperture which means the laser is much closer to the disc. The recording layer was moved up closer to the surface of the disc so that the laser would be strong enough to penetrate the first layer and access the second without moving to a more powerful and costly laser. This is what may allow Blu-Ray to support 4 layers of data in the future.
DRAM
Both employ 128-bit encryption in the form of AACS. Unlike DVD if a key is found it can be revoked. This will prevent ripping of the content. Blu-Ray adds BD+ which is another layer of DRM that Fox Studios really pushed for. They also have a feature called ROM Mark.
Managed Copy
Are you a bit peeved that you can't rip HD DVD or Blu-Ray? Well fear not. Mandatory Copy is a feature of AACS that allows you to store a digital representation of your movie on a HDD. For all intents and purposes it is allowing you to RIP content to you drive the only catch is that that content will have limited usage rights and may cost you a bit extra. For those who just want the easy access of streaming media from a HTPC that just may be the ticket they need to fall in love with the formats. Here's the rub. Microsoft and Intel were interested in supporting Blu-Ray as well but with Fox Studios pushing BD+ inclusion it became clear that BD+ could usurp the right to Mandatory Managed Copy and Microsoft and Intel realized that this would hamper their respective forays into media with Media Cenntre PC and viiv technology. HD DVD offers no extra DRM so Mandatory Managed Copy will be there once it's ready.
Price
Because the lens assembly on HD DVD is so close to DVD and because the disc structure is the same it is said that HD DVD should be the overall cheaper format to produce. Time will tell here but Toshiba looks like they're going to press the issue on price so I expect myself that HD DVD will generally be slightly cheaper in future incarnation.
Hope this filled in some gaps. Both formats are incredible and offer huge potential. Which one the consumers decide to go with en masse will depend on a variety of factors.
In any case, I'm sticking by word; if I want HD quality movies, I'm going to download them. No way I'm dropping money on a single format blu-ray or HD-DVD DVDR only to be limited by physical media.
Neither format is limited to physical media. Both specs have the ability to attach a HDD drive and dynamically update content that can be sync'd to the physical media. No more video stagnation. You will not be able to copy either format without their imposed restrictions. HD DVD may be able to be hacked but I doubt it. Blu-Ray is nigh impossible with BD+ added in.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Both formats "are" more similar than they are dissimilar. The quality of both should be the same at a given rate and codec. MPEG2 is the easiest to encode/decode but it doesn't offer the same quality as VC-1 or AVC at reasonable bitrates(under 20Mbps)
...
Because the lens assembly on HD DVD is so close to DVD and because the disc structure is the same it is said that HD DVD should be the overall cheaper format to produce.
But Blu-ray has much more space, so it can afford the higher bit rate of MPEG2. You don't need to limit yourself to <20 mbps, unlike the space-constrained HD-DVD.
The lower processing requirements should make blu-ray players much physically cooler, smaller, and cheaper than HD-DVD.
At this point I think the studios need to take responsibility, and start an electronic key cataloging system as to where you can store your catalog information online at their site, and your disc becomes damaged they should be replacing it. Because that is the sole purpose of my backup system, and it is cheap, and worth it. But I don't think I should spend a dime more for it. Not with the money these cock knockers are making. Not after buying all these disks on DVD once, seeing most of them in the theaters, and now having to upgrade that catalog again. I should be able to send my DVD in for a coupon for the original price of the disc, and get a coupon for the exact same movie that works on it's upgraded High Definition version.
Originally posted by e1618978
But Blu-ray has much more space, so it can afford the higher bit rate of MPEG2. You don't need to limit yourself to <20 mbps, unlike the space-constrained HD-DVD.
The lower processing requirements should make blu-ray players much physically cooler, smaller, and cheaper than HD-DVD.
"Why" though is the question. If I can maintain the same quality at half the bitrate why would I choose MPEG2. Please explain your logic here. Come on you do do better than "feign ignorance" like you are here. When the equivalent quality can be delivered using less storage then it makes sense on multiple levels to choose the more efficient storage and codec.
