[el chupacabra]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Sony takes royalties for Bluray too. You can hardly argue that Sony is just creating Bluray for the shared good. Microsoft and Sony are both just about as open.

Agreed, I'd just rather drink sony's piss than microsoft's, especially since sony's technology is superior.

Also Bluray uses VC1.

I never said it didn't, please reread my original post where I talk about how it does use VC1.

You can't argue Microsoft is against Bluray because they don't use VC1 because that simply isn't true.

Yes I can. Please reread my original post. I'll say it again. Most blu ray discs don't use VC1, most HD DVD discs do. Therefore MS has something to lose.

Also VC1 and MPEG4 are about the same. MPEG4 could possibly be a bit better, but light years better is a complete exaggeration.

Maybe, but out of all the technology forums/sites I've been to over the years everyone I've seen disagrees, most people don't even consider them in the same league. The difference is obvious in lower resolutions. Maybe people are being fooled with the high resolution (1080), which is fine if people can't tell the difference just because it's in 1080, but in the future when movie files become larger and larger (assuming the trend continues) more compression will be required in which case the difference will be very apparent.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by goMac 

...Apple could sell HD content to you no matter if you have a DVD drive, a Bluray drive, or an HD-DVD drive. Why pay money for an expensive drive or player when you could just download HD content?...

I don't think that downloading HD content is a good alternative to buying a BR or HD player. I just bought the newest top of the line powerbook and I only have 19gigs free on my hard drive. And wouldn't downloading some crappy movie not take several days but block all other internet access during that time or at least slow it down big time. And finally push the internet providors to start charging by the hour or GB again? No thanks... movies aren't worth it.

[tutelary]

You people saying mpeg4 is superior in ANY way to vc-1 are smoking something good apparently. I take it you have never seen actual movies encoded in either.

This "h.264 is so much better than vc-1" stuff is complete crap as well. To the eye these two are all but indiscernible.

[cSurfr]

I think it's a bit funny that people don't think sony has a monopoly with Blu-Ray. . . lets see.

1) Sony supplies the Blue Laser
2) Sony runs half of the movie studios that appear on Blu-Ray
3) Sony decides what content can and cannot be placed on the discs

The ONLY reason BR has a chance is because of the PS3. . . which isn't living up to expectations at all. . . at least 10 people I know were planning on buying a PS3, and then decided against it. Every store I go into has tons of them in stock . . . yet I can't get a Wii to save my life.

So tell me. . . Why would I want to support sony in wanting to single handedly running the entire movie market? Please tell me how the consumer would benefit from this.

[wallinbl]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

I don't think that downloading HD content is a good alternative to buying a BR or HD player. I just bought the newest top of the line powerbook and I only have 19gigs free on my hard drive.

Get a USB or FW drive. Heck, you can now get them that plug into your WAP.

And wouldn't downloading some crappy movie not take several days

I guess that depends on your provider, but mine isn't that slow.

block all other internet access during that time or at least slow it down big time.

Again, mine wouldn't have a problem.

And finally push the internet providors to start charging by the hour or GB again?

That will never happen. They know people would bail if they did. Cell phones are on their way to unlimited minutes as well because people hate being screwed by plans and overages and all that BS.

It may not be immediate, but I tend to agree with those that argue that BR and HDDVD will never get a foothold before downloading destroys them.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by cSurfr 

I think it's a bit funny that people don't think sony has a monopoly with Blu-Ray. . . lets see.

1) Sony supplies the Blue Laser
2) Sony runs half of the movie studios that appear on Blu-Ray
3) Sony decides what content can and cannot be placed on the discs

The ONLY reason BR has a chance is because of the PS3. . . which isn't living up to expectations at all. . . at least 10 people I know were planning on buying a PS3, and then decided against it. Every store I go into has tons of them in stock . . . yet I can't get a Wii to save my life.

So tell me. . . Why would I want to support sony in wanting to single handedly running the entire movie market? Please tell me how the consumer would benefit from this.

Because so far we have gotten more movies than HD-DVD for less. What is the plus side of MS and Toshiba doing the same and still not having as many titles?

[Eug]

Originally Posted by exca1ibur 

I never said TrueHD was mandatory, or even on Blu Ray. I haven't seen a single one with TrueHD. I also never said ALL Blu ray disc use VC-1. I said most NEWER Blu ray movies are using MP4, which they are. Have a look for yourself. I know earlier discs used mostly MP2 and VC1, but now most are MP4 now, is what I'm saying.

I've never heard of anyone making something mandatory for either camp. I thought that was up to the developer, since no matter which formats they use they are all supported by the media.

