[analogue SPRINKLES]

Ok since we are so off track here... serious question.

HD-DVD fans. Do you see HD-DVD BEATING BLU-RAY ever? Not a stale mate but BR actually calling it quits and HD becoming the only format.

How would this happen?

Seriously.

[starman]

At this point, I see both sides having SOME kind of aspect that might appeal to one side. eg: Star Trek on Paramount, Star Wars on Blu; HD-DVD with no region coding, Blu with higher capacity.

All I can say is that my PS3 wins, hands down, as the best HD and DVD-upscaler I own, so I lean towards Blu.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

I am just wondering because the PS3 seems to be the main seller for BR.

The month the PS3 came out with very few players on the market it still beat HD-DVD disks sales in 30 days and has held strong for a year.

In this past year PS3's have been selling more and more, BR players have dropped to $300, PS3's price drops to $399, profile 1.1 brings pretty much all the features that HD has... so what's left?

Unless studio's defect to HD they aren't going to win.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

HD-DVD fans. Do you see HD-DVD BEATING BLU-RAY ever? Not a stale mate but BR actually calling it quits and HD becoming the only format.

How would this happen?

Seriously.

Yes, if Warner sides with HD-DVD.

[starman]

I can't see Warner doing something that stupid. They'll be format neutral as long as they possibly can.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Perhaps. But if my current video library was in an HD format and I wanted to make copies of it all, it would take 15-20 terabytes and (I'm guessing) several days just to physically copy the data to the hard disk. And I can't even view them on my iPod? I'm just not seeing the attraction of this feature.

It's the same sort of thing people do with DVD's. They rip them into their computer and stream them to their AppleTV.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by starman 

I can't see Warner doing something that stupid. They'll be format neutral as long as they possibly can.

I suspect they'll go exclusive one way or another in 2008.

Pros for going Blu-ray - More current sales, and lots of PS3s out there, which can be updated to Profile 1.1.
Pros for going HD DVD - Better baseline hardware support (PiP, etc.), cheaper replication costs, and they have more intellectual property in HD DVD than they do in Blu-ray.

Originally Posted by starman 

All I can say is that my PS3 wins, hands down, as the best HD and DVD-upscaler I own, so I lean towards Blu.

The PS3 isn't known as being a top tier DVD upscaler. That title belongs to players like the Toshiba HD-XA2 and the Samsung BD-UP5000, as well as other standalones.

[starman]

If Warner went Blu, it would prolong this stupid war (re: Paramount).

If they went HD-DVD, it would probably kill Blu.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by goMac 

It's the same sort of thing people do with DVD's. They rip them into their computer and stream them to their AppleTV.

Yes, I do something similar, although not with an Apple TV. But I'm free to use that video any way I like (on iPods, etc) and I can rip them using an encoder that dramatically reduces the file size.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Yes, if Warner sides with HD-DVD.

Ok but if not there is no way for HD-DVD to win then right?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Ok but if not there is no way for HD-DVD to win then right?

Nope. Not unless something weirder happened like Disney going neutral without Warner going HD-DVD.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Nope. Not unless something weirder happened like Disney going neutral without Warner going HD-DVD.

Lets hope they just look at Xmas sales and make a decision one way or another that just ends all this ****.

[Eug]

Yeah, if Warner went Blu, then the best HD DVD could hope for is a continued stalemate, but IMO it would be more likely that Blu would eventually win.
However, if Warner went HD DVD, then the best Blu could hope for is a continued stalemate, but IMO it would be more likely that HD DVD would eventually win.

I think Warner leans HD DVD, but will go where the (projected) money is.

I was hoping for hybrid players to appear at a low price to make all of this moot, but that doesn't seem likely any time soon.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally Posted by starman 

At this point, I see both sides having SOME kind of aspect that might appeal to one side. eg: Star Trek on Paramount, Star Wars on Blu; HD-DVD with no region coding, Blu with higher capacity.

All I can say is that my PS3 wins, hands down, as the best HD and DVD-upscaler I own, so I lean towards Blu.

I'm still open to either format, but I have a feeling that Blu will win overall. I could be wrong, but if I were to buy either format today, Blu would be my choice.

[Eug]

Well, that was a waste of time. I tried getting a $99 HD-A3.

First the website was fracked. Then when it got going again, 330 of them sold in 5 minutes, with the whole 400 sold out in less than 10 minutes AFAIK.

There are still 197 (out of 200) $349 Sharp BD players and 64 (out of 80) $299 Samsung BD players left.

