[Lateralus]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

By the time some new format war gets underway consumers won't care anymore.

Other way around me thinks. They don't care *now*. The high-def wheel is still just beginning to roll. So if Toshiba actually gets the format to market sometime this year, it just might catch a wave.

And I say 'the format' with hesitation. Because it sounds like Toshiba wants this to be a silent upgrade that will matter to people who care and make no difference to those who don't. One disc, varying capability, marketed under the most established name in home entertainment history; 'DVD'

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by Lateralus 

What makes you think the Trek sets are going to be released on Blu-ray?....

Because they just spend several years and probably many millions of dollars remastering them into HD. You think that's all going to be for nothing? You think that Paramont will never release any more HD material because they were so in love with Toshiba. What makes think they won't?

[Lateralus]

Negative. The episodes were simply remastered. That is all. They don't look that great in HD. (I have the set myself)

They only appeared on HD DVD because Toshiba paid Paramount to do an HD release. If you need any evidence to that fact, feel free to take into consideration the fact that Paramount was neutral during the majority of the format war, including during the time that work on the Season One release was actually being done.

There are only so many times you can release the same content. And with both Season 2 and now Season 3 looking to be DVD only, I have every reason to believe that The Original Series *may* see further HD releases, but they wont be for quite a while and probably not until Blu-ray has solidified its position or until the next format comes along.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Lateralus 

Negative. The episodes were simply remastered. That is all. They don't look that great. (I have the set myself)

The Star Trek HD DVD set looks quite good in HD, and way better than the DVD version.

No, it's not like Transformers great, but quite good nonetheless, and good enough that I will wait for the hi-def version.

Originally Posted by Lateralus 

I personally think it'll be an extension to the DVD format that will provide a richer experience in conjunction with the upconverting hardware that has already been on the market for quite some time. Take Superbit as an example of what to expect.

Superbit is standard DVD technology. Absolutely nothing changed in the spec for Superbit. Basically all they did was strip out extras and increased the bitrate... but within the confines of the existing DVD standard.

[mrtew]

Negative? What? You don't think they are actually HD? Please explain.

[Lateralus]

Originally Posted by Eug 

The Star Trek HD DVD set looks quite good in HD, and way better than the DVD version.

No, it doesn't. And I'm not the only person with this opinion.

The set gets generally decent marks on image quality but nothing more. An HD release was hardly warranted.

Superbit is standard DVD technology. Absolutely nothing changed for Superbit.

The disc itself is, but the way in which data was stored onto it was not standard.

I offered Superbit as an example. I made my thoughts on what I'm actually expecting quite clear in the rest of my post.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Lateralus 

No, it doesn't. And I'm not the only person with this opinion.

What size is your image? Cuz the image difference is quite substantial to my eye on my projector.

But then again, I also think Casablanca looks awesome in HD.

The set gets generally decent marks on image quality but nothing more.

Yes. The HD version is decent, and the DVD version pales in comparison.

An HD release was highly warranted.

Fixed that for ya.

The disc itself is, but the way in which data was stored onto it was not standard.

Yes it is. The bitrate on Superbit is well within the original 1.0 DVD spec. It is for this reason that Superbit works perfectly on 1st generation DVD players.

[Lateralus]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

Negative? What? You don't think they are actually HD? Please explain.

Remastered. Remastered and put on an HD disc. Remastered in HD.

Three different things.

The truth is probably somewhere between options two and three. You can only do so much with 40 year old footage and Paramount knows that, otherwise they would not have needed a push from Toshiba for a Season 1 HD release and would be continuing with Seasons 2 and 3 on Blu-ray.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by Lateralus 

Remastered. Remastered and put on an HD disc. Remastered in HD..

It was remastered in HD. And obviously all the ship and planet special effects were re-done from scratch in HD. I think you don't know what you're talking about.

[Lateralus]

Okay.

[starman]

Originally Posted by Lateralus 

Negative. The episodes were simply remastered. That is all. They don't look that great in HD. (I have the set myself)

Negative. They were remastered in HD. I have the set too and it looks AMAZING in HD. I also have some episodes in 16mm and have seen some in 35mm and these HD masters look awesome.

STARTREK.COM�:�Article

The remastered episodes have been converted from the original film into a High-Definition format, which gives viewers a clearer, crisper, more vibrant picture than before, even when viewed in standard definition. Once stations upgrade and start broadcasting HD signals, the episodes will be all ready for viewers to enjoy in HD.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Lateralus 

You can only do so much with 40 year old footage

While current films tend to have a better color range than some older films, as long as it was shot on film (which Star Trek was) you'll get a better and more accurate picture in HD then you will with SD. Even HD doesn't approach the amount of resolution* that 35mm film has.

