HD DVD vs Blu-Ray
Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 10:22 am
I'm pretty sure that stat should be in excess of 97%. High def brag about moving 100,000 copies to each other while good ole DVD does in excess of 60 million copies at the same time.TIGERassault wrote:IIRC, regular DVDs still hold about 90% of the market. The HD-DVD vs Blu-ray war is farily moot, as the winner only claims a relatively small reward.
Gekko71 wrote:... I reckon Sarge from Red Vs Blue has got it right
http://rvb.roosterteeth.com/archive/episode.php?id=242
DVDs are already using red lasers (CDs use infrared).Dakatsu wrote:HD-DVD vs Blu-Ray?
What about Red-Ray or HHD-DVVDD-BVD!
And that's the first thing I'm going to remove when I rip them. Stupid crap.And now you're going to see Blu-rays that incorporate Java, which will open up a world of possibilities from more complex menus and navigation structures, imbedded hyperlinks, picture-in-picture, and other goodies that would require major spec revisions for HD-DVD. In short, Java's going to make Blu-ray far flashier and more versatile.
You'll be suprised just how many companies did refuse to use Blu-ray because of that Java. Including HP. (well, that and the lack of a managed copy feature)Testiculese wrote:And that's the first thing I'm going to remove when I rip them. Stupid crap.
wow.. didn't see THAT coming.Top Wop wrote:You know who's gonna win?
Whatever the porn companies choose as their format. Kinda like the last time.
Surprising as it sounds it is actually true. (And you thought Disney had all the clout...)Duper wrote:wow.. didn't see THAT coming.
I'm tempted to post the "Read: then you won't look so stupid when you post." image here but instead I'll just fill in the information you didn't read.Money! wrote:You know what really pisses me off? The fact that the local signal is going to be gone in 2009. No TV w/o cable? **** that! I still don't have cable and am doing just fine.
i'm still waiting for my awesome cheap 1 Terrabyte discs.Red_5 wrote:I don't really care which wins, they both look good on my TV.
Me, I'm waiting for a hologram projector and some laser-based data storage crystal cubes.
Would be cool...
Porn? I thought that's what the internet was for?Top Wop wrote:You know who's gonna win?
Whatever the porn companies choose as their format. Kinda like the last time.
Anyone I know who's actually tried it was sorely dissapointed with the experience. As long as the physical media can deliver a better looking product than any VOD systems, I think you're unlikely to see them go away completely. In fact, a big VOD venture my employer had with HP just went under very suddenly. It's just not catching on like one might expect.tunnelcat wrote:Neither will win. Microsoft wants the download model of getting movies (or any media) into your home, no hard media, and thus full control of all the bits.
Yeah, well all that porn is only going to lead to someone having sex sooner or later. Kids often follow. Kids like their cartoons. Disney still wins.Krom wrote:(And you thought Disney had all the clout...)
I really don't see any advantage to Sony doing this arbitrarily, or just for giggles. So as long as you behave legally, I'm not sure how this would ever happen to you. Give them a reason, such as pirating content, then perhaps it could.Testiculese wrote:I'm still not impressed with a most loathsome company, Sony, having the ability to brick my player just because they want to.
HD-DVD has a triple-layer disk at 51GB, so as far as actual size, Blu-Ray is now smaller. However, Blu-Ray DOES still support a higher bitrate (54Mbps max vs 30 Mbps on HD-DVD).[RIP]Machete_Bug wrote:But that's just the politics and marketing end of it. As a format, Blu-ray is better. Krom mentioned larger disc capacity. Which means more bits devoted towards the video. And more bits is always better when it comes to video compression. Plus I love the idea of being able to truly watch films in progressive 24fps as intended, instead of 30fps interlaced pictures with a 3-2 pulldown. And now you're going to see Blu-rays that incorporate Java, which will open up a world of possibilities from more complex menus and navigation structures, imbedded hyperlinks, picture-in-picture, and other goodies that would require major spec revisions for HD-DVD. In short, Java's going to make Blu-ray far flashier and more versatile.