As for your last point don't forget to add "at the expense of delivering the best HD quality"
Come on you can do better.
Onlooker-
I agree. Think of it in terms of License/Media. The physical disc in essence becomes the media for a license. Should the disc be destroyed It would be nice for the studios to have a policy of replacing the disc by the consumer paying for a mailer to return the broken disc for an exchange. Future players could have HDD included so that your favorite movies reside inside the player ready for access sans disc.
There are lots of new options that both formats have. We could see some fundamental chances next year in how we consume HD media.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Onlooker-
I agree. Think of it in terms of License/Media. The physical disc in essence becomes the media for a license. Should the disc be destroyed It would be nice for the studios to have a policy of replacing the disc by the consumer paying for a mailer to return the broken disc for an exchange. Future players could have HDD included so that your favorite movies reside inside the player ready for access sans disc.
There are lots of new options that both formats have. We could see some fundamental chances next year in how we consume HD media.
I agree on all counts. I'm not sure that you caught this so I'll say it again. I was also talking about from DVD to HD DVD. I want a coupon for my previous purchase. I'm not saying an exact exchange, but I I should get at least 50+% off if I've already bought the movie depending on the price of the new media IMO.
Originally posted by 1984
The US has always been behind in implementing technology. The government moves at a snails pace.
The government doesn't implement this. The service providers do. And right now, they have very little competition, so there's very little incentive to upgrade. You basically have two options for broadband. DSL which is slower but cheaper, or cable which is faster but more expensive. And both are essentially monopolies for any given area; there's one cable company and one phone company. They're all more interested in whatever profit they can squeeze out of customers without upgrading infrastructure. Verizon is oh, so slowly rolling out FiOS, but that won't be a major player for years and is still much slower and much more expensive than what's offered in Japan or South Korea.
Originally posted by onlooker
Criticize all you want, but if you need to download at 2.5GB per second that bad go ahead and move to France. Fuckin A.
Where did this come from? Kupan did not engage in personal attacks and namecalling. Try to control yourself. This isn't a schoolyard.
Originally posted by onlooker
Not after buying all these disks on DVD once, seeing most of them in the theaters, and now having to upgrade that catalog again. I should be able to send my DVD in for a coupon for the original price of the disc, and get a coupon for the exact same movie that works on it's upgraded High Definition version.
You're probably too young to remember this, based on your language and lack of anger management, but when we transitioned from records to CDs, no company ever offered to replace our LPs with CDs for free or even reduced cost. It's always been if you want a better version, you buy it. You can't even trade CDs and DVDs for "special editions" that came out later. Nobody's forcing you to buy Blu-ray or HD DVD and nobody's taking your DVDs away. There's no reason you have to buy the movies again. I wouldn't mind if companies kept giving me credit on new computers for the old ones I used for years, but that's not going to happen. Welcome to Capitalism 101. So ease up.
Originally posted by hmurchison
"Why" though is the question. If I can maintain the same quality at half the bitrate why would I choose MPEG2.
Disk space is not the only cost, processing power is also a cost.
HD-DVD uses less disk space and bandwidth, at the expense of processing power. HD-DVD players will always be hotter, bigger, and probably more expensive than blu-ray players.
Blu-ray uses less procesing power, at the expense of disk space and bandwidth. Since Blu-ray has plenty of disk space to use, and movies will never be longer than a few hours, this is an intelligent decision. You get less expensive players, lower heat output, smaller chassis, etc.
Originally posted by Kolchak
The government doesn't implement this. The service providers do. And right now, they have very little competition, so there's very little incentive to upgrade. You basically have two options for broadband. DSL which is slower but cheaper, or cable which is faster but more expensive. And both are essentially monopolies for any given area; there's one cable company and one phone company. They're all more interested in whatever profit they can squeeze out of customers without upgrading infrastructure. Verizon is oh, so slowly rolling out FiOS, but that won't be a major player for years and is still much slower and much more expensive than what's offered in Japan or South Korea.