First off, using the term "MP4" alone is kinda misleading, because MP4 often suggests something other than AVC/H.264, which is what the discs are using. (That's like calling VC-1 just WMV.) Yes most Blu-ray discs are now using AVC/H.264 but the reason for that is because that's what both Panasonic and Sony are pushing (and they write the software). However, as I said, for those format neutral studios using 3rd party authoring houses, they are using VC-1 on Blu-ray quite often, because it's easier to just encode VC-1 once for both HD DVD and Blu-ray. Either way though, AVC/H.264 and VC-1 are a huge improvement over MPEG2, at least on BD25. MPEG2 video (like PCM audio) is an incredible waste of space.

As for mandatory feature support in hardware, it is very important. It does NOT mean all discs have to support all mandatory features, but that the software developers can use it if desired.

Blu-ray does not have mandatory Dolby Digital Plus support. HD DVD does. Hence, pretty much all mainstream HD DVDs have at least Dolby Digital Plus. Blu-ray uses Dolby Digital. Dolby Digital on Blu-ray is limited to 640 Kbps and 5.1 channels. Dolby Digital Plus (which is more efficient than Dolby Digital) can be up to 3000 Kbps on HD DVD, with 7.1 channels. EVERY HD DVD player must be able to decode Dolby Digital Plus (at 3000 Kbps), unlike with Blu-ray where you may get no Dolby Digital Plus support at all on some players.

Blu-ray does not have mandatory dual simultaneous video stream decode support. HD DVD does. Hence every single HD DVD player in existence can play back picture-in-picture video commentaries using on-the-fly video overlays. Blu-ray cannot, which means that either you get only audio commentaries, or you have to have a second copy of the video with the video commentary hard-coded into the stream. Again, that is an incredible waste of space.

Blu-ray does not have mandatory TrueHD support. HD DVD does, but only sort of, as their mandatory support is only TrueHD 2.0. OTOH, every single HD DVD player to date supports TrueHD 5.1 decoding.

Mandatory feature support is very useful when talking about implementation of a format. goMac is correct to say that the implementation of HD DVD on the whole is more elegant when compared to Blu-ray. Blu-ray's main advantage is storage space... which it needs, since Blu-ray's implementation favours wasting space.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

And don't forget HD-DVD has no Sony pictures, No Disney and no pixar.

As consumers if they rather have picture in picture commentary or movies from those studios.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

So what's so wrong with that? There is plenty of space and if it has better sound anyway what is the downside?

PCM and TrueHD are identical in terms of sound, but PCM wastes space. (TrueHD uses lossless compression. PCM uses no compression at all.)

More importantly though, the baseline audio on Blu-ray is Dolby Digital, up to 640 Kbps 5.1 channel. The baseline audio on HD DVD is Dolby Digital Plus, up to 3 Mbps 7.1 channel. IMO, the sweet spot here is 1.5 Mbps 5.1 channel Dolby Digital Plus.

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

And don't forget HD-DVD has no Sony pictures, No Disney and no pixar.

As consumers if they rather have picture in picture commentary or movies from those studios.

Yes. Content is very important.

For me though, my #1 desired title for HD is Battlestar Galactica. That is Universal, and thus is an HD DVD exclusive (for late 2007).

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Yes. Content is very important.

Well don't worry about it then. Like you said BR can do PIP but it wastes space but we already saw 2 disk releases with special features being on the second disk because studio's know it adds the perception of value even if there is enough space to fit it on one.

Yes BSG is a biggie but if BR wins and by the current sales it looks like it will, Universal will fold and release it on BR.

OR those TrueHD disks will also do a nice job of killing HD-DVD even quicker.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Well don't worry about it then. Like you said BR can do PIP but it wastes space but we already saw 2 disk releases with special features being on the second disk because studio's know it adds the perception of value even if there is enough space to fit it on one.

Yes BSG is a biggie but if BR wins and by the current sales it looks like it will, Universal will fold and release it on BR.

Ever since early 2006, my prediction is that there will be a stalemate for quite some time, and we'd eventually get dual-format players.

That prediction has already come true. The LG standalone hybrid is a lame dual-format player, but PC-based systems are complete proper dual-format players. Furthermore, in 2007 a proper standalone dual-format player will be released.

I suspect though, neither format will be truly dominant before 2010. DVD is the king of formats, and will remain so until after 2010. Current Blu-ray and HD DVD sales are miniscule in comparison. ie. If current sales levels for Blu-ray and HD DVD persist, both formats will be effectively dead by next year.

OR those TrueHD disks will also do a nice job of killing HD-DVD even quicker.

I don't even know what that means.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Ever since early 2006, my prediction is that there will be a stalemate for quite some time, and we'd eventually get dual-format players.