I buy everything. I'm not desperate for entertainment, so if it's not good enough, I'm not buying it or downloading it. "If you have nothing to hide..." doesn't apply here. If a hardware key is hacked, Sony shuts it off. ALL players with that key are now dead. Some guy in Morocco can get my player bricked. It has already happened. Especially movie disks. Disks that used to play no longer play because of updated firmware.[RIP]Machete_Bug wrote:I really don't see any advantage to Sony doing this arbitrarily, or just for giggles. So as long as you behave legally, I'm not sure how this would ever happen to you. Give them a reason, such as pirating content, then perhaps it could.Testiculese wrote:I'm still not impressed with a most loathsome company, Sony, having the ability to brick my player just because they want to.
Wait, what? Microsoft is Toshiba's biggest backer for the HD-DVD. Heck, Microsoft are the ones that designed the interface too.tunnelcat wrote:Neither will win. Microsoft wants the download model of getting movies (or any media) into your home, no hard media, and thus full control of all the bits.
Gates is just sitting back and waiting for the two formats to duke it out and self implode.
I don't have any problems with them in my Sony BDP-S300. As for the "dual-head players" you mentioned, they've been out for months now. Its just that they're rediculously expensive compared to just getting one of each. For what it would cost to get a dual format player, you could get one of each and still have money left to buy a dozen movies in each format.tunnelcat wrote:Frankly, I'm hoping that Blu-Ray will win for now, but I wish that they would produce dual-head players that can handle both regular and Blu-Ray DVD's. Right now, I've heard that regular DVD's work like crap in Blu-Ray players, and I have a large collection.
Keyword: 'future'. I really doubt that you're going to stick to your DSL connection for the rest of your life.tunnelcat wrote:Didn't any of you guys see Gates' presentation at the CES? He was hyping his new XBOX with the ability for VOD. The wave of the future with movies, games, etc., all on his platform.
Well, I'm not going to hold my breath or have any warm and fuzzies for VOD with the state of broadband in the U.S. If Gates thinks that VOD is the wave of the future, he can come to my home and try it out on my slug of a DSL connection. Until all the telecommunication companies upgrade all their hardware and install fiber optic up to my house, he can go fly a kite with his VOD plans.
I hate to break it to you, but the future is already here. They're already streaming trailers in HD off of Apple and the XBox marketplace. They already have the equipment and the bandwith, its just boils down to getting the rights.TIGERassault wrote:Keyword: 'future'. I really doubt that you're going to stick to your DSL connection for the rest of your life.
Are those the holographic imagery thing disks?roid wrote:They're doing you a favour by changing over MONEY, Digital TV is cool, forget analog.
i'm still waiting for my awesome cheap 1 Terrabyte discs.Red_5 wrote:I don't really care which wins, they both look good on my TV.
Me, I'm waiting for a hologram projector and some laser-based data storage crystal cubes.
Would be cool...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescen ... layer_Disc
But wouldn't the discs themselves be ridiculously expensive?roid wrote:nah. they're Fluorescent Multilayer discs.
prettymuch the same as normal DVDs, but transparent - so they can have like 100+ layers. Normal DVDs can only have 2 layers or so coz they arn't transparent, the light can't travel through.
100 layers with blue lasers will give you 1 Terrabyte discs that can be read with only a slight modification to current DVD players. ie: it'd be the same price as current tech.
I'm pretty disconnected from the replication end of the business, but here's what I've been lead to undersand. Much of the added cost of Blu-ray right now is that the manufacturing technique is new. Not only are they harder to make, but there's not many places making them. There are assurances that, like just about every technology, as the format grows, prices will drop. So far they have been.TIGERassault wrote:But wouldn't the discs themselves be ridiculously expensive?
Which would look sooo much better simply because the jerkoffs that make them wouldn't have to compress the video so far that the picture looks like you took saran wrap to the TV screen. Pisses me off that they did that to half the episodes of Seaquest on the season 2 box set.fliptw wrote:still, I think the missed the ball by not giving us season sets on fewer discs at regular dvd quality.