[Eug]

I'm thinking that there will be slow uptake of both HD DVD and Blu-ray, not only because of the format war, but also because many people are more than satisfied with DVD.

In my case I have an Xbox 360 HD DVD drive with a 34" TV. I wanted something better than DVD, both for the resolution increase, but also for the decrease in artifacts and the improved blacks, etc. I was astonished as to just how much better DVD was over VHS, but nonetheless I still felt that DVD had too many image quality problems. IMO, the benefit of HD DVD (or Blu-ray) over DVD can be almost equally astonishing on some discs, even with my not-to-large TV. However, I could see many people being perfectly satisfied on my TV with DVD.

OTOH, many people are now buying large LCD TVs, and I've noticed that many DVDs look much worse on them. This is due to the fact that LCDs tend to emphasize artifacts in my opinion, and also because 37"-46" TVs are now becoming much more common. I was watching a 46" Bravia XBR TV at the Sony Store the other day and was struck at just how lousy the Superman Returns DVD looked. Compression problems galore were instantly obvious. The Blu-ray or HD DVD version would look MUCH better.

So, in your current setup, are you happy with DVD, or do you feel you need something better? ie. Do you plan on going with a HD disc format in the next 3 years, or do you think it's a waste of money?

[Dakar²]

I'd weigh in, but I won't really know till I finally pick up an HDTV this summer.

I'm leaning towards picking up a next-gen player after the format war has sorted itself out, though.

[1tuffchevy]

Regular DVD is fine for me... even on big HDTVs. I like sitting farther away, and to me, sound is more important to me than the occasional graphical glitch. That said, it pisses me off when I get a movie I really want and there isn't an option to listen to it in DTS. DTS is just SOOOOOOO much better than Dolby Digital it just isn't even funny. The only reason DD became the standard was because the old farts at the RIAA recognized the 'dolby' name. DTS is fan-tastic.

What really boggles my mind are the people who buy huge TVs, and then use the TV's built in speakers, and never get a home theater system or at the very least a set of speakers and an amp. WTF. Tv speakers are HORRID.

[andi*pandi]

we have a regular ~36" tv, and regular DVD will be fine with us until that TV dies.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by 1tuffchevy 

Regular DVD is fine for me... even on big HDTVs. I like sitting farther away, and to me, sound is more important to me than the occasional graphical glitch. That said, it pisses me off when I get a movie I really want and there isn't an option to listen to it in DTS. DTS is just SOOOOOOO much better than Dolby Digital it just isn't even funny. The only reason DD became the standard was because the old farts at the RIAA recognized the 'dolby' name. DTS is fan-tastic.

What really boggles my mind are the people who buy huge TVs, and then use the TV's built in speakers, and never get a home theater system or at the very least a set of speakers and an amp. WTF. Tv speakers are HORRID.

DTS isn't inherently better than DD. Often DTS is better, but oftentimes that is due more to the mix than the actual aound quality. Note that DTS is a less efficient compression algorithm than DD, so you can't directly compare bitrates either.

Often the DTS track is considered more dynamic, but there's nothing stopping a DD track from being just as dynamic. However, dynamics are often a mixing choice, and it seems to me that DTS likes to go in that direction. Ironically, I've in some cases preferred the DD track, since the DTS track seemed to push too far in that direction for my tastes, sort of like how early stereo music made too much use of stereo effects just because it could.

In the case of Blu-ray and HD DVD though, the DTS comparison has become less important, since DD tracks on Blu-ray are 640 Kbps (vs. 448 Kbps for DD on DVD), and it's Dolby Digital Plus on HD DVD, which is superior to DTS by most specs (better and more efficient compression algorithm, AND it can use much higher bitrates). Plus there are the options of Dolby TrueHD and DTS: MA too.

[Dakar²]

You're right about the mix Eug. I find the back speakers get more action in DTS.

[cjrivera]

DVDs are fine with me for now. I'm running a LCD projector setup (1080i) for movies and with a DVD player that has upscaling, the picture looks very good. I'm not going to buy the next-gen until the format wars have been figured out (or a good combo player comes around). I also have a lot of DVDs already and there aren't a whole lot that I would also buy the HD version, so even if/when I get the next-gen player, it will likely be new movie purchases, as opposed to trying to redo the entire library.