How is that different that anyones else's prediction? Did they all think HD-DVD would win the first week?

How is BR having 5x the players install base and almost 3x the disks sales a stalemate? Just cuz HD is still on the market doesn't mean they are neck to neck.

Who in their right mind would buy a crippled $1200 hybrid when you can get two stand alone players for less?

[Adam Betts]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

How is BR having 5x the players install base and almost 3x the disks sales a stalemate?

Once again you're pulling stats out of your ass. Source please.

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Just cuz HD is still on the market doesn't mean they are neck to neck.

Weak logic :/

[goMac]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

I don't think that downloading HD content is a good alternative to buying a BR or HD player. I just bought the newest top of the line powerbook and I only have 19gigs free on my hard drive. And wouldn't downloading some crappy movie not take several days but block all other internet access during that time or at least slow it down big time. And finally push the internet providors to start charging by the hour or GB again? No thanks... movies aren't worth it.

iTunes is marketed towards the average consumer though. A lot of us here will buy HD-DVD or Bluray for features like 1080p or maybe uncompressed 5.1, but most consumers have at most 720p. Apple could offer content at 720p, maybe with compressed 5.1, and the downloads would still be pretty reasonable. With music they've already offered a lower quality download than cd and been successful.

Honestly, when faced with having to pay at least $500 to get 1080p quality and uncompressed audio, which are features most consumers can't use anyway, I think most consumers would just pass on the format war and go with downloads from iTunes.

[exca1ibur]

Originally Posted by Eug 

First off, using the term "MP4" alone is kinda misleading, because MP4 often suggests something other than AVC/H.264, which is what the discs are using. (That's like calling VC-1 just WMV.) Yes most Blu-ray discs are now using AVC/H.264 but the reason for that is because that's what both Panasonic and Sony are pushing (and they write the software). However, as I said, for those format neutral studios using 3rd party authoring houses, they are using VC-1 on Blu-ray quite often, because it's easier to just encode VC-1 once for both HD DVD and Blu-ray. Either way though, AVC/H.264 and VC-1 are a huge improvement over MPEG2, at least on BD25. MPEG2 video (like PCM audio) is an incredible waste of space.

As for mandatory feature support in hardware, it is very important. It does NOT mean all discs have to support all mandatory features, but that the software developers can use it if desired.

Blu-ray does not have mandatory Dolby Digital Plus support. HD DVD does. Hence, pretty much all mainstream HD DVDs have at least Dolby Digital Plus. Blu-ray uses Dolby Digital. Dolby Digital on Blu-ray is limited to 640 Kbps and 5.1 channels. Dolby Digital Plus (which is more efficient than Dolby Digital) can be up to 3000 Kbps on HD DVD, with 7.1 channels. EVERY HD DVD player must be able to decode Dolby Digital Plus (at 3000 Kbps), unlike with Blu-ray where you may get no Dolby Digital Plus support at all on some players.

Blu-ray does not have mandatory dual simultaneous video stream decode support. HD DVD does. Hence every single HD DVD player in existence can play back picture-in-picture video commentaries using on-the-fly video overlays. Blu-ray cannot, which means that either you get only audio commentaries, or you have to have a second copy of the video with the video commentary hard-coded into the stream. Again, that is an incredible waste of space.

Blu-ray does not have mandatory TrueHD support. HD DVD does, but only sort of, as their mandatory support is only TrueHD 2.0. OTOH, every single HD DVD player to date supports TrueHD 5.1 decoding.

Mandatory feature support is very useful when talking about implementation of a format. goMac is correct to say that the implementation of HD DVD on the whole is more elegant when compared to Blu-ray. Blu-ray's main advantage is storage space... which it needs, since Blu-ray's implementation favours wasting space.

Thats fine, but you missing my point a little and still reading too far into what I'm saying.

Blu ray uses MP4/ADV for most newer movies. I've only seen earlier movies that used VC1.. This is a fact and can you can bring up any list of current movies to see that. The mandatory I'm not arguing. Never even heard of it TO argue it. As long as the developer has the option, thats their call. As a consumer I don't care.

[Eug]

The mandatory I'm not arguing. Never even heard of it TO argue it. As long as the developer has the option, thats their call. As a consumer I don't care.

As a consumer I care about mandatory hardware features. Why?

1) If a feature is mandatory, every single player must support it, even the el cheapo players.

2) If a feature is mandatory and every player must support it, the software developers are much more likely to use it on the discs they sell us.

The best example of this is mandatory support of Dolby Digital Plus on HD DVD. Almost every HD DVD has Dolby Digital Plus, whereas basically no Blu-ray discs have it. They're stuck with plain Dolby Digital for the baseline audio.