*film doesn't have a resolution per se, as it can vary depending on the equipment used.

Originally Posted by Lateralus

The disc itself is, but the way in which data was stored onto it was not standard.

Simply incorrect. All they did was take out the fluff and bump up the bit rates. Hence the name, SuperBIT. It was still just a standard dvd.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Lateralus 

Other way around me thinks. They don't care *now*. The high-def wheel is still just beginning to roll. So if Toshiba actually gets the format to market sometime this year, it just might catch a wave.

And I say 'the format' with hesitation. Because it sounds like Toshiba wants this to be a silent upgrade that will matter to people who care and make no difference to those who don't. One disc, varying capability, marketed under the most established name in home entertainment history; 'DVD'

Whatever this would be called, it wouldn't be called DVD.

[Eug]

So, some of you may think I'm crazy, but I just spent ~$200 on HD DVD yesterday.

Wal-Mart is selling those Venturer HD DVD players (Toshiba HD-A3 rebadge) off for $48 in some stores in Canada. Perfect, as I wanted an upscaling player for one of my other TVs anyway, and now I'll be able to play HD DVDs on it too. It also came with 2 free movies, although I already had one (Perfect Storm), and I hear the other one isn't very good (Rumor Has It).

I bought another 15 movies for $120 plus shipping.

An American Werewolf in London
Being John Malkovich
Breach
Brokeback Mountain
Eastern Promises
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Jarhead
Out of Sight
Pan's Labyrinth
Ray
Spartacus
The Last Starfighter
The Sting
Timecop
Wolf Creek (Unrated)

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Whatever this would be called, it wouldn't be called DVD.

Any news on this?

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by Eug 

So, some of you may think I'm crazy, but I just spent ~$200 on HD DVD yesterday....Venturer HD DVD player for $48... another 15 movies for $120 plus shipping.

You're crazy. Let us know if you ever watch any of those.

P.S. I'm reminded of when the crew of the Minnow found the Japanese guy on Gilligan's Island that didn't know the war had ended.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

You're crazy. Let us know if you ever watch any of those.

Why wouldn't I?

I probably won't watch Rumor Has it though. That's one of the free movies I got.

P.S. I just picked up Flags Of Our Fathers and Balls of Fury too. I just watched the latter. It's stupid, but exactly as stupid as I was expecting. But hey, it had Maggie Q in it.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

P.S. I'm reminded of when the crew of the Minnow found the Japanese guy on Gilligan's Island that didn't know the war had ended.

True.

[Eug]

The weird part is the four movies I got on HD DVD/DVD combo were cheaper than getting them on DVD alone.

An American Werewolf in London
Breach
Brokeback Mountain
Eastern Promises

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Eug 

P.S. I just picked up Flags Of Our Fathers and Balls of Fury too. I just watched the latter. It's stupid, but exactly as stupid as I was expecting. But hey, it had Maggie Q in it.

Isn't "stupid-silly" the whole reason for "Balls of Fury" to exist? Mindless entertainment rocks! Now if I could find "Bucaroo Banzai" in HD-DVD, that would be awesome! More mindlessness for the win!

[starman]

Hmm, yeah, I'm still waiting for the BB sequel. That World Crime League has had 20 years to build up power!

[Teronzhul]

Balls of fury falls more into just the realm of "stupid" rather than "stupid-silly" in my opinion. Anyway, I finally picked up a PS3 from Wal-Mart a few days ago. The Metal Gear Solid4 pack with the Dualshock 3 was available with a free $100 gift card during their fathers day promotions. It now sits next to my A2.

[jokell82]

Wow, haven't seen this thread in a while.

In any case, it looks like Blu-Ray has finally broken the $200 barrier:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000PALZE0/

Of course, it's only a profile 1.0.

[Dakar V]

Looks like it's on clearance, which really doesn't count, in my opinion.

[ort888]

Sam's has Blu-ray players for $258.

I'm waiting for a sub $200 standalone with the profile 2.0 or whatever or the PS3 to go down to $300.

Whatever happens first.

[Dakar V]

I'm with you on that.

[Eug]

Same here. $199 is the magic price point... but not for crippled 1.0.

Actually 1.1 would probably be OK, but preferably 2.0 for future proofing. It seems like 2.0 is gonna be the norm anyway. The Sony 350 will be 2.0-compatible.