[mrtew]

Well I found out why half the people with PS3's are watching SD movies on them! For x-mas we got a Playstation3 HighDefinition game machine which has a Blu-ray HighDefinition movie player, for our HighDefinition TV. But it doesn't come with a HighDefiniton cable!!! I can't believe it! I'm in shock! If I was a normal person I'd probably have just plugged it in with the cable that does come with it and played the games and watched the movies and that'd be the end of it. I don't know what my point is but I can't believe I waited a month to open it and now I have to keep waiting to use it! And I'm thinking about how my XBox360 came with a HD cable a year ago and it doesn't even have an HD movie player! Does anyone know where I can get a HD cable on Dec25th?

[Eug]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

Well I found out why half the people with PS3's are watching SD movies on them! For x-mas we got a Playstation3 HighDefinition game machine which has a Blu-ray HighDefinition movie player, for our HighDefinition TV. But it doesn't come with a HighDefiniton cable!!! I can't believe it! I'm in shock! If I was a normal person I'd probably have just plugged it in with the cable that does come with it and played the games and watched the movies and that'd be the end of it. I don't know what my point is but I can't believe I waited a month to open it and now I have to keep waiting to use it! And I'm thinking about how my XBox360 came with a HD cable a year ago and it doesn't even have an HD movie player! Does anyone know where I can get a HD cable on Dec25th?

Not even component cable?

Anyways, FWIW, most hi-def standalones don't come with HDMI cables, or even component cables either.

It's just like USB printers that don't come with USB cables. This sort of penny pinching is par for the course.

[aristotles]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

Well I found out why half the people with PS3's are watching SD movies on them! For x-mas we got a Playstation3 HighDefinition game machine which has a Blu-ray HighDefinition movie player, for our HighDefinition TV. But it doesn't come with a HighDefiniton cable!!! I can't believe it! I'm in shock! If I was a normal person I'd probably have just plugged it in with the cable that does come with it and played the games and watched the movies and that'd be the end of it. I don't know what my point is but I can't believe I waited a month to open it and now I have to keep waiting to use it! And I'm thinking about how my XBox360 came with a HD cable a year ago and it doesn't even have an HD movie player! Does anyone know where I can get a HD cable on Dec25th?

Does your HDTV accept component? The PS3 will output up to 1080p through component although most TV's will only support up to 1080i through component.

Did you RTFM or are you making this story up?

All PS3's come with a component video out cable.

[aristotles]

Originally Posted by starman 

If Warner went Blu, it would prolong this stupid war (re: Paramount).

If they went HD-DVD, it would probably kill Blu.

That's an interesting parallel universe you live in. Over here, if warner went blu the war is over but warner going red would prolong the war.

Blu-ray has been winning every week in the Nielsen/VideoScan Numbers this year with a win of BD-76% HDD-24% (3:1) for the week ending December 9th in the US.

Blu-ray has and even larger lead in europe, Australia and Japan.

What are you basing you confidence on?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by aristotles 

Blu-ray has been winning every week in the Nielsen/VideoScan Numbers this year with a win of BD-76% HDD-24% (3:1) for the week ending December 9th in the US.

Here's how I see it. The Bluray camp are likely to be more of the tech inclined/PS3 fanboys. These are people more likely to buy Bluray titles. I have a few friends who buy every single Bluray title that comes out because they go "OMGZ its teh BLU RAYZ!" and they buy whatever it is so they can watch it in HD. These are people kind of like Eug or SWG. They buy more titles because they are videophiles.

HD-DVD buyers are more likely to be families and more average people. They don't pay attention to every title released, and certainly don't have disposable income to buy every single Bluray title. They wait for the big titles, and then buy those. Harry Potter is one of those "big titles", and depending on what account you listen to, it's either very close in sales or it's beating Bluray in sales.

The issue is that the number of average joes out there far outweighs the number of Eugs or SWGs or Starmans. Sure, Bluray overall has a lot more sales, but that's because people who own Bluray players are more likely to buy smaller titles. This doesn't mean that the Bluray camp has more active buyers however.

And while some people would claim that Warner should go with the Bluray camp because they'll buy more titles, the family market is going to be Warner's bread and butter in the near future. Eventually the people who will buy all the different titles will be reduced to a small minority. Warner is going to be watching which format has better long term prospects.

(And what do you mean every week? The week before it was 58/42...)