[1tuffchevy]

Originally Posted by Eug 

DTS isn't inherently better than DD. Often DTS is better, but oftentimes that is due more to the mix than the actual aound quality. Note that DTS is a less efficient compression algorithm than DD, so you can't directly compare bitrates either.

I disagree.

Dolby Digital vs. DTS: A Guide to the Strengths of the Formats

DD= 384 kbps to 448 kbps (DVD Standard limited, DD has the potential of up to 640 kbps

DTS= 1.4 Mbps for CD's / LD's and 1.5 Mbps for DVD

" DD tends to boast that its encoding method is more efficient than DTS and thus does not require the extra bit rates. However, even if DD is slightly more efficient, it is still not 1.5 / .448 = 3.35 times more efficient."

As for the mix itself... are you saying an audio engineer remixes each movie for hte DTS soundtrack? I thought it was the same original source, but 'encoded' to dolby digital, or encoded to DTS. I wasn't aware a sound engineer remixes the original source for different DVD audio formats, have any links about that?

Edit: Here's my other issue:

DTS vs. Dolby Digital. The subwoofer.

mega bass is always on with DD. DTS only has lots of bass during certain points.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by 1tuffchevy 

As for the mix itself... are you saying an audio engineer remixes each movie for hte DTS soundtrack? I thought it was the same original source, but 'encoded' to dolby digital, or encoded to DTS. I wasn't aware a sound engineer remixes the original source for different DVD audio formats, have any links about that?

Not sure about now, but in the past, yes, the DTS mix was very different on some DVDs.

Edit: Here's my other issue:

DTS vs. Dolby Digital. The subwoofer.

mega bass is always on with DD. DTS only has lots of bass during certain points.

Well there ya go, on these tracks the mix/settings are different. In other words, it would be impossible to do a fair listening test between the two.

DD tends to boast that its encoding method is more efficient than DTS and thus does not require the extra bit rates. However, even if DD is slightly more efficient, it is still not 1.5 / .448 = 3.35 times more efficient."

The vast majority of DTS tracks are 768 Kbps.

[1tuffchevy]

Which section? It was saying that in DD it was probably sending the LFE to the subwoofer a few times, instead of a dedicated LFE like DTS.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by 1tuffchevy 

Which section? It was saying that in DD it was probably sending the LFE to the subwoofer a few times, instead of a dedicated LFE like DTS.

Sounds like a lot of speculation there. BTW you can have the LFE channel 100% of the time with DD, if you really want. However, that doesn't mean it would actually sound better.

Like I said, I often DO prefer the DTS track, but sometimes I prefer the DD track. It's a myth that DTS automatically sounds better. Different yes, but that's not the same thing.

Except for some big Hollywood blockbusters, I often prefer more subtle use of the surrounds and the LFE.

In any case, on HD DVD and Blu-ray, we've moved beyond this DD 448 vs DTS argument. On Blu-ray, it's 640 Kbps DD. On HD DVD, DD isn't even used most of the time. It's DD+.

[Dark Helmet]

On many DVD's I can hear a definite improvement in sound when using DTS. The sound is richer with more small details.

[mitchell_pgh]

I'll go HD when:
- My current TV dies.
- TVs of a good quality with 1080p are under 2K (closer and closer every day it seems)
- The HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray war has a more clear winner.

I feel Blu-Ray may win, but I'm not buying a $600++ player and $1000+ in movies just to find out I've jumped on a dead format.

I'm getting to

[Eug]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh 

I'll go HD when:
- My current TV dies.
- TVs of a good quality with 1080p are under 2K (closer and closer every day it seems)
- The HD-DVD vs. Blu-Ray war has a more clear winner.

I feel Blu-Ray may win, but I'm not buying a $600++ player and $1000+ in movies just to find out I've jumped on a dead format.

I'm getting to

Yeah, despite the fact I have an HD DVD player (and I think HD DVD has the advantage right now), for non-geeks I tell them NOT to buy either player. Too risky.

Originally Posted by Dark Helmet 

On many DVD's I can hear a definite improvement in sound when using DTS. The sound is richer with more small details.

