I don't think we know. I've read a review saying it didn't work, and a review saying it worked great. I'd let time pass (or wait for a solid review) before saying either way.
if by HD you mean 1080p, my new intel mini Core Duo does great playing the movie trailers off Apple's website. It makes me cry at night when I am on my iMac G5 20" 1.8 GHz.
While both Blu Ray and HD DVD utilize AACS 128-bit encryption Blu Ray adds ROM Mark and BD+ ontop. This is likely what is causing some delays as they try to get BD+ and AACS working in tandem.
I could care less about both of the new formats. They are being pushed as highly restrictive when they could just be higher capacity disks for us to use. Instead Sony and Toshiba have to take the time to perfect how they can screw us out of our fair-use and break 1 law by using another (DMCA).
I for one plan to boycott both stick to DVDs for the time being. Honestly if this stuff isn't cheap enough until 2007 or later then I would also expect the new groundwork for better download services to be developed. Hell in a year and a half we may have a higher speed internet because both google and a specialized organization are rumored to be working on high speed backbones capable of supported the transfer of large video streams and files. This would solve the bandwidth considerations for high resolution HD films and in the end you just have to worry about hard disk capacity. Once again if this is 2007 or later then we should have 500 GB HDs (as big as the HD manufacturers want to make them without major defects) at a reasonable price of below 200 a piece. Easily enough to store 20 GB movies even uncompressed (which they won't be).
Reliability considered you save up 400 dollars, which is still nothing compared to the costs for me to buy a player and a computer with a drive for these new formats. Let us also not forget about the thousand dollar HDTV. With this 400 dollars you could buy two 500 GB HDs to backup everything and you will be set. You will be capable of saving 25 uncompressed films on those HDs but most likely they will be compressed to about 5-7 GBs and still be HD in which case you will have room for 2 copies of 71 films for 400.
A lot of guess work here but so is the dates of all this bluray and apple integration of it.
The SCE president also told the crowd that the PS3 would use a 60GB 2.5-inch hard disc drive (HDD). A slide show during the presentation said the HDD would be loaded with the Linux operating system instead of Microsoft's Windows OS. The show also said it could be used as a "home server," could be directly connected to the Internet, and would be fully "upgradable."
It would have been cool to see the OSX in the PS3 but we'll reach mars [people] before that happens
Comments
Originally posted by Elixir
i'm not for blu ray at all.
all these security measures have me worried.
How is HD-DVD any different?
Originally posted by hmurchison
The Pioneer unit is the first Blu Ray that's shipping. What you've captured here are mockups that aren't shipping.
May is not that far off though. Here are the model numbers and specs...
Panasonic UJ-215 and Panasonic SW-5582
Originally posted by GregAlexander
I don't think we know. I've read a review saying it didn't work, and a review saying it worked great. I'd let time pass (or wait for a solid review) before saying either way.
if by HD you mean 1080p, my new intel mini Core Duo does great playing the movie trailers off Apple's website. It makes me cry at night when I am on my iMac G5 20" 1.8 GHz.
Originally posted by 1984
How is HD-DVD any different?
While both Blu Ray and HD DVD utilize AACS 128-bit encryption Blu Ray adds ROM Mark and BD+ ontop. This is likely what is causing some delays as they try to get BD+ and AACS working in tandem.
I for one plan to boycott both stick to DVDs for the time being. Honestly if this stuff isn't cheap enough until 2007 or later then I would also expect the new groundwork for better download services to be developed. Hell in a year and a half we may have a higher speed internet because both google and a specialized organization are rumored to be working on high speed backbones capable of supported the transfer of large video streams and files. This would solve the bandwidth considerations for high resolution HD films and in the end you just have to worry about hard disk capacity. Once again if this is 2007 or later then we should have 500 GB HDs (as big as the HD manufacturers want to make them without major defects) at a reasonable price of below 200 a piece. Easily enough to store 20 GB movies even uncompressed (which they won't be).
Reliability considered you save up 400 dollars, which is still nothing compared to the costs for me to buy a player and a computer with a drive for these new formats. Let us also not forget about the thousand dollar HDTV. With this 400 dollars you could buy two 500 GB HDs to backup everything and you will be set. You will be capable of saving 25 uncompressed films on those HDs but most likely they will be compressed to about 5-7 GBs and still be HD in which case you will have room for 2 copies of 71 films for 400.
A lot of guess work here but so is the dates of all this bluray and apple integration of it.
Originally posted by 1984
I have yet to see anyone run one at the full 1920x1080 resolution. No one has a 23" Cinema Display hooked up to their Mac mini.
My wife has a 23", but she has a G4 Mini.
The SCE president also told the crowd that the PS3 would use a 60GB 2.5-inch hard disc drive (HDD). A slide show during the presentation said the HDD would be loaded with the Linux operating system instead of Microsoft's Windows OS. The show also said it could be used as a "home server," could be directly connected to the Internet, and would be fully "upgradable."
It would have been cool to see the OSX in the PS3 but we'll reach mars [people] before that happens
Here's the link to the news: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6145972.html