Where did this come from? Kupan did not engage in personal attacks and namecalling. Try to control yourself. This isn't a schoolyard.
You're probably too young to remember this, based on your language and lack of anger management, but when we transitioned from records to CDs, no company ever offered to replace our LPs with CDs for free or even reduced cost. It's always been if you want a better version, you buy it. You can't even trade CDs and DVDs for "special editions" that came out later. Nobody's forcing you to buy Blu-ray or HD DVD and nobody's taking your DVDs away. There's no reason you have to buy the movies again. I wouldn't mind if companies kept giving me credit on new computers for the old ones I used for years, but that's not going to happen. Welcome to Capitalism 101. So ease up.
I remember the 8 track. Too young. Pfft..
Originally posted by hmurchison
I agree. Think of it in terms of License/Media. The physical disc in essence becomes the media for a license. Should the disc be destroyed It would be nice for the studios to have a policy of replacing the disc by the consumer paying for a mailer to return the broken disc for an exchange.
I know some box sets (like Season X of TV Show Y) offer this. My wife borrowed a friend's "Lost" Season 1 Set and (ironically) lost one of the discs. It cost $4 + S/H ($1.99 IIRC) to replace a single disc from the box set. I can't complain about that. I have no idea if studios have a standard practice like that, but some at least recognize the issue.
I suppose in light of the difficulty they create in creating a backup of your media, they should be required to have a cheap replacement policy.
Originally posted by onlooker
I remember the 8 track. Too young. Pfft..
I wouldn't brag about that. At your age, you should know better. I expect that sort of coarse language and ignorance in online forums from those too young to drink, but not from middle-aged adults.
Originally posted by atomicham
I know some box sets (like Season X of TV Show Y) offer this. My wife borrowed a friend's "Lost" Season 1 Set and (ironically) lost one of the discs. It cost $4 + S/H ($1.99 IIRC) to replace a single disc from the box set. I can't complain about that. I have no idea if studios have a standard practice like that, but some at least recognize the issue.
I suppose in light of the difficulty they create in creating a backup of your media, they should be required to have a cheap replacement policy.
I don't expect you can replace more than one or two disks under that policy. As it is, it costs them very little to replace disks like that since the lowest price I can find for a box set is $42, so that's $6 per disc. That means nobody would be able to assemble a full set under the replacement policy for less than the sale price, and you wouldn't have the packaging.
Originally posted by ngmapple
Are you kidding me, Verizon's FIOS offers 100Mb service to the home, even a tenth of that is enough for a couple simultaneous HD streams.
I use Cablevision which is up to 15Mb dowstream, still plenty fast.
Verizon offers up to 30Mbps, for a whopping $180/month (with a one year commitment). 15Mbps is a much better deal at $45/mo. Customers who need really high speed for downloading would be better off buying two of the 15Mbps connections for half the price of the 30. Cablevision doesn't give you 30Mbps unless you pay $60/mo and the 15Mbps is still $45/mo, although that's still 3x the speed of crappy RoadRunner for the same price.
Originally posted by e1618978
MPEG2 is much easier to decode than MPEG4, so I think that you have this reversed - HD-DVD should have the hardware bloat.
The lower processing requirements should make blu-ray players much physically cooler, smaller, and cheaper than HD-DVD.
Except for the fact that Blu-ray has to also be able to decode VC-1 and AVC. So if they both have to be able to decode all the formats, they will be roughly the same in processing power. I don't know why you are thinking that Blu-ray will be smaller/cooler because current disks are coming out as MPEG-2. So when the first VC-1/AVC disks come out for Blu-ray I wont be able to play them because my Blu-ray player doesn't have enough processing power? Is that what you are telling me?