I wonder if it's due to increased channel separation, as some suggest. It does seem that way to me, and on some stuff it sounds a bit artificial to me.

I do like that on some titles though.

[Dork.]

DVD is good enough for me. In fact, I'm deliberately not buying into the HDTV concept just yet. IMHO, it's way too confusing and expensive. I will hold on to my analog TV's until they die.

[1tuffchevy]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Sounds like a lot of speculation there. BTW you can have the LFE channel 100% of the time with DD, if you really want. However, that doesn't mean it would actually sound better.

Like I said, I often DO prefer the DTS track, but sometimes I prefer the DD track. It's a myth that DTS automatically sounds better. Different yes, but that's not the same thing.

Except for some big Hollywood blockbusters, I often prefer more subtle use of the surrounds and the LFE.

In any case, on HD DVD and Blu-ray, we've moved beyond this DD 448 vs DTS argument. On Blu-ray, it's 640 Kbps DD. On HD DVD, DD isn't even used most of the time. It's DD+.

Care to point me to a disc where the DD is better than DTS? I'm curious, because I've always preferred the DTS version over the DD.... so I'd really like to hear this for myself. Thanks!

[zerostar]

Well, thanks to Dark Helmet, I just got my 46" Grand Wega setup and even with my Pioneer DVD player outputting just 480p the DVDs usually look amazing... This was after a lot of tweaking...

That said as soon as you can rip and burn a hd-dvd or blue ray I will start going that route, not because I want to pirate, well heh yeah, but because I take movies with me on business trips all the time and would rather rip them to my ipod or powerbook than carry around a $50 hi-def dvd.

As I will be waiting a while for HD/Blueray... is a DVD player that can upscale to 720p over HDMI worth it?

[Adam Betts]

DVD is somewhat acceptable on HDTV, even better with upscaling but from now on I will try to see if HD-DVD version is available at Netflix before renting DVD one. For me, I'm 100% behind HD-DVD because of quality/cost ratio and with XBOX 360's cheap yet high quality HD-DVD player, it only enforced that HD-DVD is simply a better choice at this time.

[macgeek2005]

My 23" ACD plays DVD's so clearly they look like HD. I don't care at all about HD-DVD or Blu-Ray.

The next time a buy a new computer setup (in 3+ years probably), it'll undoubtebly have a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray drive in it, so that's when i'll adapt.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by macgeek2005 

My 23" ACD plays DVD's so clearly they look like HD. I don't care at all about HD-DVD or Blu-Ray.

If it's on your ACD, then it's probably upscaled. However, while I do agree it probably looks pretty good, at least IMO, true HD 1080p looks much, much better.

Better enough to justify the extra expense? For me yes. For others (like you) maybe not. Indeed, over 2/3rds of the people who have voted in the poll so far feel that DVD is "good enough".

The next time a buy a new computer setup (in 3+ years probably), it'll undoubtebly have a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray drive in it, so that's when i'll adapt.

That's a fair plan.

In the meantime...

CANOGA PARK, Calif. - Wicked Pictures has become the first adult video company to penetrate the HD-DVD market with its release of Jonathan Morgan’s slasher-movie spoof, Camp Cuddly Pines Power Tool Massacre. The title is tentatively slated to ship on Friday.

Representatives from Wicked and authoring house Dimension DVD brought a check disc of the finished product to AVN’s offices for a demonstration Monday afternoon. Boasting vivid color and detail, the anamorphic widescreen presentation showcases the unprecedented quality and interactivity of the HD format.

“We started doing the preliminary work on this in March,” said Jackie Ramos, vice president of DVD production for Wicked Pictures. “We really started conceptualizing it before that point; we've been talking about going over to HD-DVD for over a year now. As soon as we heard that great strides were being made in the mainstream world with this format, we’ve always had our ear to the ground. There were a lot of hurdles…it was a lot more work than we thought. I’ve heard through the grapevine that other companies have been ready to do this, but that when it came down to it, they weren’t ready for the technical problems that go along with it.”

