[goMac]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

heise online - IFA special - Analysten: 40 Prozent Marktanteil für HD DVD im Jahr 2011

Analysts expect that by 2011 the market share of HD DVD will be 40%. So it looks like BluRay is winning after all.

I don't think that's exactly the sort of lead or timeline Super Mario has in mind.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

This moderator has been reported for being biased and trying to cause conflict on the forum.

Give me a break! First of all let me state what I thought was obvious. 99% of my posts -- including that one -- are made as a normal user and have nothing to do with my moderator status. Secondly (and this is the key point I was trying to make) I am on *your* side in this debate, but your bizarre ad-hominem attacks aren't helping the Blu-ray camp at all. In fact, you're making us all look bad.

[Dakarʒ]

He's a charmer.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Give me a break! First of all let me state what I thought was obvious. 99% of my posts -- including that one -- are made as a normal user and have nothing to do with my moderator status.

If you're going to have moderator under your name then keep your mouth shut or get your facts straight. Or moderate bizarre posts like those of Chongo or goMac.

[starman]

Being a moderator doesn't mean he's not allowed to join in discussions.

[Dakarʒ]

It's a shame we can't all be as perfect as Super mario.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Dakarʒ 

It's a shame we can't all be as perfect as Super mario.

Sooooo true.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by starman 

Being a moderator doesn't mean he's not allowed to join in discussions.

And therefore get reported for an infraction.

[Dakarʒ]

Being biased isn't a forum rule violation, chief.

And if anyone should be reported for "trying to cause conflict on the forum" it'd be you.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

You tell me to research yet come out with a stinkin howler like that one? Betacam is a direct derivative of BetaMax. The only difference between them is the speed at which the tape moves though the machine (1.33cm-4cm/sec versus 12cm sec). There isn't a well thinking well read person on the planet who will disagree with that unless they're playing ****ing mind games.

Wow. Mindgames you say?

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Although there is a superficial similarity between Betamax and Betacam in that they use the same tape cassette, they are really quite different formats. Betamax records relatively low resolution composite video using a heterodyne color recording system and only two recording heads, while Betacam uses four heads to record in component format, at a much higher linear tape speed, resulting in much-higher video and audio quality

That is quite a big difference. It's not just the speed. It's two completely different formats.

Originally Posted by backpedaler #1

And big deal that I got the name for HD format for all of five minutes (HDCAM is short for HD Betacam, which is hardly an earth shattering difference from typing BetaMax HD until I had time to read what I wrote). You should have told Chongo, who is such a genius in your book that you did not bother correcting his amazing list of non-Toshiba inventions or bother mentioning Sony successes such as the Walkman, home video recording, the CD, etc, that HDCAM became yet another de facto standard and that Sony's professional, prosumer and consumer cameras were a qualified success in all fields.

BetaMax died in the eighties. Stop confusing professional tapes with consumer tapes.

And if you bothered to read the thread at all you would have seen my teardown of Chongo's list, just like I tore a new one in your misinformation.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

That is quite a big difference. It's not just the speed. It's two completely different formats.

That's bull, Eric. Their only difference is their electronic speed. Even the "famed" Wikipedia agrees on this. Physically they are identical and the Betacam derived itself from a BetaMax video camera system.

BetaMax died in the eighties. Stop confusing professional tapes with consumer tapes.

Betacam is a derivative technology (as is HDCAM) that deserved to be mentioned considering some Chongo-man wanted to make Sony look like a complete failure company and then comes out with some list of non-Toshiba innovations. See how Chongo from the Congo forgot about how Sony is the company most responsible for putting video and music in the hands of so many people. Now they're doing it again with high definition video judging from the sales of Blu-ray.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by Dakarʒ 

And if anyone should be reported for "trying to cause conflict on the forum" it'd be you.

I'm not the one who plays loose with facts. Everything I say has citation and reference. Take a look elsewhere for idiocy (like people who say HD-DVD is ahead in Europe, Sony hasn't had a successful product, that Toshiba invented radar etc etc etc)

It's true! Highly Dangerous Deadly Viral Disease (HD-DVD) is on the loose!

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

That's bull, Eric. Their only difference is their electronic speed. Even the "famed" Wikipedia agrees on this. Physically they are identical and the Betacam derived itself from a BetaMax video camera system.

No, physically they are NOT identical. In early days they were interchangeable if BLANK, but their recordings were not. This is similar to how an audio cassette could store both data and music (or if you wish how a diskette could be Mac or PC formatted), except that with Betacam it was read differently (four heads as opposed to two, higher linear speed). Similar media does not equate similar formats no matter how you twist it.

And then again that only covered the first iteration of Betacam. Betacam SP, which did in fact become a standard in the broadcast industry, had a completely different cassette format altogether.