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Here's how I see it. The Bluray camp are likely to be more of the tech inclined/PS3 fanboys. These are people more likely to buy Bluray titles. I have a few friends who buy every single Bluray title that comes out because they go "OMGZ its teh BLU RAYZ!" and they buy whatever it is so they can watch it in HD. These are people kind of like Eug or SWG. They buy more titles because they are videophiles.

HD-DVD buyers are more likely to be families and more average people. They don't pay attention to every title released, and certainly don't have disposable income to buy every single Bluray title. They wait for the big titles, and then buy those. Harry Potter is one of those "big titles", and depending on what account you listen to, it's either very close in sales or it's beating Bluray in sales.

I have both types of players, and on almost every title I've compared, the Blu-Ray version has better sound. For video quality they're rather similar, not enough difference to really gripe about.

As long as the quality is the same I don't care which format wins, but right now they aren't.

[Cadaver]

I've gone purple. There are movies on each format (exclusively) that I want, so I've got both a BD and an HD-DVD player. When it comes to movies available on both formats, I had originally leaned towards Blu-Ray, but lately I've been leaning towards HD-DVD (combo DVD/HD disks and my Toshiba A30 is way faster at startup/access/etc. than my Samsung BD-P1000). Though for whatever reason, I chose to buy Blade Runner on BD and not HD-DVD. Not sure why.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by aristotles 

Does your HDTV accept component? The PS3 will output up to 1080p through component although most TV's will only support up to 1080i through component.
Did you RTFM or are you making this story up?
All PS3's come with a component video out cable.

Yeah it even says on the box in very fine print that you need to buy cables for HD. It wouldn't be such a pain if everything wasn't closed. Sitting around on xmas day wishing I could play with my xmas present sucks.

[icruise]

Originally Posted by goMac 

The Bluray camp are likely to be more of the tech inclined/PS3 fanboys.
<SNIP>
HD-DVD buyers are more likely to be families and more average people.

Do you have any evidence at all to support this idea? Everything that I read seems to point to the *exact* opposite. HD-DVD supporters are "tech guys," videophiles, or movie enthusiasts. They like HD-DVD for technical reasons like the lack of region coding, easier-to-crack DRM, or geeky features like PIP or web-enabled extras. Yes, some families are now getting HD-DVD players due to the low-priced players, but they're still not the core market.

On the other hand, consoles tend to be owned by families (even if they are only played by one family member). Thus, most PS3 owners (and by extension, most Blu-ray buyers) are families. They buy Blu-ray movies because they've already got a PS3. Sure, there's also a videophile segment of Blu-ray owners, but they're greatly outnumbered by "normal" people.

Now I'll admit that I don't have much in the way of hard evidence for my viewpoint either, but it sure seems to make more sense to me.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by icruise 

Do you have any evidence at all to support this idea? Everything that I read seems to point to the *exact* opposite. HD-DVD supporters are "tech guys," videophiles, or movie enthusiasts. They like HD-DVD for technical reasons like the lack of region coding, easier-to-crack DRM, or geeky features like PIP or web-enabled extras. Yes, some families are now getting HD-DVD players due to the low-priced players, but they're still not the core market.

On the other hand, consoles tend to be owned by families (even if they are only played by one family member). Thus, most PS3 owners (and by extension, most Blu-ray buyers) are families. They buy Blu-ray movies because they've already got a PS3. Sure, there's also a videophile segment of Blu-ray owners, but they're greatly outnumbered by "normal" people.

Now I'll admit that I don't have much in the way of hard evidence for my viewpoint either, but it sure seems to make more sense to me.

I don't think the PS3 is a big family console. Look at the sales. It's getting slaughtered by the Wii in the market, and the XBox is holding it's own. The PS3 seems to be being predominately bought by... well, I don't know. I don't know any families with a PS3. The only people I know with PS3's are single guys.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by aristotles 

Does your HDTV accept component? The PS3 will output up to 1080p through component although most TV's will only support up to 1080i through component.

Did you RTFM or are you making this story up?

All PS3's come with a component video out cable.

Actually they only come with a composite cable output. No HD out of the box.

[starman]

Originally Posted by aristotles 

That's an interesting parallel universe you live in. Over here, if warner went blu the war is over but warner going red would prolong the war.

Blu-ray has been winning every week in the Nielsen/VideoScan Numbers this year with a win of BD-76% HDD-24% (3:1) for the week ending December 9th in the US.

Blu-ray has and even larger lead in europe, Australia and Japan.

What are you basing you confidence on?

What confidence? You're really not understanding what I replied to.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I have both types of players, and on almost every title I've compared, the Blu-Ray version has better sound. For video quality they're rather similar, not enough difference to really gripe about.