Wicked selected Camp Cuddly Pines as its first HD-DVD release based on the title’s popularity. Morgan's feature won the AVN's Best Sex Comedy Award in 2006. “We looked in our vault to see what we had as far as hi-definition, and Camp Cuddly Pines seemed like an obvious choice,” Ramos said. “It’s been a very popular bestseller for us, and a lot of our newer stuff was still being edited when we started testing the new format. We asked Dimension for their opinion, and they agreed on Camp Cuddly -- when they had the encoding ready, we said, okay, let’s roll with it.”

One of the major hurdles that Wicked and Dimension encountered was the scripting of advanced content menus, which allow viewers to navigate options without interrupting the feature.

“The functionality of the disc is the same quality as any mainstream product out there,” said Dimension DVD President Daniel Milstein, who has worked closely with Ramos from the project’s inception. “We used the same exact encoder that the major mainstream studios use…it took about two weeks to encode the feature, frame-by-frame. It takes a lot of processing power.”

“The first one is always the hardest,” added Dimension VP Robert Brickman. “Now that we know the procedure, we’ll be able to do it faster the next time out.”

According to Ramos, Wicked already has additional titles in the HD queue, including the AVN-nominated Curse Eternal. “We’re going to follow up with our other new releases after that,” he said. “It’s been a long, hard road doing this; at times, it got tense. The leading edge of technology is a dangerous place to be sometimes. But we’re really happy with the outcome. When I took the check disc home and watched it on my plasma TV, I was amazed by the color and the definition. It’s incredible.”

Camp Cuddly Pines Power Tool Massacre will be available at this January’s AVN Adult Entertainment Expo. The HD-DVD package will also contain a standard-def DVD sampler with five sex scenes from Wicked releases including the aforementioned Curse Eternal, Sleeping Around, Brad Armstrong’s **** and Manhunters and Julia Ann Hardcore.

"While getting to the market first certainly is very exciting for us, it was more important to us that we put out a properly functioning disc,” said Wicked Pictures President Steve Orenstein. “Jackie has spent countless hours with Dimension DVD to make sure we release a quality product, and I think we have definitely succeeded."

[Eriamjh]

If you haven't seen HD at 1080p, you don't know what you are missing.

HD all the way. DVD is fine for "small" TVs, but not the best for TVs over 60".

[Montezuma58]

I want some sort of HD movie player right now. But I'm going to wait a few months then check on the status of the format war or availability of universal players.

I just got a new projector set up with a 96" screen. Standard DVD's look OK on it. But I have to sit back a little further so that artifacts aren't as noticeable. I need to sit back about 11' from the screen for DVD. For HD material I can get as close a 7' and still have an enjoyable picture.

On my small HD TV in the family room, the difference between DVD's and HD is subtle. The difference is hardly enough to justify the expense of HD-DVD/Blu-Ray. But also with this set I'm sitting much further away relative to the screen size.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Eug 

In the meantime...

I thought "Pirates" was the first? It came out very early this year.

Not that I would know anything about it...

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Montezuma58 

I want some sort of HD movie player right now. But I'm going to wait a few months then check on the status of the format war or availability of universal players.

I just got a new projector set up with a 96" screen. Standard DVD's look OK on it. But I have to sit back a little further so that artifacts aren't as noticeable. I need to sit back about 11' from the screen for DVD. For HD material I can get as close a 7' and still have an enjoyable picture.

Yup.

On my small HD TV in the family room, the difference between DVD's and HD is subtle. The difference is hardly enough to justify the expense of HD-DVD/Blu-Ray. But also with this set I'm sitting much further away relative to the screen size.

With 34", I sit quite close to the TV. The resolution difference is very noticeable, but not night-and-day noticeable. However, the bigger issue is the fact that DVD compression artifacts are obvious. On HD DVD for the most part the compression artifacts are simply gone.

In fact the difference between broadcast HD (MPEG2 at mid bitrates) and HD DVD is pretty noticeable too. Same resolution, but there are obvious compression artifacts on fast scenes for some broadcast HD.

Originally Posted by 1tuffchevy 

Care to point me to a disc where the DD is better than DTS? I'm curious, because I've always preferred the DTS version over the DD.... so I'd really like to hear this for myself. Thanks!