Whatever its merits as a film, 'Training Day' has made history by becoming one of the first titles to be released on both the Blu-ray and HD DVD formats. In our first head-to-head comparison, we found the HD DVD to be superior. The unfortunate cropping of the Blu-ray image, coupled with more noticeable compression artifacts and an overall darker cast, can't compete with the more consistently pleasing presentation of the HD DVD. Also a strike against the Blu-ray version is that both the Dolby TrueHD and Dolby Digital-Plus soundtracks have been dropped in favor of plain old Dolby Digital, and even the disc's menu navigation is more clunky and with less interactive functionality. Certainly, this Blu-ray release delivers fine video quality in its own right, but the format's backers will need to step it up if they are going to win the hearts and minds of early adopters over HD DVD.
Interesting indeed. I can't wait for more players to hit the market (for both formats) to see if there are any difference among players (and to see if it is the Samsung that is doing the cropping).
Originally posted by kupan787
Except for the fact that Blu-ray has to also be able to decode VC-1 and AVC. So if they both have to be able to decode all the formats, they will be roughly the same in processing power. I don't know why you are thinking that Blu-ray will be smaller/cooler because current disks are coming out as MPEG-2. So when the first VC-1/AVC disks come out for Blu-ray I wont be able to play them because my Blu-ray player doesn't have enough processing power? Is that what you are telling me?
I don't think that there will ever be MPEG-4 blu-ray disks, and the heat output is only when you are playing the disk. However, I'll admit that as long as blu-ray still supports MPEG-2, they still need all the same cooling and processing hardware.
I wonder if playing an MPEG-4 HD-DVD movie would noticeably drain the battery of a laptop faster than playing a MPEG-2 blu-ray movie...
Originally posted by Kolchak
The government doesn't implement this. The service providers do You basically have two options for broadband. DSL which is slower but cheaper, or cable which is faster but more expensive. And both are essentially monopolies for any given area; there's one cable company and one phone company.
That's exactly what I was talking about though. The government does nothing about these monopolies. Just look at who's hands the Net Neutrality bill is in. It's all a bunch of tubes to them. If there was competition we would have faster speeds. You should have seen the despicable behavior Comcast showed when a competing municipal broadband service was on the table. They spent millions on a massive misinformation campaign using television, radio, pamphlets, phone calls, etc. They had Comcast employees poising as citizens at the meetings asking loaded questions, made threatening calls to members in favor of the competition, performed bogus surveys claiming to be a third party while pushing their own agenda. It was unbelievable. I had never seen anything more corrupt. Needless to say they won the vote. A month later Comcast jacked up their rates.
Originally posted by hmurchison
"Why" though is the question. If I can maintain the same quality at half the bitrate why would I choose MPEG2. Please explain your logic here. Come on you do do better than "feign ignorance" like you are here. When the equivalent quality can be delivered using less storage then it makes sense on multiple levels to choose the more efficient storage and codec.
You don't have to choose MPEG2. Blu-Ray supports MPEG4 as well. I've seen the demos so it's up to the studios. You can fit considerably more MPEG4 video on a 25/50 GB BD-ROM and not even have to worry about fudging the bitrate. The question is why Warner would use MPEG4 on HD-DVD but not on Blu-Ray when there is no reason not to. It's possible that some within Warner want Blu-Ray to fail so they decided to do a quick and dirty transfer. I also think the Samsung player is unfortunately a dud. It seems to have a lot of video issues which make a direct comparison impossible at this time. There are a whole lot of other manufacturers coming out with Blu-Ray players so we're not going to learn anything valuable for a while. I think we'll be well past page 100 before a "winner" is declared.
They did a fine job maximizing quality for their first release so I expect their VC-1 stuff will be very good as well.
Originally posted by Kolchak
I wouldn't brag about that. At your age, you should know better. I expect that sort of coarse language and ignorance in online forums from those too young to drink, but not from middle-aged adults.
I said I can remember them. I didn't say I invented them. I'm no where near middle aged. If middle aged were 50 I'd be just over half of that.
Originally posted by onlooker
I said I can remember them. I didn't say I invented them. I'm no where near middle aged. If middle aged were 50 I'd be just over half of that.
Male life expectancy in the US is 72, so middle aged is 36.
Originally posted by e1618978
Male life expectancy in the US is 72, so middle aged is 36.
So I'm obviously not middle aged.