As long as the quality is the same I don't care which format wins, but right now they aren't.

Placebo effect at its finest. There are very few titles available on both formats that even have different audio encodes (I can only think of 1, but I'm sure there are more). And anything encoded in TrueHD or uncompressed PCM will sound the same on both formats.

[starman]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

Actually they only come with a composite cable output. No HD out of the box.

Actually, you're wrong. My PS3 came with an HDMI cable.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by starman 

Actually, you're wrong. My PS3 came with an HDMI cable.

The PS3 doesn't come with an HDMI cable. I know someone who bought the high end one and had to buy an HDMI cable.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by starman 

Actually, you're wrong. My PS3 came with an HDMI cable.

Actually, according to Sony themselves you're wrong:
PlayStation.com

Video output in HD requires cables and an HD-compatible display, both sold separately. Copy-protected Blu-ray video discs can only output at 1080p using an HDMI cable connected to a device that is compatible with the HDCP standard. HDMI cable not included. Additional equipment may be required to use the HDMI connector.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

Placebo effect at its finest. There are very few titles available on both formats that even have different audio encodes (I can only think of 1, but I'm sure there are more). And anything encoded in TrueHD or uncompressed PCM will sound the same on both formats.

You'd think so, but that's not what my measurements and blind tests have told me. Oh well, perhaps for >99% of HT sound systems few can tell. But that doesn't explain how so many people are able to, consistently, discern the difference in the formats.

Frankenfight: Blu-ray vs. HD DVD, Formats Not Equal

The increased capacity of Blu-Ray allows for fewer compressed tracks? Maybe.

[Eug]

So I went out today to see if I could pick up a $99 HD DVD player (with 7 free movies). Considering this is an hour before the store opens, and it's below zero outside, I said forget that.



(They're selling more than just HD DVD players, but there are only limited numbers of each item available.)

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I have both types of players, and on almost every title I've compared, the Blu-Ray version has better sound. For video quality they're rather similar, not enough difference to really gripe about.

That's interesting, considering many titles have lossless audio on both formats.

As jokell82 says: "Placebo effect at its finest."

[analogika]

Or, more likely, different D/A and audio output stages.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

You'd think so, but that's not what my measurements and blind tests have told me. Oh well, perhaps for >99% of HT sound systems few can tell. But that doesn't explain how so many people are able to, consistently, discern the difference in the formats.

Frankenfight: Blu-ray vs. HD DVD, Formats Not Equal

The increased capacity of Blu-Ray allows for fewer compressed tracks? Maybe.

That's the weirdest method I've ever seen. So the video difference of .9 meant nothing, but the audio difference of .15 was very significant? Please.

Seems to me that whole thing is ridiculous. Video and audio are for all intents and purposes the same on both formats.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

That's the weirdest method I've ever seen. So the video difference of .9 meant nothing, but the audio difference of .15 was very significant? Please.

Video difference is 0.09, not 0.9. And the article just said significant, not "very significant".

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Video difference is 0.09, not 0.9. And the article just said significant, not "very significant".

Whatever, I meant .09. It's all semantics. How ~.1 and .15 could be considered enough of a difference is stupid.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogika 

Or, more likely, different D/A and audio output stages.

I would assume he's using the same receiver, but you could still be right I suppose.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by goMac 

I don't think the PS3 is a big family console. Look at the sales. It's getting slaughtered by the Wii in the market, and the XBox is holding it's own. The PS3 seems to be being predominately bought by... well, I don't know. I don't know any families with a PS3. The only people I know with PS3's are single guys.

Bad news for ya... the PS3 outsold the 360 in the same time period.

If you are saying the 360 is doing a good job based on this rate the PS3 will still clean it up.

The Wii doesn't even fit into this equation because it can't even play a DVD or act like any sort of real multimedia system.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Bad news for ya... the PS3 outsold the 360 in the same time period.

No, in one time period. The 360 is still outselling the PS3 on average.

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

If you are saying the 360 is doing a good job based on this rate the PS3 will still clean it up.

Right.

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

The Wii doesn't even fit into this equation because it can't even play a DVD or act like any sort of real multimedia system.

I'm sorry but almost no one I know decides which console to buy based on whether or not it plays movies because most people already have a DVD player. Therefore no one cares whether the Wii has DVD or not.

People buy video game consoles as video game systems.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

Bad news for ya... the PS3 outsold the 360 in the same time period.

If you are saying the 360 is doing a good job based on this rate the PS3 will still clean it up.