Not much point, as it's a personal preference thing. I agree that DTS tracks often seem to have better channel separation and more active surrounds. The point was that often I don't actually like that, depending on the material. It seems kinda false. It reminds me of those old Beatles records where you'd have wild changes in the left-right channels. Very "dynamic" use of the stereo channels, but I don't like it.

---

Cool reception for high definition

The HD industry also hopes it's making progress in solving what In-Stat calls the “disconnect” between HD sets and services.

While one out of 10 Canadian households owns an HD set, only a third of those homes has an HD set-top box, according to Solutions Research Group.

And while nearly all consumers want flat panel TVs, they're not so sure about HDTV, according to Mr. McTaggart.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by Eug 

In the meantime...

The war's over. HD-DVD wins.

[mdc]

I have a 1080i 55" TV and DVD is good enough for me. I do notice the artifacts but they don't bother me that much.

A few days ago I did buy the xbox360 HD-DVD drive and I really do notice the difference. My wife is really impressed with the quality of HD-DVD.

I vote DVD is good enough for me, but I'll definitely get the HD-DVD version of a movie.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by mdc 

I have a 1080i 55" TV and DVD is good enough for me. I do notice the artifacts but they don't bother me that much.

A few days ago I did buy the xbox360 HD-DVD drive and I really do notice the difference. My wife is really impressed with the quality of HD-DVD.

Heh. So DVD is good enough but you bought the HD DVD add-on for the 360 anyway? So are you going to keep the HD DVD drive then?

My main beef is the lack of titles (and the fact that they're split over two competing and incompatible formats).

P.S. The GF/wife test is a significant one. My GF doesn't care at all about the different sound formats, but is really impressed at how good HD looks (broadcast and HD DVD, and I trust would feel the same with Blu-ray).

Originally Posted by jokell82 

I thought "Pirates" was the first? It came out very early this year.

Not that I would know anything about it...

Heh. Is that a real HD DVD disc though? Isn't that WMV-HD?

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

The war's over. HD-DVD wins.

I know you jest, but some people firmly believe this. Personally I think that the pr0n guys are followers in this war, and won't have that much affect in pushing it in either direction.

[mdc]

Regular TV isn't good enough. I think watching regular TV is horrible and the quality is terrible. DVD is far superior to regular TV, but in comparison to HD-DVD I don't think it's regular TV to HDTV and that's why it's still good enough.

I'll definitely be keeping the HD-DVD drive. I bought it almost more because at a shop I've never seen DVD and HD-DVD of the same movie side by side. I wanted to do the test. If I felt like HD-DVD failed then I would've tried to organize some way to return it, but I don't think it failed. I feel it passed very well and we'll be keeping the drive.

I agree with you about the lack of titles. My local Target in particular. I think they have about 12 (in either BluRay or HD-DVD). Best Buy is better, but seems to stock more Blu-Ray. And finally, I think it sucks that I want The Fifth Element but it's on BluRay and not HD-DVD. It's like video games and their exclusive games.

[Gossamer]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I know you jest, but some people firmly believe this. Personally I think that the pr0n guys are followers in this war, and won't have that much affect in pushing it in either direction.

Not entirely. My boss is one of those firm believers. I suppose it would give an advantage.

[cjrivera]

Originally Posted by Eug 

P.S. The GF/wife test is a significant one. My GF doesn't care at all about the different sound formats, but is really impressed at how good HD looks (broadcast and HD DVD, and I trust would feel the same with Blu-ray).

Ok, so now we know what your GF thinks, but what does your wife think?

[Eug]

Originally Posted by mdc 

I agree with you about the lack of titles. My local Target in particular. I think they have about 12 (in either BluRay or HD-DVD). Best Buy is better, but seems to stock more Blu-Ray. And finally, I think it sucks that I want The Fifth Element but it's on BluRay and not HD-DVD. It's like video games and their exclusive games.

Blu-ray and HD DVD is about even in my local stores, but they're both expensive locally.

As for The Fifth Element, perhaps it's a blessing in disguise for you, since TFE is supposedly one of the worst Blu-ray titles in terms of quality.