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

See how Chongo from the Congo forgot about how Sony is the company most responsible for putting video and music in the hands of so many people. Now they're doing it again with high definition video judging from the sales of Blu-ray.

Ad hominems? Man, you really are one vile sycophant.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

I'm not the one who plays loose with facts. Everything I say has citation and reference.

No it doesn't. Nothing you say has a citation. You just say things like you think Apple will act one way, or you think Toshiba will act another way, even if all evidence is to the contrary. Then when other people including me in the forum post a link to a press release or some other information, you run around like a chicken with it's head cut off calling us liars.

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Take a look elsewhere for idiocy (like people who say HD-DVD is ahead in Europe,

HD-DVD is ahead in hardware sales. We've provided links.

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Sony hasn't had a successful product,

Sony has had successful products, the debate was on successful formats.

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

that Toshiba invented radar etc etc etc)

I don't know why that was brought up, although some research shows that while Toshiba may not have invented radar, they seem to be the ones who adapted it for weather purposes.

That said, I think you have to be pretty stupid to say that Toshiba wasn't a huge player in DVD. While other people may have been involved, Toshiba was the one that actually designed the discs. From Wikipedia:

"In the early 1990s two high-density optical storage standards were being developed; one was the MultiMedia Compact Disc, backed by Philips and Sony, and the other was the Super Density disc, supported by Toshiba, Time Warner, Matsushita Electric, Hitachi, Mitsubishi Electric, Pioneer, Thomson, and JVC. IBM's president, Lou Gerstner, acting as a matchmaker, led an effort to unite the two camps behind a single standard, anticipating a repeat of the costly videotape format war between VHS, Betamax and Video 2000 in the 1980s."

Hey! Look at that! I hardly had to go very far before finding another failed Sony format. Looks like Sony hasn't gotten over losing out to the original DVD format...

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

It's true! Highly Dangerous Deadly Viral Disease (HD-DVD) is on the loose!

Referring to HD-DVD as a disease not only makes you seem like an awfully huge fanboy, but it makes you seem all that more paranoid that HD-DVD might actually win the format war.

[Super Mario]

Oh God, Eric. Now I know you have been infected by Highly Dangerous Deadly Viral Disease

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

No, physically they are NOT identical. In early days they were interchangeable if BLANK, but their recordings were not.

Recordings are electronic and depend on that aforementioned speed. Electronic recordings are not physical. Mechanically (that's the physical part) they are identical.

I already said that all but you seem to think an electric signal is "physical". That's a bit like being wacked in the head by a data transfer over Wi-fi.

On a technical level, Betacam and Betamax are similar in that both share the same videocassette shape, use the same oxide tape formulation with the same coercivity, and both record linear audio tracks on the same location of the videotape. But in the key area of video recording, Betacam and Betamax are completely different. BetaCam tapes are mechanically interchangeable with Betamax, but not electronically. BetaCam moves the tape at 12 cm/sec, with different recording/encoding techniques. Betamax is a color-under system with linear tape speeds ranging from 4 cm/sec to 1.33 cm/sec.

Exactly as I said.

You also said BetaMax was identical in quality to VHS. Wrong again. Ask any broadcaster or documentary film maker. There was also a form of Betacam that equaled DVD quality at 500 lines resolution.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Nothing you say has a citation.

Prove it. One instance. Then I'll bring up so many of your uncited lies that your mother will be ashamed she gave birth to you.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

Man, you really are one vile sycophant.

Reported and told the REAL mods what I think of you and your insults. Calling a person vile while typing away a bunch of error filled posts is unwarranted.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Oh God, Eric. Now I know you have been infected by Highly Dangerous Deadly Viral Disease

Are you completely daft? If you have read any of my posts you would know that I am not a supporter of any format. In fact I am completely stupefied by this whole situation, and can only hope that we see a viable digital distribution of high-definition content before any of these physical formats get off the ground.

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Recordings are electronic and depend on that aforementioned speed. Electronic recordings are not physical. Mechanically (that's the physical part) they are identical.

Do I have to explain this to you in baby terms? Your comprehension level seems to be a bit below par of an average adult.

No, physical format has nothing to do with it. And NO, it has little to do with the speed either. The electronic ENCODING was completely different. So even if you ran a Betamax recording in a Betacam player at the appropriate, which would happily accommodate the physical cassette, you would not get a result.

In fact, since you seem incapable of reading your own sources, I have taken the liberty to bold the relevant parts:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

But in the key area of video recording, Betacam and Betamax are completely different. BetaCam tapes are mechanically interchangeable with Betamax, but not electronically. BetaCam moves the tape at 12 cm/sec, with different recording/encoding techniques. Betamax is a color-under system with linear tape speeds ranging from 4 cm/sec to 1.33 cm/sec.