[ghporter]

Somehow, Sony and their consortium for Blu-Ray don't seem to have understood the whole thing about "affordability." Around here, the least expensive I've seen a BR player has been in the (high) mid-$200s ($260 or so). When I can get an upconverting standard DVD player for less than $150, it strikes me as not terribly good business for all the BR players to cost more than $100 more than that. How are sales of the discs? Not "through the roof" like Sony had hoped, I"m sure.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

I'd just like to mention that 2.0 spec is the stupidest **** ever. GoMac and other HD fans were banana's for it and thought that would be the reason HD would win. Pffff. I thought it was bad then and it is bad now.

For Example on Transformers you can change the theme of the DVD menus, so you can download a tiny tiny file and it changes the theme. This could have been on the disk from the start.

On Miami Vice you can use Live to have a picture in picture of a google map of the location of the movie. This could easily just be a movie showing the same thing.

I heard on another disk you can use it to bookmark favorite points and send it to your friends. Yippie.

True this could just be because nobody has had a good idea yet but so far it is just sucks.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

I'd just like to mention that 2.0 spec is the stupidest **** ever. GoMac and other HD fans were banana's for it

Not really. What most people were saying was necessary was 1.1-like support. And not surprisingly, even the BDA agrees, and has already obsoleted 1.0.

Net support is a bonus, though, if only for future proofing (and firmware updates).

[Shaddim]

Yeah, 2.0 has value strictly for updates, the other stuff is crap.

BTW, I got tired of waiting for an Integra player and pre-ordered the Pioneer BDP-95FD. I'm hoping it's as good as the reviewers say, usually I don't buy gear without trying it.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Yeah, 2.0 has value strictly for updates, the other stuff is crap.

I don't buy that. How often in a players lifetime do you see the player needing updating other than updating the spec? Once maybe twice tops? Even then every single person will have access to a computer or know someone who can download and burn the update to a disk for them.

Such bullshit.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

I don't buy that. How often in a players lifetime do you see the player needing updating other than updating the spec? Once maybe twice tops? Even then every single person will have access to a computer or know someone who can download and burn the update to a disk for them.

Such bullshit.

Early on in the players life updates happen quite frequently. Being able to press a button on the machine to update rather than find the iso, burn it to disc, and play it in the player is much nicer (especially for people who have no idea what an iso is).

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

I don't buy that. How often in a players lifetime do you see the player needing updating other than updating the spec? Once maybe twice tops? Even then every single person will have access to a computer or know someone who can download and burn the update to a disk for them.

Such bullshit.

So, how many times have you updated your PS3 now?

BTW, I think there have been something like ten (or more) updates for the HD DVD players already. Those who got the updates mailed to them waited several weeks each time before the update.

And you might be surprised just how many people had problems burning ISOs from downloads, especially since most people have no clue what an ISO is in the first place.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

I don't buy that. How often in a players lifetime do you see the player needing updating other than updating the spec? Once maybe twice tops? Even then every single person will have access to a computer or know someone who can download and burn the update to a disk for them.

Such bullshit.

My freakin TV has already had two updates (thank goodness it has a USB port to install them instead of needing a new board every time). Updates are actually more useful on a player where there could be problems with the vendor's Java virtual machine, new profiles, disk incompatibilities, etc...

Not to mention I don't trust vendors not to put the disk that needs to be burned on their website as an exe or some other absurdity.

An ethernet port is what, ten cents? There isn't much of an excuse. If a vendor is too cheap to slap on an ethernet port, I'm not sure I'd want to be buying their gear.

[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

I don't buy that. How often in a players lifetime do you see the player needing updating other than updating the spec? Once maybe twice tops? Even then every single person will have access to a computer or know someone who can download and burn the update to a disk for them.

Such bullshit.

I've updated the firmware on some pieces of gear many times (6+), allowing for new features. Sometimes it's something small, like load times or a new menu. Sometimes it's big, like a whole new format or codec. I buy gear, in part, for it's ability to upgrade in a seamless manner. You don't, I get that. Take some prozac, pet a puppy, go relax in a hot bath, whatever.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by Eug 

So, how many times have you updated your PS3 now?

The PS3 updates are to add featues and bug fixes for the game system which you know.

The updates for the BR aspect of it are to upgrade the spec from 1.0 to 1.1 and then 2.0. I highly doubt any of these cheap players will offer a full spec update as the hardware isn't there.

Sad that there were so many HD-DVD updates. Guess they didn't know what they were doing.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by analogue SPRINKLES 

The PS3 updates are to add featues and bug fixes for the game system which you know.

The updates for the BR aspect of it are to upgrade the spec from 1.0 to 1.1 and then 2.0.

There were also updates that improved the PS3's DVD playback etc., and compatibility fixes. It's up to them whether they want to put them as massive combined updates, or multiple small updates, but the bottom line is you've had a lot of them already.