This is what Bill Hunt had to say about it:

Now it's time to look at my first Blu-ray Disc. Naturally, my hand swerved toward The Fifth Element. The title was an amazing bit of reference work on standard DVD, and that Superbit version was awesome. Obvious choice, right? Should look amazing in HD. Yeah... it should. But it doesn't. In fact... I'm not going to come out and say it looks like crap, but it is easily the worst-looking high-definition title I've seen yet, and I've seen 30-plus titles now. The image is muddy-looking, lacking in crisp, clean detail. The colors don't quite pop off the screen like they should. Just a mess. Okay... I will say it. It looks like crap.

The newer Blu-ray titles are apparently excellent, but some of the first ones were disappointments.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Gossamer 

Not entirely. My boss is one of those firm believers. I suppose it would give an advantage.

Porn has always been a technology leader. I wouldn't be surprised to see the format that the porn industry backs to come out on top.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

come out on top.

So to speak...

[imitchellg5]

I think DVD is fine for SDTV, but if you got a HDTV, why not upgrade to HD-DVD or Blu-Ray ( besides the insane cost of Blu-Ray)?

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

I think DVD is fine for SDTV, but if you got a HDTV, why not upgrade to HD-DVD or Blu-Ray ( besides the insane cost of Blu-Ray)?

The costs are a definite factor. The lack of a library for either format. And honestly a lot of people cannot see the difference between DVD and HD.

Originally Posted by Dakar² 

So to speak...

Was wondering if anyone would get that...

[Eriamjh]

Originally Posted by Eug 

The newer Blu-ray titles are apparently excellent, but some of the first ones were disappointments.

DVD has/has the same problem. The format itself is great. The quality is all in the mastering and transfer. A lousy encoding job or starting material will not render great results just because it's 1080p.

I have been impressed by the 1080p trailers on apple's site. Many of them look awesome on my 20" imac, and that isn't even at native 1080 (since the iMac only goes up to 1050). It makes DVDs look like crap.

I'm not willing to pay $1000 for a player, though. I paid $300 for my first DVD player in 1999 and since they are about $50-$100.

I will not be the victim of a format war, either.

[centerchannel68]

Originally Posted by Eug 

P.S. The GF/wife test is a significant one. My GF doesn't care at all about the different sound formats, but is really impressed at how good HD looks (broadcast and HD DVD, and I trust would feel the same with Blu-ray).

You must not have very good speakers. Even Kristin can tell a huge difference between DTS and DD.

[awaspaas]

I've gotten DVDs to look acceptable on the 50" with some xine postprocessing (denoise3d and unsharp mask) but the lack of resolution still bugs me. But with the HD disc formats being so expensive, that's still a while away.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Eriamjh 

DVD has/has the same problem. The format itself is great. The quality is all in the mastering and transfer. A lousy encoding job or starting material will not render great results just because it's 1080p.

I have been impressed by the 1080p trailers on apple's site. Many of them look awesome on my 20" imac, and that isn't even at native 1080 (since the iMac only goes up to 1050). It makes DVDs look like crap.

Personally, I don't think the 1080p trailers are very good when compared to the HD discs. Completely different league. In fact, I don't think the 1080p QT trailers compete well even against broadcast HD.

Not that I'd really expect them to compete that well, given their very low bitrates.

Originally Posted by centerchannel68 

You must not have very good speakers. Even Kristin can tell a huge difference between DTS and DD.

If only you knew Rob. Oh and I guess you missed the entire DTS vs DD discussion above.

P.S. I'm surprised you haven't been banned yet.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by Eug 

\P.S. I'm surprised you haven't been banned yet.

So am I.

[- - e r i k - -]

I don't even own a TV

Would a 24" iMac with an ElGato Hybrid count as an HDTV though?

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

I don't even own a TV

Would a 24" iMac with an ElGato Hybrid count as an HDTV though?

1200p with an ATSC tuner? I think that qualifies.

[ink]

I'm mostly avoiding the whole issue because of my reciever. I have the PS2, GCN, DVD, VHS and Cable all routed through it (complete with coax and optical digital for certain sources). I'll have to replace ALL of that once I go with HD-anything. I'll basically have to re-purchase every piece of AV equipment, or go with some clunky source switcher between my Yamaha and whatever HD device switcher I buy goes with.