Now, the electric signal is in fact what completely separates Betamax from Betacam. Tape can have anything written to it. DVCAM and Mini DV are two different formats, yet the same encoded data can be written to the same tapes, but the information is useless unless a player can actually read both formats. Which neither a Betamax or Betacam player could do with each others formats.

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

I already said that all but you seem to think an electric signal is "physical". That's a bit like being wacked in the head by a data transfer over Wi-fi.

If you seem to think that it only confirms my theory that you have a comprehension impairment.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Reported and told the REAL mods what I think of you and your insults. Calling a person vile while typing away a bunch of error filled posts is unwarranted.

Fine. I'll just go ahead and report each and every ad hominem you have posted in this thread and we'll see who gets the infractions.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

[Super Mario]

Go ahead, It's much more fun reporting on a bad moderator though.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Prove it. One instance. Then I'll bring up so many of your uncited lies that your mother will be ashamed she gave birth to you.

Seriously? You're going to make me cite the thread you're posting in? Where is that rolling on the floor laughing emoticon...

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

The electronic ENCODING was completely different.

Why are you repeating me and telling me I'm wrong now? I already said electronically they were different. That's besides the point. Some Sony hating person tried to make it look like Sony and Betacam had no legacy or innovation at all.

I've had enough of your rambling and hope you lose your moderator status real soon.

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Seriously? You're going to make me cite the thread you're posting in?

Do it. If you can't will you promise to **** off?

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

You also said BetaMax was identical in quality to VHS. Wrong again. Ask any broadcaster or documentary film maker. There was also a form of Betacam that equaled DVD quality at 500 lines resolution.

Just in case you thought I didn't reply to this that you edit in after the fact:

No, the quality of BetaMax was identical to VHS as they slowed down the tape to allow for more recording, which is exactly what I said.

The reason why BetaMax did fail, was despite its superior resolution at the time, its low capacity inconvenienced consumers.

Your fanboyism really shines when you are debating a neutral partner, doesn't it?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Do it. If you can't will you promise to **** off?

Ok...?

I um, cite this thread?

[Super Mario]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

The reason why BetaMax did fail, was despite its superior resolution at the time, its low capacity inconvenienced consumers.

I didn't disagree about why it didn't take off. I mentioned it's derivatives only as a sign of how development paid off.

Your fanboyism really shines when you are debating a neutral partner, doesn't it?

Another insult and reported again.

[icruise]

You look like you need a vacation...

[pooka]

This is aweseome. In all my years teasing and taunting this is the closest I've come to banniation. I truly believe this thread has brought the best out in all of us.

If there is a hell, I hope to see all of my HDDVD brethren there.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

Why are you repeating me and telling me I'm wrong now? I already said electronically they were different. That's besides the point.

No, that is not what you tried arguing at all. You said they were the same format - to the point that BetaMax was a broadcast format and were even used today as "BetaMax HD", when they are no more alike than a tape containing a C64 program and a tape containing an Apple II program.

Originally Posted by Super Mario 

I've had enough of your rambling and hope you lose your moderator status real soon.

I have moderator status? Boy, you really do have comprehension skills. I am sorry, I feel bad for debating you now.

PS. Enjoy your time off

[Brien]

Don't you just love format wars?

[- - e r i k - -]

No, actually I hate them. They are hurtful to the consumer and brings out sycophants from either side for a meaningless debate that goes nowhere.
Yes, I know that was a rhetorical question.

[Brien]

Sarcasm, Erik, sarcasm.

On a more serious note, I'd have to agree. Nearly (er, all) HD-related sites I visit have turned into madhouses.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Brien 

Sarcasm, Erik, sarcasm.

Select my post

[jokell82]

Now do you guys see why I put that dude on my ignore list?

[- - e r i k - -]

I found it amusing that I was neither attacking nor helping Sony - just correcting misinformation from both sides. Yet he decided to attack me. Mark of a good fanboy right there.

[Dakarʒ]

...and there was much rejoicing.

[starman]

I miss the days of Usenet when this could go on for months .

[Dakarʒ]

Honestly, he turned me off the whole thread. Of course, it's grown 10 pages in the past week and a half.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Dakarʒ 

Honestly, he turned me off the whole thread. Of course, it's grown 10 pages in the past week and a half.

To be honest he reinvigorated my interest in this whole mess. I like nothing more than to quench the fires of stupidity.

[Dakarʒ]

The fires of stupidity I can handle (else I wouldn't post in this forum - thank you, I'll be here all week), it was his relentless insulting (and uncreative and bizarre, poor GoMac...) that killed my taste for the thread.

[- - e r i k - -]

Originally Posted by Dakarʒ 

The fires of stupidity I can handle (else I wouldn't post in this forum - thank you, I'll be here all week), it was his relentless insulting (and uncreative and bizarre, poor GoMac...) that killed my taste for the thread.