The Wii doesn't even fit into this equation because it can't even play a DVD or act like any sort of real multimedia system.

This chart shows that the 360 and PS3 sold roughly the same world wide for the first year after release (I set it to 59 weeks because that's how long the PS3 has been out):
Video Game Chartz - Nintendo - Sony - Microsoft - Hardware Sales From Launch

In the US it's a whole 'nother ball game:
Video Game Chartz - Nintendo - Sony - Microsoft - Hardware Sales From Launch

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I would assume he's using the same receiver, but you could still be right I suppose.

The most important bits are those BEFORE it hits the amp.

I'm talking about the audio output stages of the PLAYERS.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogika 

The most important bits are those BEFORE it hits the amp.

I'm talking about the audio output stages of the PLAYERS.

Over HDMI the DAC would be in the receiver.

[jokell82]

Yeah I'm not sure very many people use the multi-channel analog outputs of their players.

[starman]

So, uh, that's the second time I thought my PS3 came with an HDMI cable. I don't know why, I don't remember buying one. :/

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by starman 

So, uh, that's the second time I thought my PS3 came with an HDMI cable. I don't know why, I don't remember buying one. :/

Maybe you can summon HDMI cables at your will. It'd be a pretty crappy super power, as you'd only need it a couple times in your life. But good for when you bought a PS3!

[Face Ache]

Originally Posted by starman 

So, uh, that's the second time I thought my PS3 came with an HDMI cable. I don't know why, I don't remember buying one. :/

The included cable is HDMI at one end but only composite at the other.

Originally Posted by goMac 

I'm sorry but almost no one I know decides which console to buy based on whether or not it plays movies because most people already have a DVD player. Therefore no one cares whether the Wii has DVD or not.

People buy video game consoles as video game systems.

I bought the PS1 because it played CDs as well as being a console system when I didn't have a stand-alone CD player.

I bought the PS3 because it plays Blu-ray DVDs as well as being a console system when I didn't have a stand-alone Blu-ray player.

Seems to make sense to me.

I didn't buy a 360 because M$ stopped making the original Xbox as soon as the 360 came out. My original Xbox is dying, yet I don't like the idea of being coerced into buying an upgrade from M$. I noticed Sony is still selling the PS2 (at a greatly reduced price), so I've cut my losses (the old Xbox games) and dumped M$ as a console the same way I dumped them as a software developer - you can bet your boots they'll stop making the 360 as soon as the 720 comes out. I don't care how much deodorant Steve Ballmer needs - I ain't payin' for it!

Ironically, I might have considered the 360 if M$ hadn't pulled their usual Act of Bastardry™. It seems that buying the original Xbox over the PS2 was the biggest mistake I've made, console-wise.


Oh, and I bought a Wii for teh fun of it.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by starman 

So, uh, that's the second time I thought my PS3 came with an HDMI cable. I don't know why, I don't remember buying one. :/

Originally Posted by Face Ache 

The included cable is HDMI at one end but only composite at the other.

WOW maybe Starman is one of those people that has been using the included cable this whole time thinking that he's got HD and he doesn't!!!!

Originally Posted by goMac 

I'm sorry but almost no one I know decides which console to buy based on whether or not it plays movies because most people already have a DVD player. Therefore no one cares whether the Wii has DVD or not. People buy video game consoles as video game systems.

Originally Posted by Face Ache 

I bought the PS1 because it played CDs as well as being a console system when I didn't have a stand-alone CD player. I bought the PS3 because it plays Blu-ray DVDs as well as being a console system when I didn't have a stand-alone Blu-ray player. Seems to make sense to me.

I've never had a DVD player. I always watched them in my TiBook until I bought an X-box partly because it had a DVD player in it and thought cool.... two devices for the price of one. I definitely never would have bought a PS3 if it didn't have a free Blu-ray player and DVD upscaler in it. Why would you think that stuff is so irrelevant to people anyway, goMac?

[Eug]

It's interesting how a sale can skew the sales rankings at Amazon. Right now the top four titles in the entire DVD section are all Harry Potter HD DVDs.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

I've never had a DVD player. I always watched them in my TiBook until I bought an X-box partly because it had a DVD player in it and thought cool.... two devices for the price of one. I definitely never would have bought a PS3 if it didn't have a free Blu-ray player and DVD upscaler in it. Why would you think that stuff is so irrelevant to people anyway, goMac?

Originally Posted by goMac

I'm sorry but almost no one I know decides which console to buy based on whether or not it plays movies because most people already have a DVD player.

There are always exceptions.