This, along the plethora of HD connectors... I'll just wait until its standardized.

And, most "1080" screens have crappy pixelmaps in the 1200x700-ish range; so you're throwing away more than half of the data on the screen already...

[pyrite]

Originally Posted by ink 

I'm mostly avoiding the whole issue because of my reciever. I have the PS2, GCN, DVD, VHS and Cable all routed through it (complete with coax and optical digital for certain sources). I'll have to replace ALL of that once I go with HD-anything. I'll basically have to re-purchase every piece of AV equipment, or go with some clunky source switcher between my Yamaha and whatever HD device switcher I buy goes with.

This, along the plethora of HD connectors... I'll just wait until its standardized.

And, most "1080" screens have crappy pixelmaps in the 1200x700-ish range; so you're throwing away more than half of the data on the screen already...

my HDTV is only 32", but i'm still hanging for HD, standard DVD looks crap unless you're at a distance IMO. full HD is freaking amazing, i witnessed blu-ray the other day and was floored by its detail.. im assuming HD-DVD is just as good, will probably go HD-DVD as I have an Xbox 360 to plug in to!! (buy gears of war, best game ever)

[sek929]

Since I now get to see movies in component thanks to 360 I see no reason to switch.

Once DVDs become obsolete (not sold or rented) then I will most likely opt for the HD-DVD drive for the 360.

Pyrite, I'll second the GOW praise, I'm just a bit past the third Berserker. The only thing that has kept me from beating it days ago is my g/f despising video games (lousy g/f )

[Eug Wanker]

Originally Posted by ink 

I'm mostly avoiding the whole issue because of my reciever. I have the PS2, GCN, DVD, VHS and Cable all routed through it (complete with coax and optical digital for certain sources). I'll have to replace ALL of that once I go with HD-anything. I'll basically have to re-purchase every piece of AV equipment, or go with some clunky source switcher between my Yamaha and whatever HD device switcher I buy goes with.

Here is my "clunky" component video with coax digital/optical digital audio HD switcher: Zektor HDS4.1

It switches using my universal remote. I have the remote set to automatically set the source on the switch. Works beautifully.

This, along the plethora of HD connectors... I'll just wait until its standardized.

? Not sure I understand the problem.

And, most "1080" screens have crappy pixelmaps in the 1200x700-ish range; so you're throwing away more than half of the data on the screen already...

So what? It still looks damn awesome.

Originally Posted by sek929 

Since I now get to see movies in component thanks to 360 I see no reason to switch.

Once DVDs become obsolete (not sold or rented) then I will most likely opt for the HD-DVD drive for the 360.

You can rent HD DVDs too of course.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by Eug Wanker 

You can rent HD DVDs too of course.

DVDs still outweigh them at Blockbuster and Best Buy by more than 100:1.

I'll wait until the technology gets cheaper, I always do. Except of course for the 360, but hey, I like to treat myself once and a while.

I don't see myself getting a HDTV for at least another 5 years, so higher def discs won't make any difference.

The only thing I would do is get a Blu-ray or HD DVD drive for my Mac, the though of backing up all my music and photos on one disc is tantalizing.

[Goldfinger]

For me DVD is good enough at the moment. I'm switching to HD when all panels are 1080p and when there are more HD broadcasts. Right now we have like one channel, and a bad one at that. And you need a special decoder that costs a fortune.
Untill then I don't really care for HD. And like ink said, it would mean a new receiver as well.

HD doesn't make movies better.

[voodoo]

VHS is totally enough for me. Oh yes. DVD peh.

Really though, the HD discs are fine and I'll be sure to get a player and a HDTV soon enough. I've seen 1080p and that's what I want. Nothing less.

That's HD for me. Anything else is just meh. It isn't that much better than DVD. 1080p is *that* much better than DVD.

So there.

V

[- - e r i k - -]

No one is denying that HD DVD (covering both HD-DVD and BluRay) is better. It's just not that much better like the way DVD was a paradigm shift compared to CHS. And all the different formats, cables and standards are confusing to any consumer right now (even most cutting edge ones). There is yet another unnecessary format war going on, and most of us rightly does not want to take part of it.