Well, at least sanity won out in the end. Thank Bob.

[Dakarʒ]

The irony being he got banned by the guy he reported. That'll probably stick in his craw, and we'll hear about it when he comes back.

So, what's the chances he replies to all these comments we're posting this morning? 110%? 120%?

[Eug]

w00t! I just received my copy of Heroes. (It came late cuz I ordered late.) Amazon.com rocks. I don't understand why Amazon.ca and BestBuy.ca etc. can't get with the program. It's cheaper for me to order from Amazon.com and get it shipped across the border than to walk into a local store. Stupid.

Anyways, I'm looking forward to this. I've NEVER seen a whole episode so this will be a nice introduction to the series. Hopefully I don't hate it. There are also some web-enabled features on the disc so it will be interesting to check that out.

In truth, I consider web-enabled features of secondary importance (even though the HD DVD brass call it the best thing since sliced bread, esp. for future releases). However, I do consider having a secondary video decoder and significant persistent memory as absolute requirements for a next-gen format.

Thus, if I were to buy a Blu-ray player (I'm not any time soon), it'd have to be at least a Profile 1.1 player. Profile 2.0 would be preferred, but not absolutely necessary.

BTW, some people have been testing Universal's web enabled features and there is one drawback to HD DVD's mandatory spec. It only calls for 128 MB persistent memory. (Blu-ray 1.0 requires 64 KB. Blu-ray 1.1 requires 256 MB which is OK, and Blu-ray 2.0 requires 1.0 GB.) So...

Blu-ray 1.0: 0.0625 MB minimum <-- Totally useless for extra content, but it's likely that most players have more than that.
HD DVD 128 MB minimum <-- OK for some stuff, but not for HD trailers.
Blu-ray 1.1: 256 MB minimum <-- Vapourware until 2008.
Blu-ray 2.0: 1024 MB minimum <-- Vapourware until ?.

The problem arises with trailer downloads. They're standard definition, because HD trailers would take up too much space. Thus, I suspect that HD DVD players with hard drives or more flash memory may appear in the future for some of this web-enabled stuff. So, until this happens, the web functionality is less impressive than it could be. But like I said, this stuff is less important to me than the secondary video decoder. However, I will reserve final judgement until I try out all the web features.

BTW, the Xbox 360 HD DVD has 128 MB flash for persistent memory I believe. I wonder if there would be a way to use the hard drive for trailers and stuff.

-----

Oh and... Thanks mods!

[starman]

Check these features out from the new Star Trek HD-DVD set.

http://www.startrek.com/startrek/videoview?id=2305833

[Dakarʒ]

I can't view it because I'm at work, but did they end up deciding to crop the original 4:3 frame to create a faux 16:9?

[Fred33]

HD DVD has such a hold on the market right now, but I think the market is ready for a change.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Eug 

w00t! I just received my copy of Heroes. (It came late cuz I ordered late.) Amazon.com rocks. I don't understand why Amazon.ca and BestBuy.ca etc. can't get with the program. It's cheaper for me to order from Amazon.com and get it shipped across the border than to walk into a local store. Stupid.

Anyways, I'm looking forward to this. I've NEVER seen a whole episode so this will be a nice introduction to the series. Hopefully I don't hate it. There are also some web-enabled features on the disc so it will be interesting to check that out.

I was sick late last week and through the weekend, so I was able to get a lot of Heroes episodes in before work today. Such a great show and a FANTASTIC looking HD DVD.

Originally Posted by Fred33 

HD DVD has such a hold on the market right now, but I think the market is ready for a change.

Uh, what?

[icruise]

Originally Posted by Dakarʒ 

The irony being he got banned by the guy he reported. That'll probably stick in his craw, and we'll hear about it when he comes back.

I probably held off doing something longer than I should have because I didn't want it to look like I was just being vindictive (although at the end I think it would be obvious to any thinking person that wasn't the case). The funny thing is that just after I banned him (temporarily, mind you) another mod came in and banned him for twice as long... So he can report me all he likes -- the other mods are aware of the situation and he's not likely to find a sympathetic ear among them.

[Dakarʒ]

Originally Posted by icruise 

I probably held off doing something longer than I should have because I didn't want it to look like I was just being vindictive (although at the end I think it would be obvious to any thinking person that wasn't the case).

Oh I don't blame you there.

[*TL]

Originally Posted by starman 

Check these features out from the new Star Trek HD-DVD set.

http://www.startrek.com/startrek/videoview?id=2305833

I'll be interested to see how this does with it's $200 price tag. Between this and the premium prices for The Sopranos 6.1 & 6.2, Lost, and Heroes, I'm starting to think that TV on HD disc might be a non-starter.