I highly doubt any of these cheap players will offer a full spec update as the hardware isn't there.

...which is why we refused to buy the early 1.0 players. However, fortunately the new entry level Sony 350 will be fully upgradable to 2.0.

Sad that there were so many HD-DVD updates. Guess they didn't know what they were doing.

The ironic part of that statement is that the only reason BR 1.0 exists is because of HD DVD. HD DVD already had a 2.0-like standard ready by launch for ALL players, even if it did need some updates later. The BR guys couldn't get their act together quick enough so they decided to release 1.0, and then screw over their first batch of standalone player customers by obsoleting 1.0 after the first year.

What they should have done is build players that could be upgraded to 1.1 eventually... preferably with a network connection... which almost effectively makes them 2.0 players.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

I got an 80GB PS3 not too long ago so now I can retire my Blu-Ray/HD DVD combo drive to an HTPC in another room.

Anything I should be bitching/whining/arguing about over it? Because as it is, I'm too busy enjoying both formats, albeit, mostly BR

[Chongo]

The Godfather - The Coppola Restoration will be out on BR tomorrow 09/23/08

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

The Godfather - The Coppola Restoration will be out on BR tomorrow 09/23/08

That ought to push out a few more units, don't you think?

[Brien]

I hope. I also hope Macs get BD drives this decade, but hey.

[Stogieman]

Apple is sure taking it's sweet time. Just like it did with USB 2.

[mrtew]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

I got an 80GB PS3 not too long ago so now I can retire my Blu-Ray/HD DVD combo drive to an HTPC in another room. Anything I should be bitching/whining/arguing about over it? Because as it is, I'm too busy enjoying both formats, albeit, mostly BR

You could bitch about how the remote always works not matter where you are or where you are pointing it or not pointing it. (sarcasm) I really with all my remotes were bluetooth instead of 70's infrared technology. Or you could bitch about how BR's victory stopped the release of StarTrek TOS HD completely somehow. I still haven't seen it in HD ever. You'd think it'd be on iTunes at least in fake HD.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by Stogieman 

Apple is sure taking it's sweet time. Just like it did with USB 2.

Remember, even if Apple offered Blu-Ray today you wouldn't be able to watch BD movies on a Mac due to the missing hardware. Apple needs HDCP compliant displays before that can happen.

So really it's pointless at the moment - just use an external and Toast.

[Dakar V]

Even if Apple offered Blu-Ray, and if OS X could play the movies, I still wouldn't pick it up unless it came in the Mini. Making my wish the most unlikely of all.

[Eug]

The sad part is some minis Apple sells RIGHT NOW aren't even up to spec for Apple's own iTunes HD, and that HD is way less CPU-hungry than Blu-ray.

[Dakar V]

Yeah, I assumed as much.

I wish I knew what Apple's plans are for that Mini. Or the logic behind those plans.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by mrtew 

You could bitch about how the remote always works not matter where you are or where you are pointing it or not pointing it. (sarcasm) I really with all my remotes were bluetooth instead of 70's infrared technology. Or you could bitch about how BR's victory stopped the release of StarTrek TOS HD completely somehow. I still haven't seen it in HD ever. You'd think it'd be on iTunes at least in fake HD.

@#$!!! I friggen hate that always working remote!

Actually, I still like IR for one reason- I keep all my components in an AV closet nowhere near line of sight, but a simple $35 RF-extender (the transmitter is a battery inside a universal remote) allows me to control everything without 'aiming' the remote anywhere- the range is phenomenal. Even controls the HTPC.

Ironically the PS3 is the only thing I can't control with it since it doesn't have IR- guess I could bitch about that, but I really don't care.

It does seem like it's time for a new remote technology to emerge that's: not line-of sight, supports universal remotes without any conversion, where each component brand/type doesn't need 1,000 different codes for whatever reason, and no proprietary systems that won't work with third party universal remotes. Is it too much to ask for in this day and age?

Edit: oops, transmitter, not receiver.

[subego]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Ironically the PS3 is the only thing I can't control with it since it doesn't have IR- guess I could bitch about that, but I really don't care.

http://www.amazon.com/PlayStation-3-...2271173&sr=8-2

$15. Does what it says on the tin.

[Shaddim]

Hey, that's not bad.


It's unfortunate that the PS3:

1. is so damned noisy (fans)*
2. is difficult to stack with other components, due to funky shape
3. doesn't match my other A/V gears
4. requires more ventilation than other players


* At least the one I use upstairs is loud, I don't know if this is the norm. When the fans are running at full speed it can be rather distracting.